Literature DB >> 31343410

Evaluation of adherence to the Commission on Cancer lung cancer quality measures.

David D Odell1, Joseph Feinglass2, Kathryn Engelhardt3, Steven Papastefan4, Shari L Meyerson5, Ankit Bharat5, Malcolm M DeCamp4, Karl Y Bilimoria6.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: In this study we present historic data on adherence to and survival outcomes associated with recently introduced quality measures for the management of non-small-cell lung cancer.
METHODS: The National Cancer Data Base was queried to identify all patients with non-small-cell lung cancer from 1998 to 2011. Adherence to guidelines was assessed for each of 3 Commission on Cancer-defined quality measures: (1) sampling 10 regional lymph nodes at surgery; (2a) surgery within 120 days of neoadjuvant chemotherapy or, (2b) 180 days of adjuvant chemotherapy; and (3) nonsurgical primary therapy in cN2 disease. The likelihood of measure adherence and the association of measure adherence with all-cause mortality were analyzed controlling for patient, hospital, and time period characteristics.
RESULTS: Regional lymph node sampling was inadequate in 72.7% of cases. Only 28.7% began adjuvant chemotherapy within 180 days of surgery. However, 96.5% of patients who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy proceeded to surgery within 120 days and surgery was first-line treatment for cN2 disease in only 3.7% of patients. Uninsured or Medicaid status was an independent risk factor for a prolonged delay between neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgery (odds ratio, 1.36; 95% confidence interval, 1.08-1.72) and surgery and adjuvant treatment (odds ratio, 1.92; 95% confidence interval, 1.69-2.19). Overall survival was significantly better in patients whose care conformed to quality standards for nodal sampling (measure 1), and timing of chemotherapy.
CONCLUSIONS: Adherence rates for nodal sampling at the time of surgery and receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy were low. These findings highlight opportunities for improvement efforts, but more measures are needed to more broadly assess the quality of lung cancer care.
Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  guideline adherence; lung cancer; quality

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 31343410     DOI: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2018.09.126

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg        ISSN: 0022-5223            Impact factor:   5.209


  5 in total

1.  Review of Cancer-Specific Quality Measures Promoting the Avoidance of Low-Value Care.

Authors:  Brandon L Ellsworth; Allan K Metz; Nicole M Mott; Ruby Kazemi; Michael Stover; Tasha Hughes; Lesly A Dossett
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2022-02-06       Impact factor: 5.344

2.  Hospital-level compliance with the commission on cancer's quality of care measures and the association with patient survival.

Authors:  Daniel P Nussbaum; Christel N Rushing; Zhifei Sun; Babatunde A Yerokun; Mathias Worni; Robert S Saunders; Mark B McClellan; Donna Niedzwiecki; Rachel A Greenup; Dan G Blazer
Journal:  Cancer Med       Date:  2021-05-04       Impact factor: 4.452

3.  Time to surgery in thoracic cancers and prioritization during COVID-19: a systematic review.

Authors:  Scott C Fligor; Savas T Tsikis; Sophie Wang; Ana Sofia Ore; Benjamin G Allar; Ashlyn E Whitlock; Rodrigo Calvillo-Ortiz; Kevin Arndt; Mark P Callery; Sidhu P Gangadharan
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2020-11       Impact factor: 2.895

4.  Applying "Kennedyism" to lung cancer treatment: Let's take more nodes.

Authors:  Richard Lazzaro; Byron Patton
Journal:  JTCVS Tech       Date:  2020-01-11

5.  Institutional factors associated with adherence to quality measures for stage I and II non-small cell lung cancer.

Authors:  Rhami Khorfan; David T Cooke; Robert A Meguid; Leah Backhus; Thomas K Varghese; Farhood Farjah; Karl Y Bilimoria; David D Odell
Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2020-07-29       Impact factor: 6.439

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.