Socioeconomic Predictors of Pituitary Surgery.
health determinants
pituitary
pituitary adenoma
race
socioeconomic status
surgery
Journal
Cureus
ISSN: 2168-8184
Titre abrégé: Cureus
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101596737
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
25 Jan 2019
25 Jan 2019
Historique:
entrez:
9
4
2019
pubmed:
9
4
2019
medline:
9
4
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
There exists a lack of data on the effect of socioeconomic status (SES) on outcomes for pituitary tumors, which have been associated with significant morbidity. The goal of this population-level study is to investigate the role of SES on receiving treatment and survival in patients with pituitary tumors. The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program database from the National Cancer Institute was used to identify patients diagnosed with pituitary tumors between 2003 and 2012. SES was determined using a validated composite index. Race was categorized as Caucasian and non-Caucasian. Treatment received included surgery, radiation, and radiation with surgery. Odds of receiving surgery and survival probability were analyzed using multivariate logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards model, respectively. A total of 25,802 patients with pituitary tumors were identified for analysis. High SES tertile (odds ratio (OR) = 1.095; 95% confidence interval (CI) [1.059, 1.132]) and quintile (OR = 1.052; 95% CI [1.031, 1.072]) were associated with higher odds of receiving surgery (p<0.0001). Caucasian patients had higher odds of receiving surgery when compared to non-Caucasian patients (OR = 1.064; 95% CI [1.000, 1.133]; p<0.05). Neither SES nor race were significant predictors of survival probability. Socioeconomic status and race were found to be associated with higher odds of receiving surgery for pituitary tumors, and thus serve as independent predictors of surgical management. Further studies are required to investigate possible causes for these findings.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
There exists a lack of data on the effect of socioeconomic status (SES) on outcomes for pituitary tumors, which have been associated with significant morbidity. The goal of this population-level study is to investigate the role of SES on receiving treatment and survival in patients with pituitary tumors.
METHODS
METHODS
The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program database from the National Cancer Institute was used to identify patients diagnosed with pituitary tumors between 2003 and 2012. SES was determined using a validated composite index. Race was categorized as Caucasian and non-Caucasian. Treatment received included surgery, radiation, and radiation with surgery. Odds of receiving surgery and survival probability were analyzed using multivariate logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards model, respectively.
RESULTS
RESULTS
A total of 25,802 patients with pituitary tumors were identified for analysis. High SES tertile (odds ratio (OR) = 1.095; 95% confidence interval (CI) [1.059, 1.132]) and quintile (OR = 1.052; 95% CI [1.031, 1.072]) were associated with higher odds of receiving surgery (p<0.0001). Caucasian patients had higher odds of receiving surgery when compared to non-Caucasian patients (OR = 1.064; 95% CI [1.000, 1.133]; p<0.05). Neither SES nor race were significant predictors of survival probability.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Socioeconomic status and race were found to be associated with higher odds of receiving surgery for pituitary tumors, and thus serve as independent predictors of surgical management. Further studies are required to investigate possible causes for these findings.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30956910
doi: 10.7759/cureus.3957
pmc: PMC6436671
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
e3957Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
Cancer Causes Control. 2001 Oct;12(8):703-11
pubmed: 11562110
Int J Epidemiol. 2003 Apr;32(2):225-33
pubmed: 12714541
Cancer. 2004 Aug 1;101(3):613-9
pubmed: 15274075
J Gen Intern Med. 2005 Jun;20(6):531-5
pubmed: 15987329
JAMA. 2006 Oct 25;296(16):1973-80
pubmed: 17062860
Arch Intern Med. 2007 Jun 11;167(11):1177-82
pubmed: 17563027
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2007 Sep 19;99(18):1384-94
pubmed: 17848670
Cancer Causes Control. 2009 May;20(4):417-35
pubmed: 19002764
J Neurosurg. 2009 Sep;111(3):545-54
pubmed: 19199461
Eur J Endocrinol. 2009 Aug;161(2):259-65
pubmed: 19447900
Arch Surg. 2010 Mar;145(3):247-53
pubmed: 20231625
Pituitary. 2011 Mar;14(1):23-30
pubmed: 20809113
J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2011 Apr;96(4):894-904
pubmed: 21474686
Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2012 Feb;40(1):80-8
pubmed: 21883357
J Am Coll Surg. 2012 Jan;214(1):81-7
pubmed: 22112418
Neurosurg Focus. 2011 Dec;31(6):E18
pubmed: 22133173
World Neurosurg. 2013 Feb;79(2):331-6
pubmed: 22732515
Am Surg. 2012 Oct;78(10):1128-31
pubmed: 23025956
Neuro Oncol. 2012 Nov;14 Suppl 5:v1-49
pubmed: 23095881
J Surg Res. 2013 Nov;185(1):15-20
pubmed: 23773721
Int Forum Allergy Rhinol. 2014 Sep;4(9):767-70
pubmed: 25145472
Ann Surg Oncol. 2015 Dec;22(13):4422-31
pubmed: 25893414
Int J Endocrinol. 2015;2015:192094
pubmed: 26078755
JAMA Oncol. 2015 May;1(2):222-30
pubmed: 26181027
J Neurol Surg B Skull Base. 2015 Aug;76(4):323-30
pubmed: 26225324
JAMA Surg. 2016 Apr;151(4):338-45
pubmed: 26581025
Pituitary. 2017 Apr;20(2):218-224
pubmed: 27743172
Eur J Endocrinol. 2017 Feb;176(2):203-212
pubmed: 27932528
JAMA. 2017 Feb 7;317(5):516-524
pubmed: 28170483
J Neurooncol. 2017 May;132(3):447-453
pubmed: 28258423