Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22393093›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology2012

Survival of older patients with cancer in the Veterans Health Administration versus fee-for-service Medicare.

Mary Beth Landrum, Nancy L Keating, Elizabeth B Lamont, Samuel R Bozeman, Steven H Krasnow, Lawrence Shulman, Jennifer R Brown, Craig C Earle, Michael Rabin, Barbara J McNeil

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
47citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

47 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Comparing VA and Non-VA Quality of Care: A Systematic Review.Journal of general internal medicine · 2017
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Soft-tissue Sarcoma Survival in the US Military Health System: Comparison With the SEER Program.Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews · 2022
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Comparison of Survival among Colon Cancer Patients in the U.S. Military Health System and Patients in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2021
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Mary Beth LandrumHarvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, USA. landrum@hcp.med.harvard.edu
Nancy L Keating
Elizabeth B Lamont
Samuel R Bozeman
Steven H Krasnow
Lawrence Shulman
Jennifer R Brown
Craig C Earle
Michael Rabin
Barbara J McNeil

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe Veterans Health Administration (VHA) provides high-quality preventive chronic care and cancer care, but few studies have documented improved patient outcomes that result from this high-quality care. We compared the survival rates of older patients with cancer in the VHA and fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare and examined whether differences in the stage at diagnosis, receipt of guideline-recommended therapies, and unmeasured characteristics explain survival differences. PATIENTS AND

methodsWe used propensity-score methods to compare all-cause and cancer-specific survival rates for men older than age 65 years who were diagnosed or received their first course of treatment for colorectal, lung, lymphoma, or multiple myeloma in VHA hospitals from 2001 to 2004 to similar FFS-Medicare enrollees diagnosed in Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) areas in the same time frame. We examined the role of unmeasured factors by using sensitivity analyses.

resultsVHA patients versus similar FFS SEER-Medicare patients had higher survival rates of colon cancer (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.87; 95% CI, 0.82 to 0.93) and non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC; HR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.88 to 0.95) and similar survival rates of rectal cancer (HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.95 to 1.16), small-cell lung cancer (HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.93 to 1.05), diffuse large-B-cell lymphoma (HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.89 to 1.18), and multiple myeloma (HR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.03). The diagnosis of VHA patients at earlier stages explained much of the survival advantages for colon cancer and NSCLC. Sensitivity analyses suggested that additional adjustment for the severity of comorbid disease or performance status could have substantial effects on estimated differences.

conclusionThe survival rate for older men with cancer in the VHA was better than or equivalent to the survival rate for similar FFS-Medicare beneficiaries. The VHA provision of high-quality care, particularly preventive care, can result in improved patient outcomes.

Indexed as

Fee-for-Service PlansMedicareAgedAged, 80 and overCarcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungCarcinoma, Small CellComorbidityHumansKaplan-Meier EstimateLung NeoplasmsLymphoma, Large B-Cell, DiffuseMaleMultiple MyelomaNeoplasmsOdds RatioProportional Hazards Models

Identifiers

PMID22393093
PMCPMC3341151

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.