Do certified cancer centers provide more cost-effective care? A health economic analysis of colon cancer care in Germany using administrative data

Benchmarking palliative care practices in neurooncology: a german perspective

PURPOSE

To benchmark palliative care practices in neurooncology centers across Germany, evaluating the variability in palliative care integration, timing, and involvement in tumor board discussions. This study aims to identify gaps in care and contribute to the discourse on optimal palliative care strategies.

METHODS

A survey targeting both German Cancer Society-certified and non-certified university neurooncology centers was conducted to explore palliative care frameworks and practices for neurooncological patients. The survey included questions on palliative care department availability, involvement in tumor boards, timing of palliative care integration, and use of standardized screening tools for assessing palliative burden and psycho-oncological distress.

RESULTS

Of 57 centers contacted, 46 responded (81% response rate). Results indicate a dedicated palliative care department in 76.1% of centers, with palliative specialists participating in tumor board discussions at 34.8% of centers. Variability was noted in the initiation of palliative care, with early integration at the diagnosis stage in only 30.4% of centers. The survey highlighted a significant lack of standardized spiritual care assessments and minimal use of advanced care planning. Discrepancies were observed in the documentation and treatment of palliative care symptoms and social complaints, underscoring the need for comprehensive care approaches.

CONCLUSION

The study highlights a diverse landscape of palliative care provision within German neurooncology centers, underscoring the need for more standardized practices and early integration of palliative care. It suggests the necessity for standardized protocols and guidelines to enhance palliative care's quality and uniformity, ultimately improving patient-centered care in neurooncology.

Application Value of High-Quality Nursing in Operating Room in Rectal Cancer Operation and its Influence on Postoperative Rehabilitation

OBJECTIVE

To study the value of high-quality care in operating room during operation of patients with rectal cancer and the effect of this nursing model on postoperative rehabilitation.

METHODS

This study recruited 72 patients with rectal cancer, including 36 in the control group and 36 in the observation group. Patients in the control group received routine care, and those in the observation group received high-quality care in operating room.

RESULTS

The anxiety score (5.50 ± .77 vs 10. 08 ± 1.13), stress score (6.97 ± .60 vs 8.61 ± .99), and depression score (4.02 ± .65 vs 5.50 ± .91) in the observation group were less than the control group after treatment (P < .05). The measured values of diastolic blood pressure (73.19 ± 1.96 vs 86.13 ± 2.0), systolic blood pressure (121.08 ± 1.62 vs 130.63 ± 2.84), heart rate (73.05 ± 1.63 vs 87.11 ± 2.91) and adrenaline E(E) (58.40 ± 3.02 vs 61.42 ± 3.86) in the observation group were less than the control group after treatment (P < .05). The cooperation degree (94.44 vs 75.00) in the observation group was greater than the control group, but the operation time (308.47 ± 9.92 vs 339.47 ± 12.70), postoperative intestinal function recovery time (16.30 ± 1.14 vs 30.94 ± 2.10) and length of stay (10.47 ± 1.85 vs 13.33 ± 1.95) were all shorter than the control group (P < .05). The nasopharyngeal temperature in the observation group was greater than the control group at 30 minutes during operation (36.16 ± .50 vs 35.19 ± .40) and after operation, and fear score (2.22 ± .42 vs 3.63 ± .72) was less than the control group (P < .05).

CONCLUSION

The application of high-quality care in the operating room during rectal cancer surgery has a significantly good clinical outcome.

Association Between Historical Redlining and Access to High-Volume Hospitals Among Patients Undergoing Complex Cancer Surgery in California

BACKGROUND

We sought to determine the impact of historical redlining on travel patterns and utilization of high-volume hospitals (HVHs) among patients undergoing complex cancer operations.

METHODS

The California Department of Health Care Access and Information database was utilized to identify patients who underwent esophagectomy (ES), pneumonectomy (PN), pancreatectomy (PA), or proctectomy (PR) for cancer between 2010 and 2020. Patient ZIP codes were assigned Home Owners' Loan Corporation grades (A: 'Best'; B: 'Still Desirable'; C: 'Definitely Declining'; and D: 'Hazardous/Redlined'). A clustered multivariable regression was used to assess the likelihood of patients undergoing surgery at an HVH, bypassing the nearest HVH, and total real driving time and travel distance.

RESULTS

Among 14,944 patients undergoing high-risk cancer surgery (ES: 4.7%, n = 1216; PN: 57.8%, n = 8643; PD: 14.4%, n = 2154; PR: 23.1%, n = 3452), 782 (5.2%) individuals resided in the 'Best', whereas 3393 (22.7%) individuals resided in redlined areas. Median travel distance was 7.8 miles (interquartile range [IQR] 4.1-14.4) and travel time was 16.1 min (IQR 10.7-25.8). Overall, 10,763 (ES: 17.4%; PN: 76.0%; PA: 63.5%; PR: 78.4%) patients underwent surgery at an HVH. On multivariable regression, patients residing in redlined areas were less likely to undergo surgery at an HVH (odds ratio [OR] 0.67, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.54-0.82) and were more likely to bypass the nearest hospital (OR 1.80, 95% CI 1.44-2.46). Notably, Medicaid insurance, minority status, limited English-language proficiency, and educational level mediated the disparities in access to HVH.

CONCLUSION

Surgical disparities in access to HVH among patients from historically redlined areas are largely mediated by social determinants such as insurance and minority status.

Would initiating colorectal cancer screening from age of 45 be cost-effective in Germany? An individual-level simulation analysis

Background

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening has been shown to be effective and cost-saving. However, the trend of rising incidence of early-onset CRC challenges the current national screening program solely for people ≥50 years in Germany, where extending the screening to those 45-49 years might be justified. This study aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of CRC screening strategies starting at 45 years in Germany.

Method

DECAS, an individual-level simulation model accounting for both adenoma and serrated pathways of CRC development and validated with German CRC epidemiology and screening effects, was used for the cost-effectiveness analysis. Four CRC screening strategies starting at age 45, including 10-yearly colonoscopy (COL), annual/biennial fecal immunochemical test (FIT), or the combination of the two, were compared with the current screening offer starting at age 50 years in Germany. Three adherence scenarios were considered: perfect adherence, current adherence, and high screening adherence. For each strategy, a cohort of 100,000 individuals with average CRC risk was simulated from age 20 until 90 or death. Outcomes included CRC cases averted, prevented death, quality-adjusted life-years gained (QALYG), and total incremental costs considering both CRC treatment and screening costs. A 3% discount rate was applied and costs were in 2023 Euro.

Result

Initiating 10-yearly colonoscopy-only or combined FIT + COL strategies at age 45 resulted in incremental gains of 7-28 QALYs with incremental costs of €28,360-€71,759 per 1,000 individuals, compared to the current strategy. The ICER varied from €1,029 to €9,763 per QALYG, and the additional number needed for colonoscopy ranged from 129 to 885 per 1,000 individuals. Among the alternatives, a three times colonoscopy strategy starting at 45 years of age proves to be the most effective, while the FIT-only strategy was dominated by the currently implemented strategy. The findings remained consistent across probabilistic sensitivity analyses.

Conclusion

The cost-effectiveness findings support initiating CRC screening at age 45 with either colonoscopy alone or combined with FIT, demonstrating substantial gains in quality-adjusted life-years with a modest increase in costs. Our findings emphasize the importance of implementing CRC screening 5 years earlier than the current practice to achieve more significant health and economic benefits.

Treatment in certified cancer centers is related to better survival in patients with colon and rectal cancer: evidence from a large German cohort study

BACKGROUND

Certified cancer centers aim to ensure high-quality care by establishing structural and procedural standards according to evidence-based guidelines. Despite the high clinical and health policy relevance, evidence from a nation-wide study for the effectiveness of care for colorectal cancer in certified centers vs. other hospitals in Germany is still missing.

METHODS

In a retrospective cohort study covering the years 2009-2017, we analyzed patient data using demographic information, diagnoses, and treatments from a nationwide statutory health insurance enriched with information on certification. We investigated whether patients with incident colon or rectal cancer did benefit from primary therapy in a certified cancer center. We used relative survival analysis taking into account mortality data of the German population and adjustment for patient and hospital characteristics via Cox regression with shared frailty for patients in hospitals with and without certification.

RESULTS

The cohorts for colon and rectal cancer consisted of 109,518 and 51,417 patients, respectively, treated in a total of 1052 hospitals. 37.2% of patients with colon and 42.9% of patients with rectal cancer were treated in a certified center. Patient age, sex, comorbidities, secondary malignoma, and distant metastases were similar across groups (certified/non-certified) for both colon and rectal cancer. Relative survival analysis showed significantly better survival of patients treated in a certified center, with 68.3% (non-certified hospitals 65.8%) 5-year survival for treatment of colon cancer in certified (p < 0.001) and 65.0% (58.8%) 5-year survival in case of rectal cancer (p < 0.001), respectively. Cox regression with adjustment for relevant covariates yielded a lower hazard of death for patients treated in certified centers for both colon (HR = 0.92, 95% CI = 0.89-0.95) and rectal cancer (HR = 0.92, 95% CI = 0.88-0.95). The results remained robust in a series of sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

This large cohort study yields new important evidence that patients with colorectal cancer have a better chance of survival if treated in a certified cancer center. Certification thus provides one powerful means to improve the quality of care for colorectal cancer. To decrease the burden of disease, more patients should thus receive cancer care in a certified center.

Weekday-dependent long-term outcomes in gastrointestinal cancer surgery: a German population-based retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

For most solid cancers, surgery represents the mainstay of curative treatment. Several studies investigating the effects of the weekday of surgery (WOS) on patient outcomes have yielded conflicting results. Barmer, the second-largest health insurance company in Germany, serves roughly 10% of the German population. The authors have used the Barmer database to evaluate how the weekday on which the surgery is performed influences long-term oncologic outcomes.

METHODS

For this retrospective cohort study, the Barmer database was used to investigate the effect of the WOS (Monday-Friday) on outcomes following oncological resections of the colorectum ( n =49 003), liver ( n =1302), stomach ( n =5027), esophagus ( n =1126), and pancreas ( n =6097). In total, 62 555 cases from 2008 to 2018 were included in the analysis. The endpoints were overall survival (OS), postoperative complications, and the necessity for therapeutic interventions or reoperations. The authors further examined whether the annual caseload or certification as a cancer center influenced the weekday effect.

RESULTS

The authors observed a significantly impaired OS for patients receiving gastric or colorectal resections on a Monday. Colorectal surgery performed on Mondays was associated with more postoperative complications and a higher probability of reoperations. The annual caseload or a certification as a colorectal cancer center had no bearing on the observed weekday effect. There is evidence that hospitals schedule older patients with more comorbidities earlier in the week, possibly explaining these findings.

CONCLUSION

This is the first study investigating the influence of the WOS on long-term survival in Germany. Our findings indicate that, in the German healthcare system, patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery on Mondays have more postoperative complications and, therefore, require significantly more reoperations, ultimately lowering the OS. This surprising finding appears to reflect an attempt to schedule patients with higher postoperative risk earlier in the week as well as semi-elective patients admitted on weekends scheduled for surgery on the next Monday.

Initial Cancer Treatment in Certified Versus Non-Certified Hospitals

BACKGROUND

According to the National Cancer Plan in Germany, all cancer patients should receive high-quality care in accordance with evidence-based treatment guidelines. Certification programs were established for this purpose but have not yet been comprehensively evaluated.

METHODS

In the WiZen project, which was supported by the Innovation Fund (supported project number 01VSF17020), controlled cohort studies were performed to investigate whether initial treatment in hospitals with or without a certificate from the German Cancer Society was associated with a difference in overall survival (primary endpoint) in patients with cancer of the colon, rectum, lung, pancreas, breast, cervix, prostate, endometrium, and ovary, head and neck cancer, and neuro-oncological tumors. The studies were based on nationwide data from adult insurees of the AOK statutory health insurance carrier for the years 2009-2017.

RESULTS

The majority of patients with all entities except breast cancer received their initial treatment in non-certified hospitals. Initial treatment in a certified hospital was found to be beneficial in terms of overall survival for all cancer entities, even after extensive adjustment for patient- and hospital-related confounders. The hazard ratio (HR) ranged from 0.97 (95% CI: [0.94; 1.00]) for lung cancer to 0.77 [0.74; 0.81] for breast cancer, corresponding to an absolute risk reduction (ARR) for overall survival of 0.62 months for lung cancer to 4.61 months for cervical cancer.

CONCLUSION

The WiZen study shows for the entities studied that initial cancer treatment in a certified center is associated with lower mortality. Despite the recommendations of the National Cancer Plan, however, more than 40% of all cancer patients still receive their initial treatment in a non-certified hospital. The preferential provision of initial care in certified hospitals would be likely to improve overall survival. Although the study design does not permit any conclusion with regard to causality, the findings seem robust considering that a control group was used, confounders were taken into account, and the study population was of large size.

Treatment of Colorectal Cancer in Certified Centers: Results of a Large German Registry Study Focusing on Long-Term Survival

(1) Background: The WiZen study is the largest study so far to analyze the effect of the certification of designated cancer centers on survival in Germany. This certification program is provided by the German Cancer Society (GCS) and represents one of the largest oncologic certification programs worldwide. Currently, about 50% of colorectal cancer patients in Germany are treated in certified centers. (2) Methods: All analyses are based on population-based clinical cancer registry data of 47.440 colorectal cancer (ICD-10-GM C18/C20) patients treated between 2009 and 2017. The primary outcome was 5-year overall survival (OAS) after treatment at certified cancer centers compared to treatment at other hospitals; the secondary endpoint was recurrence-free survival. Statistical methods included Kaplan-Meier analysis and multivariable Cox regression. (3) Results: Treatment at certified hospitals was associated with significant advantages concerning 5-year overall survival (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.89, 0.96, adjusted for a broad range of confounders) for colon cancer patients. Concentrating on UICC stage I-III patients, for whom curative treatment is possible, the survival benefit was even larger (colon cancer: HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.84, 0.94; rectum cancer: HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.84, 0.97). (4) Conclusions: These results encourage future efforts for further implementation of the certification program. Patients with colorectal cancer should preferably be directed to certified centers.

Assessment of the Potential of Concentrating Cancer Care in Hospitals With Certification Through Survival Analysis

BACKGROUND

Certification programs seek to improve the quality of complex interdisciplinary models of care such as cancer treatment through structuring the process of care in accordance with evidence-based guidelines. In Germany, the German Cancer Society (Deutsche Krebsgesellschaft, DKG) provides a certification programme for cancer care that covers more than one thousand centers. In a recent retrospective cohort study, it has been shown on a large, nationwide data set based on data from a statutory health insurance and selected clinical cancer registries, that there is a benefit in survival for cancer patients who have received initial treatment in hospitals certified by the DKG. Here, we deduce two absolute measures from the relative benefit in survival with the aim to quantify this benefit if all patients had been treated in a certified center.

METHODS

The WiZen study analysed survival of adult patients insured by the AOK with a cancer diagnosis between 2009 and 2017 in certified hospitals vs. non-certified hospitals. Besides Kaplan-Meier-estimators, Cox regression with shared frailty was used for 11 types of cancer in total, adjusting for patient-specific information such as demographic characteristics and comorbidities as well as hospital characteristics and temporal trend. Based on this regression, we predict adjusted survival curves that directly address the certification effect. From the adjusted survivals, we calculated years of life lost (YLL) and number needed to treat (NNT), along with a difference in deaths 5 years after diagnosis.

RESULTS

Based on our estimate for the 537,396 patients that were treated in a non-certified hospital included in the WiZen study, corresponding to 68,7% of the study population, we find a potential of 33,243 YLL per year in Germany based on the size of the German population as of 2017. The potential to avoid death cases 5 years from diagnosis totals 4,729 per year in Germany.

CONCLUSION

While Cox regression is an important tool to evaluate the benefit that arises from variables with a potential impact on survival such as certification, its direct results are not well suited to quantify this benefit for decision makers in health care. The estimated years of life lost and the number of deaths that could have been avoided 5 years from diagnosis avoid mis-interpretation of the hazard ratios commonly used in survival analysis and should help to inform key stakeholders in health care without specialist background knowledge in statistics. Our measures, directly adressing the effect of certification, can furthermore be used as a starting point for health-economic calculations. Steering the care of cancer patients primarily to certified hospitals would have a high potential to improve outcomes.

Mapping the Oncological Basis Dataset to the Standardized Vocabularies of a Common Data Model: A Feasibility Study

In their joint effort against cancer, all involved parties within the German healthcare system are obligated to report diagnostics, treatments, progression, and follow-up information for tumor patients to the respective cancer registries. Given the federal structure of Germany, the oncological basis dataset (oBDS) operates as the legally required national standard for oncological reporting. Unfortunately, the usage of various documentation software solutions leads to semantic and technical heterogeneity of the data, complicating the establishment of research networks and collective data analysis. Within this feasibility study, we evaluated the transferability of all oBDS characteristics to the standardized vocabularies, a metadata repository of the observational medical outcomes partnership (OMOP) common data model (CDM). A total of 17,844 oBDS expressions were mapped automatically or manually to standardized concepts of the OMOP CDM. In a second step, we converted real patient data retrieved from the Hamburg Cancer Registry to the new terminologies. Given our pipeline, we transformed 1773.373 cancer-related data elements to the OMOP CDM. The mapping of the oBDS to the standardized vocabularies of the OMOP CDM promotes the semantic interoperability of oncological data in Germany. Moreover, it allows the participation in network studies of the observational health data sciences and informatics under the usage of federated analysis beyond the level of individual countries.

The impact of intraoperative frozen section in patients with clinically node-negative breast cancer (cN0/ycN0) who received neoadjuvant systemic therapy

BACKGROUND

When surgical axillary staging reveals residual metastatic deposits in breast cancer (BC) patients who had received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT), axillary lymphonodectomy is indicated. In this study, we investigate whether it is reasonable to perform intraoperative frozen section (FS) of the removed sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs) in cases where NACT had been administered in patients who had a clinically negative nodal status at the time of diagnosis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We analyzed data from 101 BCE patients with 103 carcinomas who were diagnosed between 2014 and 2021 and met the above-mentioned criteria.

RESULTS

In three cases (2.8% of the study group), histologically active tumor tissue was detected in the removed axillary LNs. Discontinuation of therapy/the use of a low-dose NACT regimen was a significant factor for positive LNs (p = 0.02) at the subsequent surgical procedure; tumor progression during therapy approached borderline significance (p = 0.058). Among patients who had completed NACT with the planned standard dose regimen, and in which the primary tumors showed a response to therapy (n = 94), only one case had histologically detected residual metastases in the SLNs.

CONCLUSIONS

Certified breast centers aim to improve the outcome of the patients. However, these specialized centers should also focus on economic aspects. This means that diagnostic and therapeutic procedures should be continuously critically reviewed in order to avoid unnecessary expenses. In BC patients with clinically node negative disease who completed NACT as planned and in which the tumor showed a good response to therapy, time consuming and costly FS of the SLNs removed should be omitted.

[Specialised treatment of colorectal cancer in certified cancer centres: Do patients really have to travel further?]

INTRODUCTION

In Germany, many cancer patients are treated outside of cancer centres certified by the German Cancer Society (DKG) resulting in underuse of these facilities and inferior oncological treatment. One way to address this issue would be to restructure the healthcare landscape by following the Danish approach that limits cancer treatment to specialized hospitals. Such an approach would have an impact on the travelling times to treatment centers. The present study determines the impact on patient travel times using the example of colorectal cancer.

METHODS

For the present analysis, data from structured quality reports (sQB) and from patients insured with the AOK who underwent resection of the colon or rectum during 2018 were used. In addition, data from the DKG regarding an existing certification of a colorectal cance centre were used. Travel time was defined as the time patients spent in an average car with average traffic from the midpoint of the ZIP code of their residence to the coordinates of the hospital. The coordinates of the hospitals and the midpoints of the ZIP codes were obtained by querying the Google API. Travel times were calculated with a local Open Routing Machine server. The statistical programs R and Stata were used for analyses and cartographic representations.

RESULTS

In 2018, nearly half of all patients with colon cancer were treated at the hospital nearest to their place of residence, of whom approximately 40% were treated at a certified colorectal cancer centre. Overall, only about 47% of all treatments took place at a certified colorectal cancer centre. Travel time to the chosen treatment site averaged 20 minutes. It was minimally shorter (18 minutes) if no certified centre was chosen and minimally longer (21 minutes) for those whose treatment took place in a certified colorectal cancer centre. Modeling of redistributions of all patients to certified centres resulted on an average travel time of 29 minutes.

CONCLUSION

Even if treatment were limited to specialized hospitals, treatment close to home would still be guaranteed. Regardless of certification, parallel structures can be identified, especially in metropolitan areas, which indicate a potential for restructuring.

How to improve efficiency in cancer care: dimensions, methods, and areas of evaluation

Efficiency in healthcare is crucial since available resources are scarce, and the opportunity cost of an inefficient allocation is measured in health outcomes foregone. This is particularly relevant for cancer. The aim of this paper was to gain a comprehensive overview of how efficiency in cancer care is defined, and what the indicators, different methods, perspectives, and areas of evaluation are, to provide recommendations on the areas and dimensions where efficiency can be improved. METHODS: A comprehensive scoping literature review was performed searching four databases. Studies published between 2000-2021 were included if they described experiences and cases of efficiency in cancer care or methods to evaluate efficiency. The results of the literature review were then discussed during two rounds of online consultation with a panel of 15 external experts invited to provide their insights and comments to deliberate policy recommendations. RESULTS: 46 papers met the inclusion criteria. Based on the papers retrieved we have identified six areas for achieving efficiency gains throughout the entire care pathway and, for each area of efficiency, we have categorized the methods and outcome used to measure efficiency gain CONCLUSION: This is the first attempt to systematize a scattered body of literature on how to improve efficiency in cancer care and identify key areas to improve it. Based on the findings of the literature review and on the opinion of the experts involved in the consultation, we propose seven recommendations that are intended to improve efficiency in cancer care throughout the care pathway.

Treatment Costs of Colorectal Cancer by Sex and Age: Population-Based Study on Health Insurance Data from Germany

Objective: Evidence on the cost-effectiveness of screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) in the German general population remains scarce as key input parameters, the costs to treat CRC, are largely unknown. Here, we provide detailed estimates on CRC treatment costs over time. Methods: Using insurance claims data from the Vilua healthcare research database, we included subjects with newly diagnosed CRC and subjects who died of CRC between 2012 and 2016. We assessed annualized CRC-related inpatient, outpatient and medication costs for up to five years after first diagnosis and prior to death, stratified by sex and age. Findings: We identified 1748 and 1117 subjects with follow-up data for at least 1 year after diagnosis and prior to death, respectively. In those newly diagnosed, average costs were highest in the first year after diagnosis (men, EUR 16,375−16,450; women, EUR 10,071−13,250) and dropped steeply in the following years, with no consistent pattern of differences with respect to age. Costs prior to death were substantially higher as compared to the initial phase of care and consistently on a high level even several years before death, peaking in the final year of life, with strong differences by sex and age (men vs. women, <70 years, EUR 34,351 vs. EUR 31,417; ≥70 years, EUR 14,463 vs. EUR 9930). Conclusion: Once clinically manifest, CRC causes substantial treatment costs over time, particularly in the palliative care setting. Strong differences in treatment costs by sex and age warrant further investigation.

Relative Efficiency of Radiation Treatment Centers: An Application of Data Envelopment Analysis

This study determines the relative efficiencies of a number of cancer treatment centers in Ontario, taking into account the differences among them so that their performances can be compared against the provincial targets. These differences can be in physical and financial resources, and patient demographics. An analytical framework is developed based on a three-step data envelopment analysis (DEA) model to build efficiency metrics for planning, delivery, and quality of treatment at each center. Regression analysis is used to explain the efficiency metrics and demonstrates how these findings can inform continuous improvement efforts.