Lauren M Perry1, Sarah B Bateni2, Richard J Bold1, Jeffrey S Hoch3. 1. Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of California, Davis, Medical Center, Davis, Sacramento, CA. 2. Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 3. Division of Health Policy and Management, Department of Public Health Sciences, University of California, Davis, Sacramento, CA; Center for Healthcare Policy and Research, University of California, Davis, Sacramento, CA. Electronic address: jshoch@ucdavis.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Volume of operative cases may be an important factor associated with improved survival for early-stage pancreatic cancer. Most high-volume pancreatic centers are also academic institutions, which have been associated with additional healthcare costs. We hypothesized that at high-volume centers, the value of the extra survival outweighs the extra cost. STUDY DESIGN: This retrospective cohort study used data from the California Cancer Registry linked to the Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development database from January 1, 2004 through December 31, 2012. Stage I-II pancreatic cancer patients who underwent resection were included. Multivariable analyses estimated overall survival and 30-day costs at low- vs high-volume pancreatic surgery centers. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and incremental net benefit (INB) were estimated, and statistical uncertainty was characterized using net benefit regression. RESULTS: Of 2,786 patients, 46.5% were treated at high-volume centers and 53.5% at low-volume centers. There was a 0.45-year (5.4 months) survival benefit (95% CI 0.21-0.69) and a $7,884 extra cost associated with receiving surgery at high-volume centers (95% CI $4,074-$11,694). The ICER was $17,529 for an additional year of survival (95% CI $7,997-$40,616). For decision-makers willing to pay more than $20,000 for an additional year of life, high-volume centers appear cost-effective. CONCLUSIONS: Although healthcare costs were greater at high-volume centers, patients undergoing pancreatic surgery at high-volume centers experienced a survival benefit (5.4 months). The extra cost of $17,529 per additional year is quite modest for improved survival and is economically attractive by many oncology standards.
BACKGROUND: Volume of operative cases may be an important factor associated with improved survival for early-stage pancreatic cancer. Most high-volume pancreatic centers are also academic institutions, which have been associated with additional healthcare costs. We hypothesized that at high-volume centers, the value of the extra survival outweighs the extra cost. STUDY DESIGN: This retrospective cohort study used data from the California Cancer Registry linked to the Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development database from January 1, 2004 through December 31, 2012. Stage I-II pancreatic cancer patients who underwent resection were included. Multivariable analyses estimated overall survival and 30-day costs at low- vs high-volume pancreatic surgery centers. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and incremental net benefit (INB) were estimated, and statistical uncertainty was characterized using net benefit regression. RESULTS: Of 2,786 patients, 46.5% were treated at high-volume centers and 53.5% at low-volume centers. There was a 0.45-year (5.4 months) survival benefit (95% CI 0.21-0.69) and a $7,884 extra cost associated with receiving surgery at high-volume centers (95% CI $4,074-$11,694). The ICER was $17,529 for an additional year of survival (95% CI $7,997-$40,616). For decision-makers willing to pay more than $20,000 for an additional year of life, high-volume centers appear cost-effective. CONCLUSIONS: Although healthcare costs were greater at high-volume centers, patients undergoing pancreatic surgery at high-volume centers experienced a survival benefit (5.4 months). The extra cost of $17,529 per additional year is quite modest for improved survival and is economically attractive by many oncology standards.
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
Authors: Sarah B Bateni; Jennifer L Olson; Jeffrey S Hoch; Robert J Canter; Richard J Bold Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2018-09-14 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Thierry Conroy; Pascal Hammel; Mohamed Hebbar; Meher Ben Abdelghani; Alice C Wei; Jean-Luc Raoul; Laurence Choné; Eric Francois; Pascal Artru; James J Biagi; Thierry Lecomte; Eric Assenat; Roger Faroux; Marc Ychou; Julien Volet; Alain Sauvanet; Gilles Breysacher; Frédéric Di Fiore; Christine Cripps; Petr Kavan; Patrick Texereau; Karine Bouhier-Leporrier; Faiza Khemissa-Akouz; Jean-Louis Legoux; Béata Juzyna; Sophie Gourgou; Christopher J O'Callaghan; Claire Jouffroy-Zeller; Patrick Rat; David Malka; Florence Castan; Jean-Baptiste Bachet Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2018-12-20 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Scott D Ramsey; Richard J Willke; Henry Glick; Shelby D Reed; Federico Augustovski; Bengt Jonsson; Andrew Briggs; Sean D Sullivan Journal: Value Health Date: 2015-03 Impact factor: 5.725
Authors: Ryan Z Swan; David J Niemeyer; Ramanathan M Seshadri; Kyle J Thompson; Amanda Walters; John B Martinie; David Sindram; David A Iannitti Journal: Am Surg Date: 2014-06 Impact factor: 0.688
Authors: Elenir B C Avritscher; Catherine D Cooksley; Kenneth V Rolston; J Michael Swint; George L Delclos; Luisa Franzini; Stephen G Swisher; Garrett L Walsh; Paul F Mansfield; Linda S Elting Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2013-10-19 Impact factor: 3.603