• Helen M Parsons, James W Begun, Karen M Kuntz, Todd M Tuttle, Patricia M McGovern, and Beth A Virnig.
• University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX; University of Minnesota; and Masonic Cancer Center, Minneapolis, MN.
• J Oncol Pract. 2013 Jul 1;9(4):e164-71.

IntroductionIn the 1990s, several organizations began recommending evaluation of > 12 lymph nodes during colon resection because of its association with improved survival. We examined practice implications of multispecialty quality guidelines over the past 20 years recommending evaluation of ≥ 12 lymph nodes during colon resection for adequate staging.Materials And MethodsWe used the 1988 to 2009 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program to conduct a retrospective observational cohort study of 90,203 surgically treated patients with colon cancer. We used Cochran-Armitage tests to examine trends in lymph node examination over time and multivariate logistic regression to identify patient characteristics associated with guideline-recommended lymph node evaluation.ResultsThe introduction of practice guidelines was associated with gradual increases in guideline-recommended lymph node evaluation. From 1988 to 1990, 34% of patients had > 12 lymph nodes evaluated, increasing to 38% in 1994 to 1996 and to > 75% from 2006 to 2009. Younger, white patients and those with more-extensive bowel penetration (T3/4 nonmetastatic) and high tumor grade saw more-rapid increases in lymph node evaluation (P < .001). Multivariate analyses demonstrated a significant interaction between year of diagnosis and both T stage and grade, indicating that those with higher T stage and higher grade were more likely to receive guideline-recommended care earlier.ConclusionThe implementation of lymph node evaluation guidelines was accepted gradually into practice but adopted more quickly among higher risk patients. By identifying patients who are least likely to receive guideline-recommended care, these findings present a starting point for promoting targeted improvements in cancer care and further understanding underlying contributors to these disparities.

10 keywords...

hide…