• Maryam Parviz, Jay Brian Cassel, Brian J Kaplan, Stephen E Karp, James P Neifeld, Lynne T Penberthy, and Harry D Bear.
• Division of Surgical Oncology, Virginia Commonwealth University Health Systems, Richmond, Virginia 23298-0011, USA.
• J Surg Oncol. 2003 Oct 1; 84 (2): 57-62.

PurposeMultiple prospective, randomized studies show that breast conservation therapy (BCT) results in survival rates equal to mastectomy (Mx) for patients with early stage breast cancer (ESBC). Nevertheless, BCT remains underused in certain areas of the nation, without clearly definable reasons. Several studies have implicated socioeconomic status as one potential cause for this disparity in BCT usage. We sought to compare BCT rates in the medically indigent versus insured patients, within the same institution.MethodsData from 1993 to 2000, collected from the institutional tumor registry and the hospital's claims records, were analyzed for 928 patients with ESBC (Stages 0, I, and II), treated at a single medical center. The same surgeons treated both insured and indigent patients. Patients treated by BCT or Mx were compared for age, race, stage, insurance status, access to a radiation therapy center, surgeon, and year of diagnosis.ResultsPatient age, race, surgeon, or insurance status did not significantly affect the rate of mastectomy. Stage I patients (P < 0.001) and those treated after 1995 had higher BCT rates (54.9% in 1993-95 vs. 70.7% in 1996-2000; P < 0.001). Travel distance to a radiation therapy center had no significant impact on BCT rates, except for patients >40 miles distant.ConclusionsThese data refute the hypothesis that socioeconomic status, as reflected by medical insurance, is a determinant of BCT in women with ESBC. Distance of <40 miles to a radiation therapy facility, Stage I disease, and diagnosis after 1995 were factors associated with higher BCT rates.Copyright 2003 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

22 keywords...

hide…