Disparities in consent to adjuvant radiotherapy in primary glioblastoma: a population-based study.

IF 2.9 3区医学 Q2 ONCOLOGY Expert Review of Anticancer Therapy Pub Date : 2025-02-12 DOI:10.1080/14737140.2025.2464935

Wang Miao, Liu Yang, Jinhu Li, Xia Yan, Ying Lu, Xin Yang

{"title":"Disparities in consent to adjuvant radiotherapy in primary glioblastoma: a population-based study.","authors":"Wang Miao, Liu Yang, Jinhu Li, Xia Yan, Ying Lu, Xin Yang","doi":"10.1080/14737140.2025.2464935","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Despite adjuvant external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) has long been the standard treatment for glioblastoma (GBM), a significant subset of patients chooses to refuse it. We aimed to investigate the factors influencing EBRT refusal in GBM.Research design and methods: Patients with GBM were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Both univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were employed to evaluate the adjusted odds ratios (aOR) for the refusal of EBRT in relation to various clinical and demographic characteristics.Results: Among the 29,994 patients analyzed, 675 (2.3%) opted to refuse adjuvant EBRT. Patients aged ≥ 55 years (55-64: aOR 1.63, 95% CI 1.04-2.61, p = 0.03; 65-74: aOR 1.80, 95% CI 1.17-2.87, p = 0.009; 75+: aOR 2.01, 95% CI 1.28-3.24, p = 0.002), being single (aOR 1.68, 95% CI 1.19-2.35, p = 0.002), with a household income of $55,000 to $64,999 (aOR 1.94, 95% CI 1.24-3.07, p = 0.004), and not undergoing chemotherapy (aOR 114, 95% CI 80.2-170.2, p < 0.001) had significantly higher odds of refusing adjuvant EBRT.Conclusions: This study underscores the necessity for targeted communication strategies by physicians regarding the benefits of adjuvant EBRT.","PeriodicalId":12099,"journal":{"name":"Expert Review of Anticancer Therapy","volume":" ","pages":"1-8"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert Review of Anticancer Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14737140.2025.2464935","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Despite adjuvant external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) has long been the standard treatment for glioblastoma (GBM), a significant subset of patients chooses to refuse it. We aimed to investigate the factors influencing EBRT refusal in GBM.

Research design and methods: Patients with GBM were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Both univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were employed to evaluate the adjusted odds ratios (aOR) for the refusal of EBRT in relation to various clinical and demographic characteristics.

Results: Among the 29,994 patients analyzed, 675 (2.3%) opted to refuse adjuvant EBRT. Patients aged ≥ 55 years (55-64: aOR 1.63, 95% CI 1.04-2.61, p = 0.03; 65-74: aOR 1.80, 95% CI 1.17-2.87, p = 0.009; 75+: aOR 2.01, 95% CI 1.28-3.24, p = 0.002), being single (aOR 1.68, 95% CI 1.19-2.35, p = 0.002), with a household income of $55,000 to $64,999 (aOR 1.94, 95% CI 1.24-3.07, p = 0.004), and not undergoing chemotherapy (aOR 114, 95% CI 80.2-170.2, p < 0.001) had significantly higher odds of refusing adjuvant EBRT.

Conclusions: This study underscores the necessity for targeted communication strategies by physicians regarding the benefits of adjuvant EBRT.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

Expert Review of Anticancer Therapy 医学-肿瘤学

CiteScore

5.10

自引率

3.00%

发文量

100

审稿时长

4-8 weeks

期刊介绍： Expert Review of Anticancer Therapy (ISSN 1473-7140) provides expert appraisal and commentary on the major trends in cancer care and highlights the performance of new therapeutic and diagnostic approaches. Coverage includes tumor management, novel medicines, anticancer agents and chemotherapy, biological therapy, cancer vaccines, therapeutic indications, biomarkers and diagnostics, and treatment guidelines. All articles are subject to rigorous peer-review, and the journal makes an essential contribution to decision-making in cancer care. Comprehensive coverage in each review is complemented by the unique Expert Review format and includes the following sections: Expert Opinion - a personal view of the data presented in the article, a discussion on the developments that are likely to be important in the future, and the avenues of research likely to become exciting as further studies yield more detailed results Article Highlights – an executive summary of the author’s most critical points.