Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36282840›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

Improved survival of non-small cell lung cancer patients after introducing patient navigation: A retrospective cohort study with propensity score weighted historic control.

János G Pitter, Mariann Moizs, Éva Somogyiné Ezer, Gábor Lukács, Annamária Szigeti, Imre Repa, Marcell Csanádi, Maureen P M H Rutten-van Mölken, Kamrul Islam, Zoltán Kaló and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 33% of its field
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Patient navigation programmes for symptomatic lung cancer patients: a scoping review.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

János G PitterSyreon Research Institute, Budapest, Hungary.ORCID 0000-0002-6784-9215
Mariann MoizsMoritz Kaposi General Hospital, Kaposvár, Hungary.
Éva Somogyiné EzerMoritz Kaposi General Hospital, Kaposvár, Hungary.
Gábor LukácsMoritz Kaposi General Hospital, Kaposvár, Hungary.
Annamária SzigetiMoritz Kaposi General Hospital, Kaposvár, Hungary.
Imre RepaMoritz Kaposi General Hospital, Kaposvár, Hungary.
Marcell CsanádiSyreon Research Institute, Budapest, Hungary.
Maureen P M H Rutten-van MölkenErasmus School of Health Policy and Management, Institute for Medical Technology Assessment, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-8706-3159
Kamrul IslamDepartment of Economics, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.
Zoltán KalóSyreon Research Institute, Budapest, Hungary.
Zoltán VokóSyreon Research Institute, Budapest, Hungary.ORCID 0000-0002-1004-1848
Semmelweis University · HUSyreon Research Institute (Hungary) · HUErasmus University Rotterdam · NLNORCE Research AS · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

OnkoNetwork is a patient navigation program established in the Moritz Kaposi General Hospital to improve the timeliness and completeness of cancer investigations and treatment. The H2020 SELFIE consortium selected OnkoNetwork as a promising integrated care initiative in Hungary and conducted a multicriteria decision analysis based on health, patient experience, and cost outcomes. In this paper, a more detailed analysis of clinical impacts is provided in the largest subgroup, non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. A retrospective cohort study was conducted, enrolling new cancer suspect patients with subsequently confirmed NSCLC in two annual periods, before and after OnkoNetwork implementation (control and intervention cohorts, respectively). To control for selection bias and confounding, baseline balance was improved via propensity score weighting. Overall survival was analyzed in univariate and multivariate weighted Cox regression models and the effect was further characterized in a counterfactual analysis. Our analysis included 123 intervention and 173 control NSCLC patients from early to advanced stage, with significant between-cohort baseline differences. The propensity score-based weighting resulted in good baseline balance. A large survival benefit was observed in the intervention cohort, and intervention was an independent predictor of longer survival in a multivariate analysis when all baseline characteristics were included (HR = 0.63, p = 0.039). When post-baseline variables were included in the model, belonging to the intervention cohort was not an independent predictor of survival, but the survival benefit was explained by slightly better stage distribution and ECOG status at treatment initiation, together with trends for broader use of PET-CT and higher resectability rate. In conclusion, patient navigation is a valuable tool to improve cancer outcomes by facilitating more timely and complete cancer diagnostics. Contradictory evidence in the literature may be explained by common sources of bias, including the wait-time paradox and adjustment to intermediate outcomes.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungLung NeoplasmsPatient NavigationCohort StudiesHumansNeoplasm StagingPositron Emission Tomography Computed TomographyPropensity ScoreRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID36282840
PMCPMC9595513
OpenAlexW4307216074

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.