Comorbidity-adjusted life expectancy: a new tool to inform recommendations for optimal screening strategies.

BACKGROUND: Many guidelines recommend considering health status and life expectancy when making cancer screening decisions for elderly persons. OBJECTIVE: To estimate life expectancy for elderly persons without a history of cancer, taking into account comorbid conditions. DESIGN: Population-based cohort study. SETTING: A 5% sample of Medicare beneficiaries in selected geographic areas, including their claims and vital status information. PARTICIPANTS: Medicare beneficiaries aged 66 years or older between 1992 and 2005 without a history of cancer (n = 407 749). MEASUREMENTS: Medicare claims were used to identify comorbid conditions included in the Charlson index. Survival probabilities were estimated by comorbidity group (no, low/medium, and high) and for the 3 most prevalent conditions (diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and congestive heart failure) by using the Cox proportional hazards model. Comorbidity-adjusted life expectancy was calculated based on comparisons of survival models with U.S. life tables. Survival probabilities from the U.S. life tables providing the most similar survival experience to the cohort of interest were used. RESULTS: Persons with higher levels of comorbidity had shorter life expectancies, whereas those with no comorbid conditions, including very elderly persons, had favorable life expectancies relative to an average person of the same chronological age. The estimated life expectancy at age 75 years was approximately 3 years longer for persons with no comorbid conditions and approximately 3 years shorter for those with high comorbidity relative to the average U.S. population. LIMITATIONS: The cohort was limited to Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries aged 66 years or older living in selected geographic areas. Data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results cancer registry and Medicare claims lack information on functional status and severity of comorbidity, which might influence life expectancy in elderly persons. CONCLUSION: Life expectancy varies considerably by comorbidity status in elderly persons. Comorbidity-adjusted life expectancy may help physicians tailor recommendations for stopping or continuing cancer screening for individual patients.

Comparison of approaches for estimating incidence costs of care for colorectal cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Estimates of the costs of medical care vary across patient populations, data sources, and methods. The objective of this study was to compare 3 approaches for estimating the incidence costs of colorectal cancer (CRC) care using similar patient populations, but different data sources and methods. METHODS: We used 2 data sources, linked SEER-Medicare and Medicare claims alone, to identify newly diagnosed CRC patients aged 65 and older and estimated their healthcare costs during the observation period, 1998 to 2002. Controls were matched by sex, age-group, and geographic location. We compared mean net costs, measured as the difference in total cost between cases and controls, for: (1) a SEER-Medicare cohort, (2) a Medicare claims alone cohort, and (3) a modeled phase of care approach using linked SEER-Medicare data. The SEER-Medicare cohort approach was considered the reference. RESULTS: We found considerable variability across approaches for estimating net costs of care in CRC patients. In the first year after diagnosis, mean net costs were $32,648 (95% CI: $31,826 and $33,470) in the SEER-Medicare cohort. The other approaches understated mean net costs in year 1 by about 16%. Mean net 5-year costs of care were $37,227 (95% CI: $35,711 and $38,744) in the SEER-Medicare cohort, and $30,310 (95% CI: $25,894 and $34,726) in the claims only approach, with the largest difference in the 65 to 69 age group. Mean net 5-year costs of care were more similar to the reference in the modeled phase of care approach ($37,701 [range: $36,972 and $38,446]). Differences from the SEER-Medicare cohort estimates reflect misclassification of prevalent cancer patients as newly diagnosed patients in the Medicare claims only approach, and differences in years of data and assumptions about comparison groups in the modeled phase of care approach. CONCLUSIONS: CRC incidence cost estimates vary substantially depending on the strategy and data source for identifying newly diagnosed cancer patients and methods for estimating longitudinal costs. Our findings may inform estimation of costs for other cancers as well as other diseases.

Comparison of approaches for estimating prevalence costs of care for cancer patients: what is the impact of data source?

BACKGROUND: National prevalence costs of medical care can be key inputs in health policy decisions. Cost estimates vary across data sources, patient populations, and methods, however, the objective of this study was to compare 3 approaches for estimating the prevalence costs of colorectal cancer (CRC) care using different data sources, but similar patient populations and methods. METHODS: We identified prevalent CRC patients aged 65 and older from: (1) linked Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) registry-Medicare data, (2) Medicare claims only, and (3) the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS). Controls were matched by sex, age-group, and geographic location. Mean per person total and net costs, measured as the difference between patients and controls, were compared for each approach during a similar observation period. The SEER-Medicare approach was our reference, and we evaluated the impact of patient selection criteria with sensitivity analyses. Aggregate prevalence estimates were also compared. RESULTS: We found considerable variability across the different approaches to estimating prevalence costs of CRC. Mean net annual per person estimates in the SEER-Medicare reference were $5341 (95% CI: $5243, $5439), compared with $8736 (95% CI: $8203, $9269) for the Medicare claims only and $11,614 (95% CI: $7566, $15,663) for the MEPS. Aggregate national estimates of net prevalence costs of CRC in 2004 ranged from $4524 million, using the SEER-Medicare approach, to $9629 million, using the MEPS approach. Estimates varied by data source based on the payors included and identification of prevalent CRC patients. CONCLUSIONS: CRC prevalence cost estimates vary substantially depending on the data sources. Our findings have implications for estimating prevalence costs for other cancers and other diseases without registry systems that can be used to identify newly diagnosed individuals as well as those diagnosed less recently.

Adverse events after outpatient colonoscopy in the Medicare population.

BACKGROUND: Although use of colonoscopy has increased substantially among elderly Medicare beneficiaries, no one has described colonoscopy-related adverse events in a representative sample of Medicare patients. OBJECTIVE: To determine risk for adverse events after outpatient colonoscopy in elderly patients. DESIGN: Population-based, matched cohort study. SETTING: Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results cancer registry areas. PATIENTS: Random 5% sample of Medicare beneficiaries, age 66 to 95 years, who underwent outpatient colonoscopy between 1 July 2001 and 31 October 2005 (n = 53 220), matched with beneficiaries who did not have colonoscopy. MEASUREMENTS: Medicare claims were used to measure the rate of serious gastrointestinal events (bleeding and perforation), other gastrointestinal events, and cardiovascular events resulting in a hospitalization or emergency department visit within 30 days after colonoscopy compared with matched beneficiaries who did not have colonoscopy. Logistic regression was used to estimate adjusted predictive risks for adverse events and to assess whether these events varied by age, comorbid conditions, or type of colonoscopy. RESULTS: Persons undergoing colonoscopy had a higher risk for adverse gastrointestinal events than their matched group. Rates of adverse events after colonoscopy increased with age. Patients having polypectomy had higher risk for all adverse events compared with their matched group and with the screening and diagnostic colonoscopy groups. Comorbid conditions increased the risk for adverse events. Patients with a history of stroke, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, atrial fibrillation, or congestive heart failure had significantly higher risk for serious gastrointestinal events. LIMITATION: The analysis relied on the diagnosis and procedure codes recorded on the Medicare claims. CONCLUSION: Risks for adverse events after outpatient colonoscopy among elderly Medicare beneficiaries were low; however, they increased with age with specific comorbid conditions and depending on whether polypectomy was done. These data may inform decisions on whether to perform colonoscopy in persons of advanced age or those with comorbid conditions.

Current and future utilization of services from medical oncologists.

PURPOSE: There is limited information on the current use of oncologists and projections of future need. This analysis assesses current utilization patterns and projects the number of people with cancer and their use of oncologists' services through 2020. METHODS: Data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results cancer registries and Medicare physician claims were used to estimate oncologists' services from 1998 to 2003. We estimated the portion of patients with cancer who saw an oncologist, the mean number of visits, and the clinical setting where care was provided. Care was divided into initial, continuing, and last-year-of-life phases. Projections for future number of patients with cancer and visits were calculated by applying incidence and prevalence rates derived from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results data to census population projections through 2020. RESULTS: The percentage of patients who saw an oncologist was 47% during the initial-care phase, 36% during the continuing-care phase, and 70% in the last year of life. The number of visits varied by age, sex, cancer site, and phase. The total number of cancer patients in the United States is projected to increase 55%, from 11.8 million in 2005 to 18.2 million in 2020. Total oncology visits are projected to increase from 38 million in 2005 to 57 million in 2020. CONCLUSION: Utilization of oncologists' services will increase appreciably between 2005 and 2020; this will be driven predominantly by an increase in survivors of cancer and by the aging of the population. The United States may face an acute shortage of medical oncologists if efforts are not taken to meet this growing need.

Evaluation of trends in the cost of initial cancer treatment.

BACKGROUND: Despite reports of increases in the cost of cancer treatment, little is known about how costs of cancer treatment have changed over time and what services have contributed to the increases. METHODS: We used data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare linked database for 306,709 persons aged 65 and older and diagnosed with breast, lung, colorectal, or prostate cancer between 1991 and 2002 to assess the number of patients assigned to initial cancer care, from 2 months before diagnosis to 12 months after diagnosis, and mean annual Medicare payments for this care according to cancer type and type of treatment. Mutually exclusive treatment categories were cancer-related surgery, chemotherapy, radiation therapy, and other hospitalizations during the period of initial cancer care. Linear regression models were used to assess temporal trends in the percentage of patients receiving treatment and costs for those treated. We extrapolated our results based on the SEER data to the US Medicare population to estimate national Medicare payments by cancer site and treatment category. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: For patients diagnosed in 2002, Medicare paid an average of $39,891 for initial care for each lung cancer patient, $41 134 for each colorectal cancer patient, and $20,964 for each breast cancer patient, corresponding to inflation-adjusted increases from 1991 of $7139, $5345, and $4189, respectively. During the same interval, the mean Medicare payment for initial care for prostate cancer declined by $196 to $18261 in 2002. Costs for any hospitalization accounted for the largest portion of payments for all cancers. Chemotherapy use increased markedly for all cancers between 1991 and 2002, as did radiation therapy use (except for colorectal cancers). Total 2002 Medicare payments for initial care for these four cancers exceeded $6.7 billion, with colorectal and lung cancers being the most costly overall. CONCLUSIONS: The statistically significant increase in costs of initial cancer treatment reflects more patients receiving surgery and adjuvant therapy and rising prices for these treatments. These trends are likely to continue in the near future, although more efficient targeting of costly therapies could mitigate the overall economic impact of this trend.

Cost of care for elderly cancer patients in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Timely estimates of the costs of care for cancer patients are an important element in the formulation of national cancer programs and policies. We estimated net costs of care for elderly cancer patients in the United States for the 18 most prevalent cancers and for all other tumor sites combined. METHODS: We used Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare files to identify 718,907 cancer patients and 1,623,651 noncancer control subjects. Within each tumor site, noncancer control subjects were matched to patients by sex, age group, geographic location, and phase of care (ie, initial, continuing, and last year of life). Costs of care were estimated for each phase by use of Medicare claims data from January 1, 1999, through December 31, 2003. Per-patient net costs of care were applied to the 5-year survival of cancer patients by phase of care to estimate 5-year costs of care and extrapolated to the elderly US Medicare population diagnosed with cancer in 2004. RESULTS: Across tumor sites, mean net costs of care were highest in the initial and last year of life phases of care and lowest in the continuing phase. Mean 5-year net costs varied widely, from less than $20,000 for patients with breast cancer or melanoma of the skin to more than $40,000 for patients with brain or other nervous system, esophageal, gastric, or ovarian cancers or lymphoma. For elderly cancer patients diagnosed in 2004, aggregate 5-year net costs of care to Medicare were estimated to be approximately $21.1 billion. Costs to Medicare were highest for lung, colorectal, and prostate cancers, reflecting underlying incidence, stage distribution at diagnosis, survival, and phase-specific costs for these tumor sites. CONCLUSIONS: The costs of cancer care to Medicare are substantial and vary by tumor site, phase of care, stage at diagnosis, and survival.