e13576 Background: Prior studies demonstrated the superior outcomes among glioblastomas patients treated at academic facilities (ACs) verses non-academic facilities (non-AC). However, the factors contributed to the survival benefit observed at ACs remain unknown. Methods: Eligible GBM patients between 2004 and 2014 were derived from the SEER-Medicare database. Patients were categorized by treatment facility status (AC versus non-AC). Outcomes include overall survival (OS) and the receipt of surgery and adjuvant therapies. Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazard model were applied for survival analysis, and multivariable binary/multinomial logistic regression models were performed to compare differences in treatments received and hospital characteristics by facility type. Results: A total of 3263 patients treated at 562 facilities were included. Significantly superior survival was observed at ACs [Hazard ratio (HR): 0.92, 95% CI: 0.85-0.99, P = 0.024], prior to and after adjusting all covariates. Radiation and chemotherapy were utilized more frequently at ACs. For the access to clinical trials, ACs were more likely to be NCI designated cancer center, Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG), and American College of Surgeons Oncology Group (ACSOG) compared to non-ACs (all P < 0.001). For multidisciplinary resources, ACs had higher probability to provide health care services in emergency, intensive care, inpatient care, nuclear medicine, operative room, and radiation treatment than non-ACs (all P < 0.01). Further, there were more sufficient health care provider resources (number of full-time registered nurses, physicians, and total beds) at ACs over non-ACs (all P < 0.001). Conclusions: This study identified factors that contributed to the superior outcomes when GBM patients are treated at ACs. An increased likelihood of undergoing adjuvant therapies, access to clinical trials, multidisciplinary environment, and available health care provider resources in ACs are important contributors to the improved GBM outcomes.