Literature DB >> 28709665

Risk-Adjusted Margin Positivity Rate as a Surgical Quality Metric for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

Chun Chieh Lin1, Matthew P Smeltzer2, Ahmedin Jemal1, Raymond U Osarogiagbon3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Incomplete lung cancer resection connotes poor prognosis; the incidence varies with patient demographic, clinical, and institutional factors. We sought to develop a valid, survival impactful, facility-based surgical quality metric that adjusts for related patient demographic and clinical characteristics.
METHODS: Facilities performing resections for patients diagnosed with stage I to IIIA non-small cell lung cancer in the National Cancer Data Base between 2004 and 2011 were identified. Multivariate logistic regression modeling was used to estimate the expected number of margin-positive cases by adjusting for patient risk mix and calculate the observed-to-expected ratio for each facility. Facilities were categorized as outperformers (observed-to-expected ratio less than 1, p < 0.05), nonoutliers (p > 0.05), and underperformers (observed-to-expected ratio greater than 1, p < 0.05); and their characteristics across performance categories were compared by χ2 tests. Multivariate Cox proportional hazard analyses were conducted, adjusting for patient demographic and clinical characteristics.
RESULTS: A total of 96,324 patients underwent surgery at 809 facilities. The overall observed margin-positive rate was 4.4%. Sixty-one facilities (8%) were outperformers, 644 (80%) were nonoutliers, and 104 (13%) were underperformers. One third (36%) of National Cancer Institute-designated facilities, 13% of academic comprehensive cancer programs, 5% of comprehensive community cancer programs, and 13% of "other" facilities achieved outperforming status but no community cancer programs did. Interestingly, 9% of National Cancer Institute-designated facilities and 11% of academic comprehensive cancer program facilities were underperformers. Adjusting for patient demographic and clinical characteristics, outperformers had a 5-year all-cause hazard ratio of 0.88 (95% confidence interval: 0.85 to 0.91, p < 0.0001) compared with nonoutliers, and 0.80 (95% confidence interval: 0.77 to 0.84, p < 0.0001) compared with underperformers.
CONCLUSIONS: Facility performance in lung cancer surgery can be captured by the risk-adjusted margin-positivity rate, potentially providing a valid quality improvement metric.
Copyright © 2017 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28709665      PMCID: PMC5610071          DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2017.04.033

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg        ISSN: 0003-4975            Impact factor:   4.330


  25 in total

1.  Hospital volume and surgical mortality in the United States.

Authors:  John D Birkmeyer; Andrea E Siewers; Emily V A Finlayson; Therese A Stukel; F Lee Lucas; Ida Batista; H Gilbert Welch; David E Wennberg
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2002-04-11       Impact factor: 91.245

Review 2.  What is quality, and can we define it in lung cancer?-the case for quality improvement.

Authors:  Farhood Farjah; Frank C Detterbeck
Journal:  Transl Lung Cancer Res       Date:  2015-08

Review 3.  The quality of care. How can it be assessed?

Authors:  A Donabedian
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1988 Sep 23-30       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  The relationship between hospital lung cancer resection volume and patient mortality risk.

Authors:  Benjamin D Kozower; George J Stukenborg
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 12.969

5.  The influence of hospital volume on survival after resection for lung cancer.

Authors:  P B Bach; L D Cramer; D Schrag; R J Downey; S E Gelfand; C B Begg
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2001-07-19       Impact factor: 91.245

6.  Postoperative Radiation Therapy Is Associated With Improved Overall Survival in Incompletely Resected Stage II and III Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

Authors:  Elyn H Wang; Christopher D Corso; Charles E Rutter; Henry S Park; Aileen B Chen; Anthony W Kim; Lynn D Wilson; Roy H Decker; James Byunghoon Yu
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2015-06-22       Impact factor: 44.544

7.  Impact of adjuvant treatment for microscopic residual disease after non-small cell lung cancer surgery.

Authors:  Jacquelyn G Hancock; Joshua E Rosen; Alberto Antonicelli; Amy Moreno; Anthony W Kim; Frank C Detterbeck; Daniel J Boffa
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2014-12-17       Impact factor: 4.330

8.  Are surgical outcomes for lung cancer resections improved at teaching hospitals?

Authors:  Robert A Meguid; Benjamin S Brooke; David C Chang; J Timothy Sherwood; Malcolm V Brock; Stephen C Yang
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 4.330

9.  Comparison of commission on cancer-approved and -nonapproved hospitals in the United States: implications for studies that use the National Cancer Data Base.

Authors:  Karl Y Bilimoria; David J Bentrem; Andrew K Stewart; David P Winchester; Clifford Y Ko
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2009-07-27       Impact factor: 44.544

10.  Prevalence, Prognostic Implications, and Survival Modulators of Incompletely Resected Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer in the U.S. National Cancer Data Base.

Authors:  Raymond U Osarogiagbon; Chun Chieh Lin; Matthew P Smeltzer; Ahmedin Jemal
Journal:  J Thorac Oncol       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 15.609

View more
  4 in total

1.  Rurality, Stage-Stratified Use of Treatment Modalities, and Survival of Non-small Cell Lung Cancer.

Authors:  Meredith A Ray; Nicholas R Faris; Anna Derrick; Matthew P Smeltzer; Raymond U Osarogiagbon
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2020-05-06       Impact factor: 9.410

2.  Volume-Based Care Regionalization: Pitfalls and Challenges.

Authors:  Raymond U Osarogiagbon
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2020-09-08       Impact factor: 50.717

3.  Closing the gap: Contribution of surgical best practices to outcome differences between high- and low-volume centers for lung cancer resection.

Authors:  Mitchell S von Itzstein; Rong Lu; Kemp H Kernstine; Ethan A Halm; Shidan Wang; Yang Xie; David E Gerber
Journal:  Cancer Med       Date:  2020-04-21       Impact factor: 4.452

4.  Institutional-Level Differences in Quality and Outcomes of Lung Cancer Resections in the United States.

Authors:  Raymond U Osarogiagbon; Helmneh M Sineshaw; Chun Chieh Lin; Ahmedin Jemal
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2020-11-14       Impact factor: 9.410

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.