1
|
Zullig LL, Jazowski SA, Chawla N, Williams CD, Winski D, Slatore CG, Clary A, Rasmussen KM, Ticknor LM, Kelley MJ. Summary of Veterans Health Administration Cancer Data Sources. JOURNAL OF REGISTRY MANAGEMENT 2024; 51:21-28. [PMID: 38881982 PMCID: PMC11178113] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/18/2024]
Abstract
Objectives The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) is a leader in generating transformational research across the cancer care continuum. Given the extensive body of cancer-related literature utilizing VHA data, our objectives are to: (1) describe the VHA data sources available for conducting cancer-related research, and (2) discuss examples of published cancer research using each data source. Methods We identified commonly used data sources within the VHA and reviewed previously published cancer-related research that utilized these data sources. In addition, we reviewed VHA clinical and health services research web pages and consulted with a multidisciplinary group of cancer researchers that included hematologist/oncologists, health services researchers, and epidemiologists. Results Commonly used VHA cancer data sources include the Veterans Affairs (VA) Cancer Registry System, the VA Central Cancer Registry (VACCR), the Corporate Data Warehouse (CDW)-Oncology Raw Domain (subset of data within the CDW), and the VA Cancer Care Cube (Cube). While no reference standard exists for cancer case ascertainment, the VACCR provides a systematic approach to ensure the complete capture of clinical history, cancer diagnosis, and treatment. Like many population-based cancer registries, a significant time lag exists due to constrained resources, which may make it best suited for historical epidemiologic studies. The CDW-Oncology Raw Domain and the Cube contain national information on incident cancers which may be useful for case ascertainment and prospective recruitment; however, additional resources may be needed for data cleaning. Conclusions The VHA has a wealth of data sources available for cancer-related research. It is imperative that researchers recognize the advantages and disadvantages of each data source to ensure their research questions are addressed appropriately.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Leah L. Zullig
- Durham VA Health Care System, Durham, North Carolina
- Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina
| | - Shelley A. Jazowski
- Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina
- University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| | - Neetu Chawla
- Center for the Study of Healthcare Innovation, Implementation and Policy (CSHIIP), VA Greater Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California
| | - Christina D. Williams
- Durham VA Health Care System, Durham, North Carolina
- Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina
| | - David Winski
- Durham VA Health Care System, Durham, North Carolina
- Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina
| | - Christopher G. Slatore
- VA Portland Health Care System, Portland, Oregon
- Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon
| | - Alecia Clary
- Durham VA Health Care System, Durham, North Carolina
| | | | | | - Michael J. Kelley
- Durham VA Health Care System, Durham, North Carolina
- Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina
- Department of Veterans Affairs, Washington, DC
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Chiew KL, Sundaresan P, Jalaludin B, Chong S, Vinod SK. Quality indicators in lung cancer: a review and analysis. BMJ Open Qual 2021; 10:bmjoq-2020-001268. [PMID: 34344690 PMCID: PMC8336169 DOI: 10.1136/bmjoq-2020-001268] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/17/2020] [Accepted: 07/25/2021] [Indexed: 12/02/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Kim-Lin Chiew
- Macarthur Cancer Therapy Centre, South Western Sydney Cancer Service, Campbelltown, New South Wales, Australia .,South Western Sydney Clinical School, University of New South Wales Faculty of Medicine, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Puma Sundaresan
- Crown Princess Mary Cancer Centre, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia.,Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Bin Jalaludin
- Population Health Intelligence, Healthy People and Places Unit, South Western Sydney Local Health District, Liverpool, New South Wales, Australia.,School of Public Health and Community Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Shanley Chong
- Population Health Intelligence, Healthy People and Places Unit, South Western Sydney Local Health District, Liverpool, New South Wales, Australia.,School of Public Health and Community Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Shalini K Vinod
- South Western Sydney Clinical School, University of New South Wales Faculty of Medicine, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.,Liverpool Cancer Therapy Centre, South Western Sydney Cancer Service, Liverpool, New South Wales, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Herrel LA, Zhu Z, Griggs JJ, Kaye DR, Dupree JM, Ellimoottil CS, Miller DC. Association Between Delivery System Structure and Intensity of End-of-Life Cancer Care. JCO Oncol Pract 2020; 16:e590-e600. [PMID: 32069191 DOI: 10.1200/jop.19.00667] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To determine whether the type of delivery system is associated with intensity of care at the end of life for Medicare beneficiaries with cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS We used SEER registry data linked with Medicare claims to evaluate intensity of end-of-life care for patients who died of one of ten common cancers diagnosed from 2009 through 2014. Patients were categorized as receiving the majority of their care in an integrated delivery system, designated cancer center, health system that was both integrated and a certified cancer center, or health system that was neither. We evaluated adherence to seven nationally endorsed end-of-life quality measures using generalized linear models across four delivery system types. RESULTS Among 100,549 beneficiaries who died of cancer during the study interval, we identified only modest differences in intensity of end-of-life care across delivery system structures. Health systems with no cancer center or integrated affiliation demonstrated higher proportions of patients with multiple hospitalizations in the last 30 days of life (11.3%), death in an acute care setting (25.9%), and lack of hospice use in the last year of life (31.6%; all P < .001). Patients enrolled in hospice had lower intensity care across multiple end-of-life quality measures. CONCLUSION Intensity of care at the end of life for patients with cancer was higher at delivery systems with no integration or cancer focus. Maximal supportive care delivered through hospice may be one avenue to reduce high-intensity care at the end of life and may impact quality of care for patients dying from cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lindsey A Herrel
- The University of Michigan Institute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, Ann Arbor, MI
| | - Ziwei Zhu
- The University of Michigan Institute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, Ann Arbor, MI
| | - Jennifer J Griggs
- The University of Michigan Institute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, Ann Arbor, MI
| | - Deborah R Kaye
- The University of Michigan Institute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, Ann Arbor, MI
| | - James M Dupree
- The University of Michigan Institute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, Ann Arbor, MI
| | - Chandy S Ellimoottil
- The University of Michigan Institute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, Ann Arbor, MI
| | - David C Miller
- The University of Michigan Institute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, Ann Arbor, MI
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Williams CD, Alpert N, Redding TS, Bullard AJ, Flores RM, Kelley MJ, Taioli E. Racial Differences in Treatment and Survival among Veterans and Non-Veterans with Stage I NSCLC: An Evaluation of Veterans Affairs and SEER-Medicare Populations. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2020; 29:112-118. [PMID: 31624076 DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.epi-19-0245] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/20/2019] [Revised: 05/28/2019] [Accepted: 10/07/2019] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Surgery is the preferred treatment for stage I non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), with radiation reserved for those not receiving surgery. Previous studies have shown lower rates of surgery among Blacks with stage I NSCLC than among Whites. METHODS Black and White men ages ≥65 years with stage I NSCLC diagnosed between 2001 and 2009 were identified in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database and Veterans Affairs (VA) cancer registry. Logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards models were used to examine associations between race, treatment, and survival. RESULTS Among the patients in the VA (n = 7,895) and SEER (n = 8,744), the proportion of Blacks was 13% and 7%, respectively. Overall, 16.2% of SEER patients (15.4% of Whites, 26.0% of Blacks) and 24.5% of VA patients received no treatment (23.4% of Whites, 31.4% of Blacks). In both cohorts, Blacks were less likely to receive any treatment compared with Whites [ORadj = 0.57; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.47-0.69 for SEER-Medicare; ORadj = 0.68; 95% CI, 0.58-0.79 for VA]. Among treated patients, Blacks were less likely than Whites to receive surgery only (ORadj = 0.57; 95% CI, 0.47-0.70 for SEER-Medicare; ORadj = 0.73; 95% CI, 0.62-0.86 for VA), but more likely to receive chemotherapy only and radiation only. There were no racial differences in survival. CONCLUSIONS Among VA and SEER-Medicare patients, Blacks were less likely to get surgical treatment. Blacks and Whites had similar survival outcomes when accounting for treatment. IMPACT This supports the hypothesis that equal treatment correlates with equal outcomes and emphasizes the need to understand multilevel predictors of lung cancer treatment disparities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christina D Williams
- Cooperative Studies Program Epidemiology Center-Durham, Durham Veterans Affairs Health Care System, Durham, North Carolina.
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina
| | - Naomi Alpert
- Department of Population Health Science and Policy, Institute for Translational Epidemiology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York
| | - Thomas S Redding
- Cooperative Studies Program Epidemiology Center-Durham, Durham Veterans Affairs Health Care System, Durham, North Carolina
| | - A Jasmine Bullard
- Cooperative Studies Program Epidemiology Center-Durham, Durham Veterans Affairs Health Care System, Durham, North Carolina
| | - Raja M Flores
- Department of Thoracic Surgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York
- Tisch Cancer Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York
| | - Michael J Kelley
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina
- Division of Hematology-Oncology, Medical Service, Durham Veterans Affairs Health Care System, Durham, North Carolina
| | - Emanuela Taioli
- Department of Population Health Science and Policy, Institute for Translational Epidemiology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York
- Department of Thoracic Surgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York
- Tisch Cancer Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Roth CP, Coulter ID, Kraus LS, Ryan GW, Jacob G, Marks JS, Hurwitz EL, Vernon H, Shekelle PG, Herman PM. Researching the Appropriateness of Care in the Complementary and Integrative Health Professions Part 5: Using Patient Records: Selection, Protection, and Abstraction. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 2019; 42:327-334. [PMID: 31257004 DOI: 10.1016/j.jmpt.2019.02.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/09/2019] [Revised: 01/23/2019] [Accepted: 02/07/2019] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES The purpose of this paper is to describe the 4-step process (consent, selection, protection, and abstraction) of acquiring a large sample of chiropractic patient records from multiple practices and subsequent data abstraction. METHODS From April 2017 to December 2017, RAND acquired patient records from 99 chiropractic practices across the United States. The records included patients enrolled in a survey e-study (prospective sample) and a random sample of all clinic patients (retrospective sample) with chronic back or neck pain. Clinic staff were trained to collect the sample, scan, and transfer the records. We designed an online data collection tool for abstraction. Protocols were instituted to protect patient confidentiality. Doctors of chiropractic were selected and trained as abstractors, and a system was established to monitor data collection. RESULTS In compliance with data protection protocols, 3603 patient records were scanned, including 1475 in the prospective sample and 2128 in the random sample. A total of 1716 patients (prospective sample) consented to having their records scanned, but only 1475 could be retrieved. Of records scanned, 19% were unusable owing to illegibility, no care during the period of interest, or poor scanning. The abstractor interrater reliability for appropriateness of care decisions was fair to moderate (κ .38-.48). CONCLUSION The acquisition, handling, and abstraction of a large sample of chiropractic records was a complex task with challenges that necessitated adapting planned approaches. Of the records abstracted, many revealed incomplete provider documentation regarding the details of and rationale for care. Better documentation and more standardized record keeping would facilitate future research using patient records.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Carol P Roth
- RAND Corporation, Health, Santa Monica, California
| | | | - Lisa S Kraus
- RAND Corporation, Health, Santa Monica, California
| | - Gery W Ryan
- RAND Corporation, Health, Santa Monica, California
| | - Gary Jacob
- RAND Corporation, Health, Santa Monica, California
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
6
|
Swegal WC, Herbert RJ, Eisele DW, Chang J, Bristow RE, Gourin CG. Observed-to-expected ratio for adherence to treatment guidelines as a quality of care indicator for laryngeal cancer. Laryngoscope 2019; 130:672-678. [PMID: 31169916 DOI: 10.1002/lary.28104] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/04/2019] [Revised: 02/25/2019] [Accepted: 05/20/2019] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS To examine associations between survival and adherence to National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) treatment guidelines using an observed-to-expected (O/E) ratio for greater adherence as a risk-adjusted hospital measure of quality care in elderly patients treated for larynx cancer. STUDY DESIGN Retrospective analysis of Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare data. METHODS Patients diagnosed with larynx cancer from 2004 to 2007 were evaluated using multivariate regression and survival analysis. A fit logistic regression model was used to calculate an O/E ratio for guideline adherence for each hospital using quality indicators derived from NCCN guidelines for recommended treatment and stratified by hospital volume. RESULTS Of 1,721 patients treated at 395 hospitals, 43.0% of patients received NCCN guideline-adherent care. Low-volume hospitals (N = 295) treating six or fewer cases treated 765 patients (44.5%), with a mean O/E of 0.96 ± 0.45. Hospitals treating more then six cases with an O/E <1 (N = 32) treated 284 patients (16.5%), with a mean O/E of 0.77 ± 0.18. Hospitals treating more than six cases with an O/E ≥1 (N = 68) treated 672 patients (39.1%), with a mean O/E of 1.17 ± 0.11. Treatment at hospitals with an O/E ≥1 was associated with improved survival (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.83 [95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.70 to 0.98]) and lower mean incremental treatment-related costs (-$3,009 [-$5,226 to -$791]) compared with hospitals with an O/E <1 (HR = 1.00 [0.80 to 1.24]) and the reference group of low-volume hospitals. CONCLUSIONS A hospital-specific O/E for NCCN treatment guideline adherence, combined with a minimum case volume criterion, is associated with survival and treatment-related costs in elderly patients with larynx cancer, and may be a feasible measure of larynx cancer quality of care. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE NA Laryngoscope, 130:672-678, 2020.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Warren C Swegal
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Robert J Herbert
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - David W Eisele
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Jenny Chang
- Department of Epidemiology, University of California Irvine, Irvine, California
| | - Robert E Bristow
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of California, Irvine Medical Center, Orange, California, U.S.A
| | - Christine G Gourin
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Takeda A, Sanuki N, Tsurugai Y, Taguri M, Horita N, Hara Y, Eriguchi T, Akiba T, Sugawara A, Kunieda E, Kaneko T. Questionnaire survey comparing surgery and stereotactic body radiotherapy for lung cancer: lessons from patients with experience of both modalities. J Thorac Dis 2019; 11:2479-2489. [PMID: 31372285 DOI: 10.21037/jtd.2019.05.76] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
Abstract
Background Currently, there is some controversy regarding indications for stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for lung cancer patients. We investigated the treatment preferences of patients with experience of both surgery and SBRT using a questionnaire survey. Methods Of lung cancer patients treated with SBRT between 2005 and 2017, we identified those who also previously underwent surgery for lung cancer. These patients were asked about their experiences of surgery and SBRT including perceived condition, distress, stress, convenience, adverse effects, and satisfaction during and after treatment. Participants were also asked about treatment decision-making for hypothetical scenarios. Results Of 653 lung cancer patients treated with SBRT, 149 also underwent surgery for lung cancer, 52 of whom participated in this questionnaire. The median age at the time of this survey was 76 years (range, 59-91 years). Significantly more participants had a favorable impression of SBRT during and after treatment (all question items; P<0.01). In terms of overall satisfaction, 27 patients preferred SBRT and three patients preferred surgery. In a hypothetical scenario (equivalent treatment outcomes) aged 70 years and faced with decision-making for first-time lung cancer treatment, significantly more patients selected SBRT (P<0.01): 38 patients selected SBRT. In a scenario with 20% better survivals for surgical resection, 14 patients selected SBRT, 12 selected surgery, and 26 were indecisive (P=0.47). In a scenario at age 80 years, significantly more patients selected SBRT (P<0.01). Conclusions Most patients with experience of both surgery and SBRT for lung cancer prefer SBRT. This information would be helpful at treatment decision-making.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Atsuya Takeda
- Radiation Oncology Center, Ofuna Chuo Hospital, Kamakura, Kanagawa, Japan
| | - Naoko Sanuki
- Radiation Oncology Center, Ofuna Chuo Hospital, Kamakura, Kanagawa, Japan
| | - Yuichiro Tsurugai
- Radiation Oncology Center, Ofuna Chuo Hospital, Kamakura, Kanagawa, Japan
| | - Masataka Taguri
- Department of Data Science, Yokohama City University School of Data Science, Yokohama, Kanagawa, Japan
| | - Nobuyuki Horita
- Department of Pulmonology, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Kanagawa, Japan
| | - Yu Hara
- Department of Pulmonology, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Kanagawa, Japan
| | - Takahisa Eriguchi
- Radiation Oncology Center, Ofuna Chuo Hospital, Kamakura, Kanagawa, Japan
| | - Takeshi Akiba
- Radiation Oncology Center, Ofuna Chuo Hospital, Kamakura, Kanagawa, Japan.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Tokai University School of Medicine, Isehara, Kanagawa, Japan
| | - Akitomo Sugawara
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tokai University School of Medicine, Isehara, Kanagawa, Japan
| | - Etsuo Kunieda
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tokai University School of Medicine, Isehara, Kanagawa, Japan
| | - Takeshi Kaneko
- Department of Pulmonology, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Kanagawa, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Gourin CG, Herbert RJ, Fakhry C, Quon H, Kang H, Kiess AP, Koch WM, Eisele DW, Frick KD. Quality indicators of oropharyngeal cancer care in the elderly. Laryngoscope 2017; 128:2312-2319. [PMID: 29243261 DOI: 10.1002/lary.27050] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/29/2017] [Revised: 10/24/2017] [Accepted: 11/16/2017] [Indexed: 11/07/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To examine associations between quality of care, survival, and costs in elderly patients treated for oropharyngeal squamous cell cancer (OPSCC). STUDY DESIGN Retrospective analysis of Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare data. METHODS We evaluated 666 patients diagnosed with OPSCC from 2004 to 2007 using multivariate regression and survival analysis. Using quality indicators derived from guidelines for recommended care, summary measures of quality were calculated for diagnosis, initial treatment, surveillance, treatment for recurrence, end-of-life care, performance, and an overall summary measure of quality. RESULTS Higher-quality care was associated with significant differences in survival for initial treatment (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.55 [0.41 to 0.73]), surveillance (HR = 0.32 [0.22 to 0.48]), treatment of recurrence (HR = 2.37 [1.56 to 3.60]), performance measures (HR = 0.50 [0.36 to 0.69]), and the overall summary measure of quality (HR = 0.53 [0.39 to 0.71]). Higher-quality salvage surgery was associated with improved survival (HR = 0.16 [0.04 to 0.54]), whereas higher-quality chemotherapy given for recurrence was associated with worse survival (HR = 5.70 [1.92 to 16.94]). Overall, higher-quality care was not associated with differences in costs. Higher-quality care was associated with significantly lower mean incremental costs for treatment of recurrence and end-of-life care, and higher costs for diagnosis and surveillance. CONCLUSION Higher-quality OPSCC care in elderly patients was associated with improved survival; however, higher-quality care was not associated with reduced costs, and higher-quality care for treatment of recurrence was associated with poorer survival, primarily due to poorer survival in patients treated with palliative chemotherapy. These data demonstrate a complex relationship between quality and costs in elderly OPSCC patients, which can be used to frame discussions of value and guide disease-specific quality-measure development. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE 2c. Laryngoscope, 128:2312-2319, 2018.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christine G Gourin
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A
| | - Robert J Herbert
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A
| | - Carole Fakhry
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A
| | - Harry Quon
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A
| | - Hyunseok Kang
- Department of Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at John Hopkins, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A
| | - Ana P Kiess
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A
| | - Wayne M Koch
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A
| | - David W Eisele
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A
| | - Kevin D Frick
- Department of Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at John Hopkins, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A.,Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A.,Johns Hopkins Carey Business School, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Mahal BA, Chen YW, Sethi RV, Padilla OA, Yang DD, Chavez J, Muralidhar V, Hu JC, Feng FY, Hoffman KE, Martin NE, Spratt DE, Yu JB, Orio PF, Nguyen PL. Travel distance and stereotactic body radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer. Cancer 2017; 124:1141-1149. [DOI: 10.1002/cncr.31190] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/06/2017] [Revised: 10/29/2017] [Accepted: 11/10/2017] [Indexed: 11/11/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Brandon A. Mahal
- Harvard Radiation Oncology Program; Harvard University; Boston Massachusetts
| | - Yu-Wei Chen
- Department of Internal Medicine; Cleveland Clinic; Cleveland Ohio
| | - Roshan V. Sethi
- Harvard Radiation Oncology Program; Harvard University; Boston Massachusetts
| | | | | | - Janice Chavez
- Department of Social Work; Brigham and Women's Hospital; Boston Massachusetts
| | - Vinayak Muralidhar
- Harvard Radiation Oncology Program; Harvard University; Boston Massachusetts
| | - Jim C. Hu
- Department of Urology; Weill Cornell Medicine; New York New York
| | - Felix Y. Feng
- Department of Radiation Oncology; University of California at San Francisco; San Francisco California
| | - Karen E. Hoffman
- Department of Radiation Oncology; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center; Houston Texas
| | - Neil E. Martin
- Department of Radiation Oncology; Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Brigham and Women's Hospital; Boston Massachusetts
| | - Daniel E. Spratt
- Department of Radiation Oncology; University of Michigan Health System; Ann Arbor Michigan
| | - James B. Yu
- Department of Therapeutic Radiology/Radiation Oncology; Yale University; New Haven Connecticut
| | - Peter F. Orio
- Department of Radiation Oncology; Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Brigham and Women's Hospital; Boston Massachusetts
| | - Paul L. Nguyen
- Department of Radiation Oncology; Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Brigham and Women's Hospital; Boston Massachusetts
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Webster KT, Tippett D, Simpson M, Abrams R, Pietsch K, Herbert RJ, Eisele DW, Gourin CG. Speech‐language pathology care and short‐ and long‐term outcomes of oropharyngeal cancer treatment in the elderly. Laryngoscope 2017; 128:1403-1411. [DOI: 10.1002/lary.26950] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/18/2017] [Revised: 08/29/2017] [Accepted: 09/07/2017] [Indexed: 11/09/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Kimberly T. Webster
- Department of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck SurgeryJohns Hopkins UniversityBaltimoreMarylandU.S.A
| | - Donna Tippett
- Department of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck SurgeryJohns Hopkins UniversityBaltimoreMarylandU.S.A
| | - Marissa Simpson
- Department of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck SurgeryJohns Hopkins UniversityBaltimoreMarylandU.S.A
| | - Rina Abrams
- Department of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck SurgeryJohns Hopkins UniversityBaltimoreMarylandU.S.A
| | - Kristine Pietsch
- Department of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck SurgeryJohns Hopkins UniversityBaltimoreMarylandU.S.A
| | - Robert J. Herbert
- Department of Health Policy and Managementthe Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public HealthBaltimoreMarylandU.S.A
| | - David W. Eisele
- Department of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck SurgeryJohns Hopkins UniversityBaltimoreMarylandU.S.A
| | - Christine G. Gourin
- Department of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck SurgeryJohns Hopkins UniversityBaltimoreMarylandU.S.A
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Britt CJ, Chang HY, Quon H, Kang H, Kiess AP, Eisele DW, Frick KD, Gourin CG. Quality indicators of laryngeal cancer care in commercially insured patients. Laryngoscope 2017; 127:2805-2812. [PMID: 28688188 DOI: 10.1002/lary.26728] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/17/2017] [Revised: 05/05/2017] [Accepted: 05/10/2017] [Indexed: 11/10/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To examine associations between quality, complications, and costs in commercially insured patients treated for laryngeal cancer. STUDY DESIGN Retrospective cross-sectional analysis of MarketScan Commercial Claim and Encounters data (Truven Health Analytics, Ann Arbor, Michigan, U.S.A.). METHODS We evaluated 10,969 patients diagnosed with laryngeal cancer from 2010 to 2012 using cross-tabulations and multivariate regression. Using quality indicators derived from guidelines for recommended care, summary measures of quality were calculated for diagnosis, initial treatment, surveillance, treatment for recurrence, performance, and an overall summary measure of quality. RESULTS Higher-quality care in the initial treatment period was associated with lower odds of 30-day mortality (odds ratio [OR] = 0.21, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.04-0.98]), surgical complications (OR = 0.39 [0.17-0.88]), and medical complications (OR = 0.68 [0.49-0.96]). Mean incremental 1-year costs were higher for higher-quality diagnosis ($20,126 [$14,785-$25,466]), initial treatment ($17,918 [$10,481-$25,355]), and surveillance ($25,424 [$20,014-$30,834]) quality indicators, whereas costs were lower for higher-quality performance measures (-$45,723 [-$56,246--$35,199]) after controlling for all other variables. Higher-quality care was associated with significant differences in mean incremental costs for initial treatment in surgical patients ($-37,303 [-$68,832--$5,775]), and for the overall summary measure of quality in patients treated nonoperatively ($10,473 [$1,121-$19,825]). After controlling for the overall summary measure of quality, costs were significantly lower for patients receiving high-volume surgical care (mean -$18,953 [-$28,381--$9,426]). CONCLUSION Higher-quality larynx cancer care in commercially insured patients was associated with lower 30-day mortality and morbidity. High-volume surgical care was associated with lower 1-year costs, even after controlling for quality. These data have implications for discussions of value and quality in an era of healthcare reform. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE 2c. Laryngoscope, 127:2805-2812, 2017.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christopher J Britt
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A
| | - Hsien-Yen Chang
- Department of Health Policy and Management, the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A
| | - Harry Quon
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A
| | - Hyunseok Kang
- Department of Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A
| | - Ana P Kiess
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A
| | - David W Eisele
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A
| | - Kevin D Frick
- Department of Health Policy and Management, the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A.,Johns Hopkins Carey Business School, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A
| | - Christine G Gourin
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Ellis CT, Stitzenberg KB. Reply to A. Habr-Gama et al. J Clin Oncol 2016; 34:4052. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2016.69.2541] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- C. Tyler Ellis
- C. Tyler Ellis, Karyn B. Stitzenberg, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - Karyn B. Stitzenberg
- C. Tyler Ellis, Karyn B. Stitzenberg, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Impact of age and comorbidity on treatment of non-small cell lung cancer recurrence following complete resection: A nationally representative cohort study. Lung Cancer 2016; 102:108-117. [PMID: 27987578 DOI: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2016.11.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 41] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/23/2016] [Revised: 10/21/2016] [Accepted: 11/04/2016] [Indexed: 11/22/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Older patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are less likely to receive guideline-recommended treatment at diagnosis, independent of comorbidity. However, national data on treatment of postoperative recurrence are limited. We evaluated the associations between age, comorbidity, and other patient factors and treatment of postoperative NSCLC recurrence in a national cohort. MATERIALS AND METHODS We randomly selected 9001 patients with surgically resected stage I-III NSCLC in 2006-2007 from the National Cancer Data Base. Patients were followed for 5 years or until first NSCLC recurrence, new primary cancer, or death, whichever came first. Perioperative comorbidities, first recurrence, treatment of recurrence, and survival were abstracted from medical records and merged with existing registry data. Factors associated with active treatment (chemotherapy, radiation, and/or surgery) versus supportive care only were analyzed using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS Median age at initial diagnosis was 67; 69.7% had >1 comorbidity. At 5-year follow-up, 12.3% developed locoregional and 21.5% developed distant recurrence. Among patients with locoregional recurrence, 79.5% received active treatment. Older patients (OR 0.49 for age >75 compared with <55; 95% CI 0.27-0.88) and those with substance abuse (OR 0.43; 95% CI 0.23-0.81) were less likely to receive active treatment. Women (OR 0.62; 95% CI 0.43-0.89) and patients with symptomatic recurrence (OR 0.69; 95% CI 0.47-0.99) were also less likely to receive active treatment. Among those with distant recurrence, 77.3% received active treatment. Older patients (OR 0.42 for age >75 compared with <55; 95% CI 0.26-0.68) and those with any documented comorbidities (OR 0.59; 95% CI 0.38-0.89) were less likely to receive active treatment. CONCLUSION Older patients independent of comorbidity, patients with substance abuse, and women were less likely to receive active treatment for postoperative NSCLC recurrence. Studies to further characterize these disparities in treatment of NSCLC recurrence are needed to identify barriers to treatment.
Collapse
|
14
|
de Moor JS, Virgo KS, Li C, Chawla N, Han X, Blanch-Hartigan D, Ekwueme DU, McNeel TS, Rodriguez JL, Yabroff KR. Access to Cancer Care and General Medical Care Services Among Cancer Survivors in the United States: An Analysis of 2011 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey Data. Public Health Rep 2016; 131:783-790. [PMID: 28123224 DOI: 10.1177/0033354916675852] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/27/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Cancer survivors require appropriate health care to manage their unique health needs. This study describes access to cancer care among cancer survivors in the United States and compares access to general medical care between cancer survivors and people who have no history of cancer. METHODS We assessed access to general medical care using the core 2011 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS). We assessed access to cancer care using the MEPS Experiences With Cancer Survey. We used multivariable logistic regression to compare access to general medical care among 2 groups of cancer survivors (those who reported having access to all necessary cancer care [n = 1088] and those who did not [n = 70]) with self-reported access to general medical care among people who had no history of cancer (n = 22 434). RESULTS Of the 1158 cancer survivors, 70 (6.0%) reported that they did not receive all necessary cancer care. Adjusted analyses found that cancer survivors who reported not receiving all necessary cancer care were also less likely to report receiving general medical care (78.0%) than cancer survivors who reported having access to necessary cancer care (87.1%) and people who had no history of cancer (87.8%). CONCLUSIONS This study provides nationally representative data on the proportion of cancer survivors who have access to necessary cancer care and yields insight into factors that impede survivors' access to both cancer care and general medical care. This study is a reference for future work on access to care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Janet S de Moor
- Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Katherine S Virgo
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Chunyu Li
- Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Neetu Chawla
- Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland, CA, USA
| | - Xuesong Han
- Surveillance and Health Services Research, American Cancer Society, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | | | - Donatus U Ekwueme
- Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | | | - Juan L Rodriguez
- Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - K Robin Yabroff
- Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Tong BC, Wallace S, Hartwig MG, D'Amico TA, Huber JC. Patient Preferences in Treatment Choices for Early-Stage Lung Cancer. Ann Thorac Surg 2016; 102:1837-1844. [PMID: 27623277 DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2016.06.031] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/16/2015] [Revised: 05/25/2016] [Accepted: 06/06/2016] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Decision-making for lung cancer treatment can be complex because it involves both provider recommendations based on the patient's clinical condition and patient preferences. This study describes the relative importance of several considerations in lung cancer treatment from the patient's perspective. METHODS A conjoint preference experiment began by asking respondents to imagine that they had just been diagnosed with lung cancer. Respondents then chose among procedures that differed regarding treatment modalities, the potential for treatment-related complications, the likelihood of recurrence, provider case volume, and distance needed to travel for treatment. Conjoint analysis derived relative weights for these attributes. RESULTS A total of 225 responses were analyzed. Respondents were most willing to accept minimally invasive operations for treatment of their hypothetical lung cancer, followed by stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT); they were least willing to accept thoracotomy. Treatment type and risk of recurrence were the most important attributes from the conjoint experiment (each with a relative weight of 0.23), followed by provider volume (relative weight of 0.21), risk of major complications (relative weight of 0.18), and distance needed to travel for treatment (relative weight of 0.15). Procedural and treatment preferences did not vary with demographics, self-reported health status, or familiarity with the procedures. CONCLUSIONS Survey respondents preferred minimally invasive operations over SBRT or thoracotomy for treatment of early-stage non-small cell lung cancer. Treatment modality and risk of cancer recurrence were the most important factors associated with treatment preferences. Provider experience outweighed the potential need to travel for lung cancer treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Betty C Tong
- Division of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.
| | - Scott Wallace
- The Fuqua School of Business, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina
| | - Matthew G Hartwig
- Division of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina
| | - Thomas A D'Amico
- Division of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina
| | - Joel C Huber
- The Fuqua School of Business, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Mahal BA, Chen YW, Muralidhar V, Mahal AR, Choueiri TK, Hoffman KE, Hu JC, Sweeney CJ, Yu JB, Feng FY, Kim SP, Beard CJ, Martin NE, Trinh QD, Nguyen PL. National sociodemographic disparities in the treatment of high-risk prostate cancer: Do academic cancer centers perform better than community cancer centers? Cancer 2016; 122:3371-3377. [DOI: 10.1002/cncr.30205] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/15/2016] [Revised: 06/18/2016] [Accepted: 06/21/2016] [Indexed: 11/11/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Brandon A. Mahal
- Department of Internal Medicine; Brigham and Women's Hospital; Boston Massachusetts
- Harvard Medical School; Boston Massachusetts
| | - Yu-Wei Chen
- Department of Radiation Oncology; Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Brigham and Women's Hospital; Boston Massachusetts
| | | | - Amandeep R. Mahal
- Department of Therapeutic Radiology/Radiation Oncology; Yale School of Medicine; New Haven Connecticut
| | - Toni K. Choueiri
- Harvard Medical School; Boston Massachusetts
- Department of Medical Oncology; Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Brigham and Women's Hospital; Boston Massachusetts
| | - Karen E. Hoffman
- Department of Radiation Oncology; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center; Houston Texas
| | - Jim C. Hu
- Department of Urology; New York-Presbyterian Hospital/Weill Cornel Medical Center; New York New York
| | - Christopher J. Sweeney
- Harvard Medical School; Boston Massachusetts
- Department of Medical Oncology; Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Brigham and Women's Hospital; Boston Massachusetts
| | - James B. Yu
- Department of Therapeutic Radiology/Radiation Oncology; Yale School of Medicine; New Haven Connecticut
| | - Felix Y. Feng
- Department of Radiation Oncology; University of Michigan Health System; Ann Arbor Michigan
| | - Simon P. Kim
- Department of Urology; University Hospitals Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine; Cleveland Ohio
| | - Clair J. Beard
- Harvard Medical School; Boston Massachusetts
- Department of Radiation Oncology; Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Brigham and Women's Hospital; Boston Massachusetts
| | - Neil E. Martin
- Harvard Medical School; Boston Massachusetts
- Department of Radiation Oncology; Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Brigham and Women's Hospital; Boston Massachusetts
| | - Quoc-Dien Trinh
- Harvard Medical School; Boston Massachusetts
- Division of Urology; Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School; Boston Massachusetts
| | - Paul L. Nguyen
- Harvard Medical School; Boston Massachusetts
- Department of Radiation Oncology; Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Brigham and Women's Hospital; Boston Massachusetts
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Mahal BA, Chen YW, Efstathiou JA, Muralidhar V, Hoffman KE, Yu JB, Feng FY, Beard CJ, Martin NE, Orio PF, Nguyen PL. National trends and determinants of proton therapy use for prostate cancer: A National Cancer Data Base study. Cancer 2016; 122:1505-12. [PMID: 26970022 DOI: 10.1002/cncr.29960] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/19/2015] [Revised: 02/09/2016] [Accepted: 02/10/2016] [Indexed: 11/09/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND In the current study, the authors sought to both characterize the national trends in proton therapy use for prostate cancer and determine the factors associated with receipt of this limited resource, using what to the best of their knowledge is the largest nationwide cancer registry. METHODS The National Cancer Data Base was used to identify 187,730 patients diagnosed with nonmetastatic prostate cancer from 2004 through 2012 who received external beam radiotherapy as their initial form of definitive therapy. Multivariable logistic regression analysis adjusted for sociodemographic and clinical factors was used to identify independent determinants of proton therapy use. RESULTS The rate of proton therapy use increased significantly from 2.3% in 2004 to 5.2% in 2011 and 4.8% in 2012 (P value for trend <.0001). Proton therapy for prostate cancer was much more likely to be delivered at an academic compared with nonacademic center and to patients who were white, younger, healthier, from metropolitan areas, from zip codes with higher median household incomes, and who did not have an advanced stage of or high-grade disease (all P<.0001). Compared with white patients, those who were black and Hispanic were found to be significantly less likely to receive proton therapy even after robust multivariable adjustments (adjusted odds ratio, 0.20 [95% confidence interval, 0.18-0.22; P<.0001] and adjusted odds ratio, 0.57 [95% confidence interval, 0.48-0.66; P<.0001], respectively). CONCLUSIONS The use of proton therapy to treat patients with prostate cancer more than doubled from 2004 to 2012, with striking racial disparities in its use noted despite robust multivariable adjustments. Long-term follow-up is needed to determine whether the increased use of proton therapy for prostate cancer is justified, and ongoing efforts should be made to ensure equal access to resource-limited oncologic therapies. Cancer 2016;122:1505-12. © 2016 American Cancer Society.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Brandon A Mahal
- Department of Internal Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.,Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Yu-Wei Chen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Jason A Efstathiou
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | | | - Karen E Hoffman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - James B Yu
- Department of Therapeutic Radiology/Radiation Oncology, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut
| | - Felix Y Feng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, Michigan
| | - Clair J Beard
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Neil E Martin
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Peter F Orio
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Paul L Nguyen
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Iwamoto M, Nakamura F, Higashi T. Monitoring and evaluating the quality of cancer care in Japan using administrative claims data. Cancer Sci 2015; 107:68-75. [PMID: 26495806 PMCID: PMC4724820 DOI: 10.1111/cas.12837] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/05/2015] [Revised: 10/08/2015] [Accepted: 10/18/2015] [Indexed: 11/29/2022] Open
Abstract
The importance of measuring the quality of cancer care has been well recognized in many developed countries, but has never been successfully implemented on a national level in Japan. We sought to establish a wide‐scale quality monitoring and evaluation program for cancer by measuring 13 process‐of‐care quality indicators (QI) using a registry‐linked claims database. We measured two QI on pre‐treatment testing, nine on adherence to clinical guidelines on therapeutic treatments, and two on supportive care, for breast, prostate, colorectal, stomach, lung, liver and cervical cancer patients who were diagnosed in 2011 from 178 hospitals. We further assessed the reasons for non‐adherence for patients who did not receive the indicated care in 26 hospitals. QI for pretreatment testing were high in most hospitals (above 80%), but scores on adjuvant radiation and chemoradiation therapies were low (20–37%), except for breast cancer (74%). QI for adjuvant chemotherapy and supportive care were more widely distributed across hospitals (45–68%). Further analysis in 26 hospitals showed that most of the patients who did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy had clinically valid reasons for not receiving the specified care (above 70%), but the majority of the patients did not have sufficient reasons for not receiving adjuvant radiotherapy (52–69%) and supportive care (above 80%). We present here the first wide‐scale quality measurement initiative of cancer patients in Japan. Patients without clinically valid reasons for non‐adherence should be examined further in future to improve care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Momoko Iwamoto
- Division of Health Services Research, Center for Cancer Control and Information Services, National Cancer Center, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Fumiaki Nakamura
- Department of Public Health/Health Policy, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Takahiro Higashi
- Division of Health Services Research, Center for Cancer Control and Information Services, National Cancer Center, Tokyo, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Waissi W, Noël G, Giraud P. Surveillance après radiothérapie stéréotaxique des tumeurs pulmonaires. Cancer Radiother 2015; 19:566-72. [DOI: 10.1016/j.canrad.2015.05.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/30/2015] [Accepted: 05/11/2015] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
|
20
|
Facility characteristics and quality of lung cancer care in an integrated health care system. J Thorac Oncol 2015; 9:447-55. [PMID: 24736065 DOI: 10.1097/jto.0000000000000108] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/28/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION In a national, integrated health care system, we sought to identify facility-level attributes associated with better quality of lung cancer care. METHODS Adherence to 23 quality indicators across four domains (Diagnosis and Staging, Treatment, Supportive Care, End-of-Life Care) was assessed through abstraction of electronic records from 4804 lung cancer patients diagnosed in 2007 at 131 Veterans Health Administration facilities. Performance was reported as proportions of eligible patients fulfilling adherence criteria. With stratification of patients by stage, generalized estimating equations identified facility-level characteristics associated with performance by domain. RESULTS Overall performance was high for the older (mean age 67.7 years, SD 9.4 years), predominantly male (98%) veterans. However, no facility did well on every measure, and range of adherence across facilities was large; 9% of facilities were in the highest quartile for one or more domain of care, more than 30% for two, and 65% for three. No facility performed consistently well across all domains. Less than 1% performed in the lowest quartile for all. Few facility-level characteristics were associated with care quality. For End-of-Life Care, diagnosis and treatment within the same facility, availability of cancer psychiatry/psychology consultation services, and availability of both inpatient and outpatient palliative care consultation services were associated with better adherence. CONCLUSIONS Quality of Veterans Health Administration lung cancer care is generally high, though substantial variation exists across facilities. With the exception of the salutary impact of palliative care consultation services on end-of-life quality of care, observed facility-level characteristics did not consistently predict adherence to indicators, suggesting quality may be determined by complex local factors that are difficult to measure.
Collapse
|
21
|
The association between race and treatment regret among men with recurrent prostate cancer. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2014; 18:38-42. [PMID: 25348256 DOI: 10.1038/pcan.2014.42] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/14/2014] [Revised: 08/26/2014] [Accepted: 08/27/2014] [Indexed: 11/08/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND To examine the impact of race on treatment regret among men with recurrent prostate cancer after surgery or radiation. METHODS The prospective Comprehensive, Observational, Multicenter, Prostate Adenocarcinoma (COMPARE) registry was used to study a cohort of 484 men with biochemically recurrent prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy, external beam radiation or brachytherapy. Multivariable logistic regression was used to model the association between race and treatment regret and to determine whether there was an interaction between race and sexual problems after treatment with regards to treatment regret. RESULTS Black men (N=78) were significantly more likely to have treatment regret when compared with non-black men (N=406; 21.8% versus 12.6%) on univariable analysis (odds ratio (OR) 1.94; 95% confidence interval 1.05-3.56; P=0.03). On multivariable analysis, black race trended towards but was no longer significantly associated with an increase in treatment regret (adjusted OR (AOR) 1.84 (0.95-3.58); P=0.071). There was an interaction between race and sexual problems after treatment (Pinteraction=0.02) such that among those without sexual problems, black men had more treatment regret than non-black men (26.7% versus 8.4%: AOR 4.68 (1.73-12.63); P=0.002), whereas among those with sexual problems, there was no difference in treatment regret between black and non-black men (18.8% versus 17.3%: AOR 1.04 (0.44-2.46); P=0.93). CONCLUSIONS Among men with recurrent prostate cancer after surgery or radiation, black men were nearly twice as likely to experience treatment regret. Treating physicians should ensure that patients are fully apprised of the pros and cons of all treatment options to reduce the risk of subsequent regret.
Collapse
|
22
|
Smaldone MC, Handorf E, Kim SP, Thompson RH, Costello BA, Corcoran AT, Wong YN, Uzzo RG, Leibovich BC, Kutikov A, Boorjian SA. Temporal trends and factors associated with systemic therapy after cytoreductive nephrectomy: an analysis of the National Cancer Database. J Urol 2014; 193:1108-13. [PMID: 25444991 DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2014.10.095] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 10/20/2014] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE We evaluated temporal trends in systemic therapy use in patients undergoing cytoreductive nephrectomy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma. We used data from a large national cancer registry and assessed characteristics associated with the receipt of systemic treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS We reviewed the NCDB to identify patients with stage IV renal cell carcinoma who underwent cytoreductive nephrectomy between 1998 and 2010. Systemic therapy was defined as immunotherapy and/or chemotherapy, including targeted agents. We evaluated associations between clinicopathological features and receipt of systemic therapy using multivariable logistic regression with generalized estimating equations. RESULTS Of 22,409 patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with cytoreductive nephrectomy 8,830 (39%) received systemic therapy. Use of systemic therapy increased from 32% of cases in 1998 to 49% in 2010 (p < 0.001). After adjustment older patient age (71 years or greater OR 0.36, CI 0.31-0.43), increasing comorbidity count (Charlson comorbidity index 2 or greater OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.68-0.92), papillary histology (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.71-0.93), sarcomatoid histology (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.80-0.98), Medicaid (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.5-0.74), Medicare (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.62-0.79) and no insurance (OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.63-0.91) were associated with significantly decreased systemic therapy use. Male gender (OR 1.05, 95% CI 1.02-1.08) predicted an increased likelihood of systemic therapy. CONCLUSIONS Systemic therapy in patients undergoing cytoreductive nephrectomy has increased with time, coinciding with the introduction of targeted therapies. Nevertheless, still less than half of such patients receive systemic treatment. While the etiology of the lack of treatment is likely multifactorial, the potential health policy implications of disparities in care warrant further investigation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marc C Smaldone
- Division of Urologic Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center-Temple University Health System, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Elizabeth Handorf
- Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Fox Chase Cancer Center-Temple University Health System, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Simon P Kim
- Department of Urology, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut
| | | | | | - Anthony T Corcoran
- Division of Urology, State University of New York at Stony Brook, Stony Brook, New York
| | - Yu-Ning Wong
- Division of Medical Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center-Temple University Health System, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Robert G Uzzo
- Division of Urologic Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center-Temple University Health System, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | | | - Alexander Kutikov
- Division of Urologic Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center-Temple University Health System, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | | |
Collapse
|
23
|
Mahal BA, Ziehr DR, Aizer AA, Hyatt AS, Lago-Hernandez C, Choueiri TK, Elfiky AA, Hu JC, Sweeney CJ, Beard CJ, D’Amico AV, Martin NE, Kim SP, Lathan CS, Trinh QD, Nguyen PL. Racial disparities in an aging population: The relationship between age and race in the management of African American men with high-risk prostate cancer. J Geriatr Oncol 2014; 5:352-8. [DOI: 10.1016/j.jgo.2014.05.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/06/2014] [Revised: 04/17/2014] [Accepted: 05/06/2014] [Indexed: 01/06/2023]
|
24
|
Mahal BA, Aizer AA, Ziehr DR, Hyatt AS, Sammon JD, Schmid M, Choueiri TK, Hu JC, Sweeney CJ, Beard CJ, D'Amico AV, Martin NE, Kim SP, Trinh QD, Nguyen PL. Trends in Disparate Treatment of African American Men With Localized Prostate Cancer Across National Comprehensive Cancer Network Risk Groups. Urology 2014; 84:386-92. [DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2014.05.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 57] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/26/2014] [Revised: 04/17/2014] [Accepted: 05/05/2014] [Indexed: 10/25/2022]
|
25
|
Tanvetyanon T, Lee JH, Fulp WJ, Schreiber F, Brown RH, Levine RM, Cartwright TH, Abesada-Terk G, Kim GP, Alemany C, Faig D, Sharp PV, Markham MJ, Malafa M, Jacobsen PB. Changes in the care of non-small-cell lung cancer after audit and feedback: the Florida initiative for quality cancer care. J Oncol Pract 2014; 10:e247-54. [PMID: 24737876 DOI: 10.1200/jop.2013.001275] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Audit and feedback have been widely used to enhance the performance of various medical practices. Non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is one of the most common diseases encountered in medical oncology practice. We investigated the use of audit and feedback to improve the care of NSCLC. METHODS Medical records were reviewed for patients with NSCLC first seen by a medical oncologist in 2006 (n = 518) and 2009 (n = 573) at 10 oncology practices participating in the Florida Initiative for Quality Cancer Care. In 2008, feedback from 2006 audit results was provided to practices, which then independently undertook steps to improve their performance. Sixteen quality-of-care indicators (QCIs) were evaluated on both time points and were examined for changes in adherence over time. RESULTS A statistically significant increase in adherence was observed for five of 16 QCIs. Adherence to brain staging using magnetic resonance imaging or computed tomography scan for stage III NSCLC (57.8% in 2006 v 82.8% in 2009; P = .001), availability of chemotherapy flow sheet (89.2% v 97.0%; P < .001), documentation of performance status for stage III and IV disease (43.4% v 51.3%; P < .001), availability of pathology report for patients undergoing surgery (95.2% v 99.2%; P = .02), and availability of signed chemotherapy consent (69.5% v 76.3%; P = .04). There were no statistically significant decreases in adherence on any QCIs. CONCLUSION Audit with feedback was associated with a modest but important improvement in the treatment of NSCLC. Whether these changes are durable will require long-term follow-up.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tawee Tanvetyanon
- H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa; Center for Cancer Care and Research at Watson Clinic, Lakeland; Florida Cancer Specialists and Research Institute, Sarasota; Spacecoast Cancer Center, Titusville; Ocala Oncology, Ocala; Coastal Oncology and Hematology, Stuart; Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville; Cancer Center of Florida, Orlando; North Broward Medical Center, Deerfield Beach; Tallahassee Memorial Healthcare, Tallahassee; and University of Florida, Gainesville, FL
| | - Ji-Hyun Lee
- H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa; Center for Cancer Care and Research at Watson Clinic, Lakeland; Florida Cancer Specialists and Research Institute, Sarasota; Spacecoast Cancer Center, Titusville; Ocala Oncology, Ocala; Coastal Oncology and Hematology, Stuart; Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville; Cancer Center of Florida, Orlando; North Broward Medical Center, Deerfield Beach; Tallahassee Memorial Healthcare, Tallahassee; and University of Florida, Gainesville, FL
| | - William J Fulp
- H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa; Center for Cancer Care and Research at Watson Clinic, Lakeland; Florida Cancer Specialists and Research Institute, Sarasota; Spacecoast Cancer Center, Titusville; Ocala Oncology, Ocala; Coastal Oncology and Hematology, Stuart; Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville; Cancer Center of Florida, Orlando; North Broward Medical Center, Deerfield Beach; Tallahassee Memorial Healthcare, Tallahassee; and University of Florida, Gainesville, FL
| | - Fred Schreiber
- H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa; Center for Cancer Care and Research at Watson Clinic, Lakeland; Florida Cancer Specialists and Research Institute, Sarasota; Spacecoast Cancer Center, Titusville; Ocala Oncology, Ocala; Coastal Oncology and Hematology, Stuart; Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville; Cancer Center of Florida, Orlando; North Broward Medical Center, Deerfield Beach; Tallahassee Memorial Healthcare, Tallahassee; and University of Florida, Gainesville, FL
| | - Richard H Brown
- H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa; Center for Cancer Care and Research at Watson Clinic, Lakeland; Florida Cancer Specialists and Research Institute, Sarasota; Spacecoast Cancer Center, Titusville; Ocala Oncology, Ocala; Coastal Oncology and Hematology, Stuart; Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville; Cancer Center of Florida, Orlando; North Broward Medical Center, Deerfield Beach; Tallahassee Memorial Healthcare, Tallahassee; and University of Florida, Gainesville, FL
| | - Richard M Levine
- H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa; Center for Cancer Care and Research at Watson Clinic, Lakeland; Florida Cancer Specialists and Research Institute, Sarasota; Spacecoast Cancer Center, Titusville; Ocala Oncology, Ocala; Coastal Oncology and Hematology, Stuart; Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville; Cancer Center of Florida, Orlando; North Broward Medical Center, Deerfield Beach; Tallahassee Memorial Healthcare, Tallahassee; and University of Florida, Gainesville, FL
| | - Thomas H Cartwright
- H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa; Center for Cancer Care and Research at Watson Clinic, Lakeland; Florida Cancer Specialists and Research Institute, Sarasota; Spacecoast Cancer Center, Titusville; Ocala Oncology, Ocala; Coastal Oncology and Hematology, Stuart; Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville; Cancer Center of Florida, Orlando; North Broward Medical Center, Deerfield Beach; Tallahassee Memorial Healthcare, Tallahassee; and University of Florida, Gainesville, FL
| | - Guillermo Abesada-Terk
- H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa; Center for Cancer Care and Research at Watson Clinic, Lakeland; Florida Cancer Specialists and Research Institute, Sarasota; Spacecoast Cancer Center, Titusville; Ocala Oncology, Ocala; Coastal Oncology and Hematology, Stuart; Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville; Cancer Center of Florida, Orlando; North Broward Medical Center, Deerfield Beach; Tallahassee Memorial Healthcare, Tallahassee; and University of Florida, Gainesville, FL
| | - George P Kim
- H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa; Center for Cancer Care and Research at Watson Clinic, Lakeland; Florida Cancer Specialists and Research Institute, Sarasota; Spacecoast Cancer Center, Titusville; Ocala Oncology, Ocala; Coastal Oncology and Hematology, Stuart; Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville; Cancer Center of Florida, Orlando; North Broward Medical Center, Deerfield Beach; Tallahassee Memorial Healthcare, Tallahassee; and University of Florida, Gainesville, FL
| | - Carlos Alemany
- H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa; Center for Cancer Care and Research at Watson Clinic, Lakeland; Florida Cancer Specialists and Research Institute, Sarasota; Spacecoast Cancer Center, Titusville; Ocala Oncology, Ocala; Coastal Oncology and Hematology, Stuart; Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville; Cancer Center of Florida, Orlando; North Broward Medical Center, Deerfield Beach; Tallahassee Memorial Healthcare, Tallahassee; and University of Florida, Gainesville, FL
| | - Douglas Faig
- H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa; Center for Cancer Care and Research at Watson Clinic, Lakeland; Florida Cancer Specialists and Research Institute, Sarasota; Spacecoast Cancer Center, Titusville; Ocala Oncology, Ocala; Coastal Oncology and Hematology, Stuart; Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville; Cancer Center of Florida, Orlando; North Broward Medical Center, Deerfield Beach; Tallahassee Memorial Healthcare, Tallahassee; and University of Florida, Gainesville, FL
| | - Philip V Sharp
- H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa; Center for Cancer Care and Research at Watson Clinic, Lakeland; Florida Cancer Specialists and Research Institute, Sarasota; Spacecoast Cancer Center, Titusville; Ocala Oncology, Ocala; Coastal Oncology and Hematology, Stuart; Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville; Cancer Center of Florida, Orlando; North Broward Medical Center, Deerfield Beach; Tallahassee Memorial Healthcare, Tallahassee; and University of Florida, Gainesville, FL
| | - Merry-Jennifer Markham
- H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa; Center for Cancer Care and Research at Watson Clinic, Lakeland; Florida Cancer Specialists and Research Institute, Sarasota; Spacecoast Cancer Center, Titusville; Ocala Oncology, Ocala; Coastal Oncology and Hematology, Stuart; Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville; Cancer Center of Florida, Orlando; North Broward Medical Center, Deerfield Beach; Tallahassee Memorial Healthcare, Tallahassee; and University of Florida, Gainesville, FL
| | - Mokenge Malafa
- H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa; Center for Cancer Care and Research at Watson Clinic, Lakeland; Florida Cancer Specialists and Research Institute, Sarasota; Spacecoast Cancer Center, Titusville; Ocala Oncology, Ocala; Coastal Oncology and Hematology, Stuart; Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville; Cancer Center of Florida, Orlando; North Broward Medical Center, Deerfield Beach; Tallahassee Memorial Healthcare, Tallahassee; and University of Florida, Gainesville, FL
| | - Paul B Jacobsen
- H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa; Center for Cancer Care and Research at Watson Clinic, Lakeland; Florida Cancer Specialists and Research Institute, Sarasota; Spacecoast Cancer Center, Titusville; Ocala Oncology, Ocala; Coastal Oncology and Hematology, Stuart; Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville; Cancer Center of Florida, Orlando; North Broward Medical Center, Deerfield Beach; Tallahassee Memorial Healthcare, Tallahassee; and University of Florida, Gainesville, FL
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Williams CD, Gajra A, Ganti AK, Kelley MJ. Use and impact of adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with resected non-small cell lung cancer. Cancer 2014; 120:1939-47. [DOI: 10.1002/cncr.28679] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/05/2013] [Revised: 02/05/2014] [Accepted: 02/06/2014] [Indexed: 11/11/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Christina D. Williams
- Division of Hematology-Oncology; Durham VA Medical Center; Durham North Carolina
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine; Duke University; Durham North Carolina
| | - Ajeet Gajra
- Division of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine; SUNY Upstate Medical University; Syracuse New York
| | - Apar K. Ganti
- Department of Internal Medicine; VA Nebraska-Western Iowa Health Care System; Omaha Nebraska
- Division of Oncology/Hematology, Department of Internal Medicine; University of Nebraska Medical Center; Omaha Nebraska
| | - Michael J. Kelley
- Division of Hematology-Oncology; Durham VA Medical Center; Durham North Carolina
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine; Duke University; Durham North Carolina
| |
Collapse
|