Michaela A Dinan1, Yanhong Li2, Yinghong Zhang2, Suzanne B Stewart3, Lesley H Curtis4, Daniel J George5, Shelby D Reed6. 1. Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC; Duke Cancer Institute, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC; Department of Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC. Electronic address: michaela.dinan@duke.edu. 2. Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC. 3. Department of Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC; Department of Surgery, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC. 4. Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC; Department of Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC. 5. Duke Cancer Institute, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC; Department of Surgery, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC. 6. Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC; Duke Cancer Institute, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC; Department of Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC.
Abstract
UNLABELLED: We conducted a retrospective analysis of Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare data of men with prostate cancer. Among 34,727 patients, those who died of their prostate cancer had more hospice and outpatient use, less inpatient and intensive care unit use, and lower overall costs. Efforts to shift care toward the outpatient setting might provide more efficient and judicious care for patients during the end of life. BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer poses a significant financial burden in the United States. However, most men with prostate cancer will die from noncancer causes. Concerns about increased resource utilization at the end of life have not been appropriately examined in this context. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare data of men who were diagnosed with and died of, as opposed to with, prostate cancer between 2000 and 2007. Within these 2 populations, we compared changes in the use of medical interventions, hospice, and overall health care costs to Medicare in the last year of life. RESULTS: Among 34,727 patients, those who died of prostate cancer had lower costs ($43,572 vs. $45,830; P < .001), largely because of lower mean inpatient costs ($20,769 vs. $29,851) and fewer hospitalizations (1.8 vs. 2.1), inpatient days (12.2 vs. 15.7), intensive care unit (ICU) days (1.4 vs. 3.4), and skilled nursing facility days (11.7 vs. 14.7; P < .001 for all). Outpatient and hospice costs were significantly greater among patients who died of prostate cancer, as was use of chemotherapy and androgen deprivation therapy. Patients who died of prostate cancer had approximately 12% lower costs than patients who died from other causes in adjusted analyses (fold-change, 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85-0.92). The single strongest predictor of increased costs at the end of life was receipt of multiple invasive procedures (fold increase in costs, 2.39; 95% CI, 2.22-2.58). CONCLUSION: Patients who died of prostate cancer rather than from other causes had more hospice and outpatient use, less inpatient and ICU use, and lower overall costs. Efforts to shift care toward outpatient settings might provide more efficient and judicious care for patients during the end of life.
UNLABELLED: We conducted a retrospective analysis of Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare data of men with prostate cancer. Among 34,727 patients, those who died of their prostate cancer had more hospice and outpatient use, less inpatient and intensive care unit use, and lower overall costs. Efforts to shift care toward the outpatient setting might provide more efficient and judicious care for patients during the end of life. BACKGROUND:Prostate cancer poses a significant financial burden in the United States. However, most men with prostate cancer will die from noncancer causes. Concerns about increased resource utilization at the end of life have not been appropriately examined in this context. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare data of men who were diagnosed with and died of, as opposed to with, prostate cancer between 2000 and 2007. Within these 2 populations, we compared changes in the use of medical interventions, hospice, and overall health care costs to Medicare in the last year of life. RESULTS: Among 34,727 patients, those who died of prostate cancer had lower costs ($43,572 vs. $45,830; P < .001), largely because of lower mean inpatient costs ($20,769 vs. $29,851) and fewer hospitalizations (1.8 vs. 2.1), inpatient days (12.2 vs. 15.7), intensive care unit (ICU) days (1.4 vs. 3.4), and skilled nursing facility days (11.7 vs. 14.7; P < .001 for all). Outpatient and hospice costs were significantly greater among patients who died of prostate cancer, as was use of chemotherapy and androgen deprivation therapy. Patients who died of prostate cancer had approximately 12% lower costs than patients who died from other causes in adjusted analyses (fold-change, 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85-0.92). The single strongest predictor of increased costs at the end of life was receipt of multiple invasive procedures (fold increase in costs, 2.39; 95% CI, 2.22-2.58). CONCLUSION:Patients who died of prostate cancer rather than from other causes had more hospice and outpatient use, less inpatient and ICU use, and lower overall costs. Efforts to shift care toward outpatient settings might provide more efficient and judicious care for patients during the end of life.
Authors: Joan M Teno; Pedro L Gozalo; Julie P W Bynum; Natalie E Leland; Susan C Miller; Nancy E Morden; Thomas Scupp; David C Goodman; Vincent Mor Journal: JAMA Date: 2013-02-06 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Joan L Warren; K Robin Yabroff; Angela Meekins; Marie Topor; Elizabeth B Lamont; Martin L Brown Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2008-06-10 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Joan L Warren; Linda C Harlan; Angela Fahey; Beth A Virnig; Jean L Freeman; Carrie N Klabunde; Gregory S Cooper; Kevin B Knopf Journal: Med Care Date: 2002-08 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Ethan Basch; D Andrew Loblaw; Thomas K Oliver; Michael Carducci; Ronald C Chen; James N Frame; Kristina Garrels; Sebastien Hotte; Michael W Kattan; Derek Raghavan; Fred Saad; Mary-Ellen Taplin; Cindy Walker-Dilks; James Williams; Eric Winquist; Charles L Bennett; Ted Wootton; R Bryan Rumble; Stacie B Dusetzina; Katherine S Virgo Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2014-09-08 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Nathaniel Hendrix; Roman Gulati; Boshen Jiao; A Karim Kader; Stephen T Ryan; Ruth Etzioni Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2021-10-01 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Avirup Guha; Amit Kumar Dey; Sadeer Al-Kindi; P Elliott Miller; Arjun K Ghosh; Amitava Banerjee; Juan Lopez-Mattei; Nihar R Desai; Brijesh Patel; Guilherme H Oliveira; Marcos de Lima; Michael Fradley; Daniel Addison Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2020-11-18 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Brent K Hollenbeck; Mary Oerline; Samuel R Kaufman; Megan E V Caram; Stacie B Dusetzina; Andy M Ryan; Vahakn B Shahinian Journal: Urology Date: 2020-10-16 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Boshen Jiao; Roman Gulati; Nathaniel Hendrix; John L Gore; Soroush Rais-Bahrami; Todd M Morgan; Ruth Etzioni Journal: Value Health Date: 2021-04-22 Impact factor: 5.101
Authors: Joseph Ac Delaney; Xiaoyan Yin; João Daniel Fontes; Erin R Wallace; Asheley Skinner; Na Wang; Bradley G Hammill; Emelia J Benjamin; Lesley H Curtis; Susan R Heckbert Journal: SAGE Open Med Date: 2018-02-20