Published online Dec 15, 2023. doi: 10.4251/wjgo.v15.i12.2077
Peer-review started: August 7, 2023
First decision: September 1, 2023
Revised: September 22, 2023
Accepted: October 30, 2023
Article in press: October 30, 2023
Published online: December 15, 2023
Processing time: 128 Days and 17.6 Hours
Cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) is a cancer with poor survival outcomes that is increasing in incidence worldwide. In clinical practice there can be barriers to providing treatments that can improve outcomes for those with CCA. Potentially curative surgery is not an option for those diagnosed with advanced disease, which represents the majority of patients. Stent insertion to manage disease complications is a complex procedure requiring access to specialist expertise that is not routinely available in all areas. There are currently relatively few recommended systemic treatment options available that can prolong survival.
Due to the complexity of treating CCA, we hypothesise that there could be variation in the treatments received by CCA patients. Such variation could contribute to the poor outcomes experienced by CCA patients. There is very little data to evidence variation in the care and management of CCA in England, so research into this area is needed. Identifying variation that could point to inequality is the first step toward improving patient outcomes, leading to further research into understanding why this variation exists and ultimately improvement strategies to reduce these variations in care.
We aimed to investigate whether there was evidence of geographic variation in the proportion of CCA patients that received each of three main cancer-specific treatments: potentially curative surgery; systemic therapy amongst those that did not receive surgery; stent insertion amongst those that did not receive surgery.
We conducted a retrospective cohort study including patients diagnosed with CCA from 2014-2017 in England. We used linear probability models to investigate geographic variation in the proportions of that received either potentially curative surgery, systemic therapy (in the absence of surgery) or stent insertion (in the absence of surgery) across Cancer Alliance areas in England, adjusting for potential confounders.
Half of CCA patients in England received none of the cancer treatments we investigated in this study. Only 12.4% received potentially curative surgery. Across all Cancer Alliance areas, the mean percentage-point difference from the population average [95% confidence interval (CI)] ranged from -3.96 (-6.34 to -1.59)% to 3.77 (0.54 o 6.99)% after adjustment for patient sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, showing statistically significant variation.
Amongst those who did not receive surgery, 19.9% received systemic therapy, with mean percentage-point difference from the population average [95%CI] ranging from -3.84 (-8.04 to 0.35)% to 9.28 (1.76 to 16.80)% across Cancer Alliances after adjustment. Stent insertion was received by 27.8%. Across Cancer Alliances, after adjustment for confounders, the mean percentage-point difference from population average [95%CI] ranged between -10.54 (-12.88 to -8.20)% and 13.64 (9.22 to 18.06)%, showing wide and statistically significant variation from the population average.
It is unknown whether the observed variation is evidence of inequality in access to treatment and differing clinical practice or can be explained by factors we were unable to account for in our analysis, such as patient choice and differences in the clinical case-mix of patients in these areas.
We found statistically significant geographic variation in the proportions of CCA patients receiving surgery, systemic therapy and stent insertion across Cancer Alliance areas in England.
Local detailed review of treatment pathways should be undertaken to understand in more detail why rates of treatment were low and whether the observed variation indicates disparities in access to care or differences in clinical practice. Greater understanding of why variation in care is present can support the development of future strategies to reduce unwarranted variation and improve outcomes.