The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Wait Times for Cancer Surgery in the United States: Trends and Predictors of Delays
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patients frequently voice concerns regarding wait times for cancer treatment; however, little is known about the length of wait times from diagnosis to surgery in the United States. Our objectives were (1) to assess changes in wait times over the past decade and (2) to identify patient, tumor, and hospital factors associated with prolonged wait times for initial cancer treatment. METHODS: Using the National Cancer Data Base (1995-2005), 1,228,071 patients were identified who underwent resection for nonmetastatic breast, colon, esophageal, gastric, liver, lung, pancreatic, and rectal cancer at 1443 hospitals. Multivariable models were developed to assess factors associated with time to treatment. RESULTS: From 1995 to 2005, the median time from diagnosis to treatment increased for all cancers (P < 0.0001). The time from diagnosis to treatment was significantly longer at National Cancer Institute Comprehensive Cancer Centers and Veterans' Administration institutions versus community hospitals (P < 0.0001). On multivariable analysis, patients were significantly more likely to undergo initial treatment > 30 days from diagnosis if older (6 of 8 cancers), black (5 of 8 cancers), had more comorbidities (6 of 8 cancers), had Stage I disease (7 of 8 cancers), or were treated at National Cancer Institute Comprehensive Cancer Centers or Veterans' Affairs institutions (all cancers). CONCLUSIONS: Wait times for cancer treatment have increased over the last decade. As case loads increase, wait times for treatment are likely to continue increasing, potentially resulting in additional treatment delay. Additional resources and strategies are needed to reduce wait times for cancer treatment in the United States.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Murphy, C. T., Galloway, T. J., Handorf, E. A., Egleston, B. L., Wang, L. S., Mehra, R., Flieder, D. B., & Ridge, J. A. (2016) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2015.61.5906 · Cited by 428
Current Use of Telemedicine for Post-Discharge Surgical Care: A Systematic Review
Gunter, R. L., Chouinard, S., Fernandes-Taylor, S., Wiseman, J. T., Clarkson, S., Bennett, K., Greenberg, C. C., & Kent, C. K. (2016) · Journal of the American College of Surgeons · doi:10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2016.01.062 · Cited by 264
Mayer, D. K., & Alfano, C. M. (2019) · JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute · doi:10.1093/jnci/djy232 · Cited by 127
Timing of breast cancer surgery-how much does it matter?
Mansfield, S. A., Abdel-Rasoul, M., Terando, A. M., & Agnese, D. M. (2017) · The Breast Journal · doi:10.1111/tbj.12758 · Cited by 35
Metadata
- Authors
- Bilimoria, K. Y., Ko, C. Y., Tomlinson, J. S., Stewart, A. K., Talamonti, M. S., Hynes, D. L., Winchester, D. P., & Bentrem, D. J.
- Venue
- Annals of Surgery
- Published
- 2011-04
- Volume
- 253
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 779-785
- ISSN
- 0003-4932 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2313492784
- Cited by
- 315
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 5.10
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Wait Times for Cancer Surgery in the United States: Trends and Predictors of Delays. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/sla.0b013e318211cc0f
- The paper
- Bilimoria, K. Y., Ko, C. Y., Tomlinson, J. S., Stewart, A. K., Talamonti, M. S., Hynes, D. L., Winchester, D. P., & Bentrem, D. J. (2011). Wait Times for Cancer Surgery in the United States: Trends and Predictors of Delays. Annals of Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1097/sla.0b013e318211cc0f
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.