Socio-Economic Status in Risk of Acute Adverse Events Following Radiotherapy

Abstract

Socio-economic status (SES) are known to influence cancer patient outcomes. The purpose of this study is to evaluate whether SES affected the short-term clinical experience of patients treated with radiotherapy (RT) during the pandemic. This was a single institution, retrospective cohort quality improvement study. The primary endpoint consisted of adverse events (AEs) defined as an unplanned admission to a drop-in radiation-nursing clinic (RNC) or the institution's emergency department (ED) within 90 days of a radiation course. Adult cancer patients who received external beam RT from April 1, 2019, to March 31, 2022 were included. Patients were classified into two periods: treated prior to the pandemic (pre-COVID), and during the pandemic (COVID era), with a cutoff date of March 31, 2020. SES, age, RT intent (curative, palliative, SBRT), regimen (conventional fractionation and hypofractionation), disease site, and sex were included as co-variables. SES was obtained by matching a patient's postal code with a provincial data tool with four distinct dimensions: 1) residential instability, 2) material deprivation, 3) ethnic concentration, and 4) dependency. For each SES dimension, a score of 1-5 (best-worst) is assigned to individuals. A backward stepwise multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to analyze the variables and identify the factors that were significantly associated (p<0.05) with increased risk of AEs. Institutional ethics review board exemption was obtained. Across the 3-year period, 15715 patients (5499 pre-COVID and 10216 COVID era patients) were identified and included in the analyses, and 5756 AEs were observed. The analyses revealed that patient age (p<0.001), disease site (p<0.001), treatment intent (p<0.001) and treatment regimen (p = 0.005) were associated with the risk of developing AEs. AEs risk was correlated with the treatment period (pre-COVID vs. COVID era) (p<0.001) and material deprivation (p = 0.027). Adjusting for the other variables, patients who were least materially deprived were at lower risk (Odds Ratio (OR) = 0.88, 95% CI [0.78-0.98]) of developing AEs than patients who were most materially deprived. Patient sex (p>0.1), residential instability (p = 0.069), ethnic concentration (p>0.5) and dependency (p>0.5) were not associated with AEs risk. Patients with more (SES score 1-4 vs 5) residential instability (p<0.001; OR = 0.82, 95% CI [0.74-0.90]) and less (SES score 1 vs 2-5) material deprivations (p = 0.006; OR = 0.76, 95% CI [0.66-0.88]) were at reduced the risk of ED visits. SES was not associated with RNC visits. In a universal health care system, SES (residential instability and material deprivation) were associated with the increased risk of ED within 90 days of RT. Proactive care and virtual monitoring during the 90-day period after RT in high-risk patients may reduce ED visits. ED visits beyond our tertiary institution are being gathered to address this study limitation.