Palliative care and imaging utilisation for patients with cancer

OBJECTIVE

This observational study explores the association between palliative care (PC) involvement and high-cost imaging utilisation for patients with cancer patients during the last 3 months of life.

METHODS

Adult patients with cancer who died between 1 January 2012 and 31 May 2015 were identified. Referral to PC, intensity of PC service use, and non-emergent oncological imaging utilisation were determined. Associations between PC utilisation and proportion of patients imaged and mean number of studies per patient (mean imaging intensity (MII)) were assessed for the last 3 months and the last month of life. Similar analyses were performed for randomly matched case-control pairs (n = 197). Finally, the association between intensity of PC involvement and imaging utilisation was assessed.

RESULTS

3784 patients were included, with 3523 (93%) never referred to PC and 261 (7%) seen by PC, largely before the last month of life (61%). Similar proportions of patients with and without PC referral were imaged during the last 3 months, while a greater proportion of patients with PC referral were imaged in the last month of life. PC involvement was not associated with significantly different MII during either time frame. In the matched-pairs analysis, a greater proportion of patients previously referred to PC received imaging in the period between the first PC encounter and death, and in the last month of life. MII remained similar between PC and non-PC groups. Finally, intensity of PC services was similar for imaged and non-imaged patients in the final 3 months and 1 month of life. During these time periods, increased PC intensity was not associated with decreased MII.

CONCLUSIONS

PC involvement in end-of-life oncological care was not associated with decreased use of non-emergent, high-cost imaging. The role of advanced imaging in the PC setting requires further investigation.

The impact of concordance with a lung cancer diagnosis pathway guideline on treatment access in patients with stage IV lung cancer

Background

Timely access to treatment of lung cancer is dependent on efficient and appropriate patient assessment and early referral for diagnostic workup. This study assesses the impact of Cancer Care Ontario (CCO) Lung Cancer Diagnostic Pathway Guideline (LCDPG) concordance on access to treatment of stage IV lung cancer patients referred to the Diagnostic Assessment Program (DAP) at a Canadian tertiary cancer centre.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study includes patients diagnosed with clinical stage IV lung cancer referred to the DAP at a Canadian tertiary cancer centre between November 1, 2015 and May 31, 2017. Referral concordance was determined based on CCO LCDPG. The primary outcome; time to treatment from initial healthcare presentation; was compared between the concordant and discordant referrals.

Results

Two hundred patients were referred for clinical stage IV lung cancer during the study period. Of these referrals, 151 (75.5%) were assessed and referred in concordance with LCDPG. Guideline concordant referrals were associated with reduced time to treatment from first healthcare presentation compared with guideline discordant referrals (55.3 vs. 108.8 days, P<0.001). Time to diagnostic procedure (32.2 vs. 86.7 days, P<0.001) and decision to treat (38.5 vs. 93.8 days, P<0.001) were also reduced with guideline concordance. The most common reason for discordant assessment and referral was delayed or inadequate investigation of symptoms in a high risk patient (32.7% of discordant referrals).

Conclusions

Guideline concordant assessment and referral of stage IV lung cancer patients results in reduced time to diagnosis and treatment. Future research and education should focus on improving factors that delay DAP referral.

Positron Emission Tomography–Computed Tomography (PET-CT) Versus No PET-CT in the Management of Potentially Resectable Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastases: Cost Implications of a Randomized Controlled Trial

Purpose:

To evaluate whether positron emission tomography (PET) combined with computed tomography (PET-CT) is cost saving, or cost neutral, compared with conventional imaging in management of patients with resectable colorectal cancer liver metastases.

Methods:

Cost evaluation of a randomized trial that compared the effect of PET-CT on surgical management of patients with resectable colorectal cancer liver metastases. Health care use data ≤ 1 year after random assignment was obtained from administrative databases. Cost analysis was undertaken from the perspective of a third-party payer (ie, Ministry of Health). Mean costs with 95% credible intervals (CrI) were estimated by using a Bayesian approach.

Results:

The estimated mean cost per patient in the 263 patients who underwent PET-CT was $45,454 CAD (range, $1,340 to $181,420) and in the 134 control patients, $40,859 CAD (range, $279 to $293,558), with a net difference of $4,327 CAD (95% CrI, −$2,207 to $10,614). The primary cost driver was hospitalization for liver surgery (difference of $2,997 CAD for PET-CT; 95% CrI, −$2,144 to $8,010), which was mainly a result of a longer length of hospital stay for the PET-CT arm (median, 7 v 6 days; P = .03) and a higher postoperative complication rate (20% v 10%; P = .01). Baseline characteristics were similar between groups, including the number of liver segments involved with cancer, number of segments resected, and type of liver resection performed. No difference in survival was detected between arms.

Conclusion:

PET-CT was associated with limited clinical benefit and a nonsignificant increased cost. Universal funding of PET-CT in the management of patients with resectable colorectal cancer liver metastases does not seem justified.

Geographic variation in cancer-related imaging: Veterans Affairs health care system versus Medicare

BACKGROUND

Geographic variations in use of medical services have been interpreted as indirect evidence of wasteful care. Less overuse of services, however, may not be reliably associated with less geographic variation.

OBJECTIVE

To compare average use and geographic variation in use of cancer-related imaging between fee-for-service Medicare and the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) health care system.

DESIGN

Observational analysis of cancer-related imaging from 2003 to 2005 using Medicare and VA utilization data linked to cancer registry data. Multilevel models, adjusted for sociodemographic and tumor characteristics, were used to estimate mean differences in annual imaging use between cohorts of Medicare and VA patients within geographic areas and variation in use across areas for each cohort.

SETTING

40 hospital referral regions.

PATIENTS

Older men with lung, colorectal, or prostate cancer, including 34,475 traditional Medicare beneficiaries (Medicare cohort) and 6835 VA patients (VA cohort).

MEASUREMENTS

Per-patient count of imaging studies for which lung, colorectal, or prostate cancer was the primary diagnosis (each study weighted by a standardized price), and a direct measure of overuse-advanced imaging for prostate cancer at low risk for metastasis.

RESULTS

Adjusted annual use of cancer-related imaging was lower in the VA cohort than in the Medicare cohort (price-weighted count, $197 vs. $379 per patient; P < 0.001), as was annual use of advanced imaging for prostate cancer at low risk for metastasis ($41 vs. $117 per patient; P < 0.001). Geographic variation in cancer-related imaging use was similar in magnitude in the VA and Medicare cohorts.

LIMITATION

Observational study design.

CONCLUSION

Use of cancer-related imaging was lower in the VA health care system than in fee-for-service Medicare, but lower use was not associated with less geographic variation. Geographic variation in service use may not be a reliable indicator of the extent of overuse.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

Doris Duke Charitable Foundation and Department of Veterans Affairs Office of Policy and Planning.

Use of chemotherapy at the end of life in Turkey

Background

An increasing number of patients receive palliative chemotherapy near the end of life. The aim of this study is to evaluate the aggressiveness of chemotherapy in Turkish individuals near the end of life.

Methods

Patients diagnosed with solid tumors and died from 2010 to 2011 in the medical oncology department of Akdeniz University were included in the study. Data about the diagnosis, treatment details and imaging procedures were collected.

Results

Three hundred and seventy-three people with stage IV solid tumors died from 2010 to 2011 in our clinic. Eighty-nine patients (23.9%) patients underwent chemotherapy in the last month of life while 39 patients (10.5%) received chemotherapy in the last 14 days. The probability of undergoing chemotherapy in the last month of life was influenced by: age, ‘newly diagnosed’ patients, and performance status. There was no significant association of chemotherapy in the last month of life with gender and tumor type. Having a PET-CT scan did not alter the chemotherapy decision.

Conclusion

In conclusion, chemotherapy used in the last month of life in a tertiary care center of Turkey is high. Increasing quality of life should be a priority near the end of life and physicians should consider ceasing chemotherapy and direct the patient to early palliative care.