There are little data on the quality of cancer treatment information available on social media. Here, we quantify the accuracy of cancer treatment information on social media and its potential for harm. Two cancer experts reviewed 50 of the most popular social media articles on each of the 4 most common cancers. The proportion of misinformation and potential for harm were reported for all 200 articles, and their association with the number of social media engagements using a 2-sample Wilcoxon rank-sum test. All statistical tests were 2-sided. Of 200 total articles, 32.5% (n = 65) contained misinformation and 30.5% (n = 61) contained harmful information. Among articles containing misinformation, 76.9% (50 of 65) contained harmful information. The median number of engagements for articles with misinformation was greater than factual articles (median [IQR] = 2300 [1200–4700] vs 1600 [819–4700], P = .05). The median number of engagements for articles with harmful information was statistically significantly greater than safe articles (median [IQR] = 2300 [1400–4700] vs 1500 [810–4700], P = .007).

ObjectivesThe goal of this study was to determine the impact refusal of surgery has on overall survival in patients with endometrial cancer.MethodsFrom January 2004 to December 2015, the National Cancer Database was queried for patients with pathologically proven endometrial cancer who were recommended surgery and refused. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to account for differences in baseline characteristics between patients who underwent surgery and those who refused. Kaplan–Meier analyses and doubly robust estimation with multivariate Cox proportional hazards modeling were used to analyze overall survival.ResultsOf the 300 675 patients identified, 534 patients (0.2%) were recommended surgical treatment but refused: 18% (95/534) were age ≤40 years. The 5-year overall survival for all patients who refused surgery was significantly decreased compared with patients who underwent surgery (29.2% vs 71.9%, P<0.01). This was demonstrated at ages 41–64 years (65.5% vs 91.0%, P<0.01) and ≥65 years (23.4% vs 75.3%, P<0.01). The 5-year overall survival did not meet statistical significance at age ≤40 years (90.1% vs 87.8% P<0.19). However, there were few patients in this cohort. On multivariate analysis, factors associated with refusal of surgery included: Medicaid insurance, Black race, Hispanic Race, Charlson Comorbidity Index scores of 2 or greater, stage II or III, and if patient received external beam radiation therapy alone. Factors associated with undergoing surgery included: age greater than 41, stage IB, and if the patient received brachytherapy.ConclusionsRefusal of surgery for endometrial cancer is uncommon and leads to decreased overall survival.

No abstract

364 Background: Trimodality therapy with chemoradiation followed by surgery is the standard of care for non-metastatic esophageal cancer. Some patients refuse surgery and this information is captured in the National Cancer Database (NCDB). We sought to understand factors associated with refusal of surgery in these patients and to compare their survival rates with those who undergo surgery. Methods: Data from the NCDB for patients with pathologically proven non-metastatic esophageal cancer from 2006 to 2013 were pooled and screened. Patients with T1N0M0 disease were excluded. Pearson’s chi-squared test and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to assess the distribution of demographic, clinical, and treatment factors. After propensity-score matching with inverse probability of treatment weighting, overall survival (OS) was compared between patients who refused surgery and those who had surgery using Kaplan Meier analyses and doubly-robust estimation with multivariate Cox proportional hazards modeling. Results: We found 890 of 18,942 patients (4.6%) refused surgery. Older patients, females, those with squamous histology, patients insured by Medicare and those who received radiation therapy (RT) were more likely to refuse. Patients who had N1 disease, high incomes, those who received chemotherapy and those who lived farther from care were more likely to have surgery. The initial 6 month OS was not significantly different between patients who refused surgery and those who had surgery (93.5% vs 95.1% P= 0.064). However, five-year OS was significantly lower in patients who refused (16.4% vs. 38.4% P< .01). This survival decrement was observed uniquely in patients with both adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma histology. Among those who refused surgery, the OS decrement was mitigated by increasing RT doses. In those who received over 54 Gy of RT, there was no statistical difference in OS between the groups (HR = 0.84, 95% CI 0.65-1.09). Conclusions: We identified a number of patient characteristics that are related to the refusal of surgery in esophageal cancer. Refusal of surgery was related to a decrease in OS in propensity weighted cohorts. This survival decrement may be mitigated by RT in a dose dependent fashion.