Trends and Projections in National United States Health Care Spending for Gastrointestinal Malignancies (1996–2030)

Stukalin, Igor; Ahmed, Newaz Shubidito; Fundytus, Adam; Qian, Alexander S.; Coward, Stephanie; Kaplan, Gilaad G.; Hilsden, Robert J.; Burak, Kelly W.; Lee, Jeffrey K.; Singh, Siddharth; Ma, Christopher

doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2021.12.244

Cited by 12 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Total treatment costs were estimated at USD 2.7 million a year. However, according to Stukalin et al total expenditure related to healthcare for patients with pancreatic cancer averaged USD 2.55 billion in 2016 [ 11 ]. In his publication, Soefje points to the results of economic analyses of direct medical costs conducted on a cohort of patients subjected to oncological treatment in relation to the control group, where PPPM (per-patient-per-month) for patients with pancreatic cancer was on average USD 15,480 to USD 1001 for the control group (the analysis included the costs of hospitalization, outpatient care, visits to the emergency department) [ 12 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Treatment Costs and Social Burden of Pancreatic Cancer

Cipora

Partyka

Pajewska

et al. 2023

Cancers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

(1) Background: Pancreatic cancer is the cancer with the third-highest mortality rate, and forecasts indicate its growing share in morbidity. The basis of treatment is inpatient chemotherapy and there is a strong focus on palliative care. (2) Methods: A literature review was conducted based on the rapid review methodology in PubMed and Cochrane databases. The search was supplemented with publications from the snowball search. Qualitative assessment of included publications was performed using AMSTAR2 modified scheme. (3) Results: The review included 17 publications, of which majority concerned direct costs related to the adopted treatment regimen. Most of the publications focused on comparing the cost-effectiveness of drug therapies and the costs of palliative treatment. Other publications concerned indirect costs generated by pancreatic cancer. They particularly focused on the economic burden of lost productivity due to sickness absence. (4) Conclusion: The increase in the incidence of pancreatic cancer translates into an increase in the costs of the health care system and indirect costs. Due to the significant share of hospitalization in the health care structure, direct costs are increasing. The inpatient treatment regimen and side effects translate into a loss of productivity for patients with pancreatic cancer. Among gastrointestinal cancers, pancreatic cancer generates the second largest indirect costs, although it has a much lower incidence rate than the dominant colorectal cancer. This indicates a significant problem of the economic burden of this cancer.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Treatment Costs and Social Burden of Pancreatic Cancer

Cipora

Partyka

Pajewska

et al. 2023

Cancers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Our previous cost analysis of colorectal, pancreatic, liver, gastric, esophageal, and gallbladder/biliary tract cancers by using the DEX and GBD data sets has identified similar total and per capita health care spending and temporal trends in health expenditures 15 . Although gastrointestinal malignancies are a heterogeneous group, this cost analysis showed that most health expenditures occurred in the inpatient setting and that the most significant increases in health expenditures were attributable to prescribed pharmaceutical care as driven by the price and intensity of care, consistent with our findings on kidney cancer.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To account for specialty drugs that may not be captured in national surveys such as the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, the DEX specifically obtained a data set of drugs from 2010 to 2018 from IQVIA (Danbury, Connecticut) to generate a specialty drug spending model that included sunitinib, pazopanib, everolimus, and axitinib for kidney cancer. Per capita health care spending was defined as total health care spending divided by kidney cancer prevalence 15 …”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The methods used in this article are described in detail in our previous publications. 14,15 In brief, this study used public data from the Disease Expenditure Project 2016 (DEX 2016) and the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019 (GBD 2019), both of which were the most recently available data.…”

Section: Data Sourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Per capita health care spending was defined as total health care spending divided by kidney cancer prevalence. 15 The secondary outcome was to identify the drivers of change in health expenditures for kidney cancer in each age group. Five primary drivers of change were evaluated in the DEX between 1996 and 2162 -HEALTH EXPENDITURES FOR KIDNEY CANCER 2013 that consisted of changes in health expenditures as follows: (1) total US population size, (2) the proportion of the population in each age and sex group, (3) disease incidence/prevalence, (4) service utilization, and (5) the price and intensity of care.…”

Section: Outcome Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Trends in health care spending on kidney cancer in the United States, 1996–2016

Takemura

Ahmed

Stukalin

et al. 2023

Cancer

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Paradigm shifts in kidney cancer management have led to higher health care spending. Here, total and per capita health care spending and primary drivers of change in health expenditures for kidney cancer in the United States between 1996 and 2016 are estimated. Methods: Public databases developed by the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation for the Disease Expenditure Project were used. The prevalence of kidney cancer was estimated from the Global Burden of Disease Study. Changes in health care spending on kidney cancer were assessed by joinpoint regression and expressed as annual percent changes (APCs).

show abstract

Contemporary trends in utilization of metastasectomy in the era of targeted and immunotherapies

Passman,

Kallan,

Roberson

et al. 2024

Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundMetastasectomy is a useful adjunct in the management of metastatic cancer. Widespread adoption of novel targeted and immunotherapies has improved the survival profiles of multiple malignancies, which has potentially altered the role of metastasectomy. This study aimed to characterize trends in metastasectomy across five primary cancers eligible for these therapies.MethodsThe National Inpatient Sample was used to identify patients who underwent metastasectomy in the United States (2016–2021). Patients with procedure codes for resection of the lung, liver, adrenal gland, brain, or small bowel and concurrent diagnosis codes for secondary malignant neoplasm of that site were included. Subjects were subcategorized by primary malignancy: colorectal cancer, lung cancer, breast cancer, melanoma, or renal cancer. Sample weights were used to produce national estimates, which were incidence adjusted by primary malignancy. Trends in utilization were calculated with average annual percent change (AAPC) and linear regression coefficients.ResultsColorectal cancer was the most frequent indication for metastasectomy (n = 57,644 cases), followed by lung cancer (n = 55,090 cases), breast cancer (n = 12,616 cases), renal cancer (n = 8427 cases), and melanoma (n = 5658 cases). Utilization of metastasectomy increased over the study period for breast cancer (AAPC, +10.6%; p = .013) and melanoma (AAPC, +8.3%; p = .040) but did not change for lung cancer (AAPC, −1.6%; p = .26), colorectal cancer (AAPC, +0.3%; p = .83), or renal cancer (AAPC, +2.3%; p = .36).ConclusionsBetween 2016 and 2021, utilization of metastasectomy increased significantly for melanoma and breast cancer. The role of metastasectomy will likely continue to develop as new treatment protocols improve survival profiles for patients with metastatic disease.

show abstract

Trends and Projections in National United States Health Care Spending for Gastrointestinal Malignancies (1996–2030)

Cited by 12 publications

References 56 publications

Treatment Costs and Social Burden of Pancreatic Cancer

Treatment Costs and Social Burden of Pancreatic Cancer

Trends in health care spending on kidney cancer in the United States, 1996–2016

Contemporary trends in utilization of metastasectomy in the era of targeted and immunotherapies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About