ArticleAnnals of epidemiology2021
Comparative study of survival among small cell lung cancer patients in the U.S. military health system and those in the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results (SEER) program.
Article in Annals of epidemiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Survival among lung cancer patients: comparison of the U.S. military health system and the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results (SEER) program by health insurance status.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2024Article
- MilCanEpi: Increased Capability for Cancer Care Research in the Department of Defense.JCO clinical cancer informatics · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe U.S. military health system provides universal health care access to beneficiaries. However, whether the universal access has translated into improved patient outcome is unknown. We compared survival of small-cell lung cancer patients in the military health system with that in the U.S. general population. Stage and receipt of cancer treatment were also compared to see if they could contribute to survival difference.
methodsThe data were obtained from The Department of Defense's Automated Central Tumor Registry (ACTUR) and the national Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program, respectively. ACTUR (N = 3040) and SEER patients (N = 12,160) were matched on age, sex, race and diagnosis year. Multivariable Cox regression model was used to compare all-cause mortality between ACTUR and SEER. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to compare cancer stage and treatment.
resultsACTUR patients exhibited significantly better survival than SEER counterparts (HR = 0.77, 95% CI= 0.71-0.83). ACTUR and SEER patients had similar stage, but ACTUR patients were more likely to receive radiation treatment (OR = 1.26, 95% CI = 1.12-1.42). The survival advantage of ACTUR patients remained across all tumor stages and radiation groups.
conclusionsSurvival of small-cell lung cancer patients with universal health care access had better survival than similar patients in the U.S. general population. Future studies are warranted to identify factors that may contribute to the improved survival.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.