ArticleCancer causes & control : CCC2024
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.
Article in Cancer causes & control : CCC, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Trends in lung cancer survival: superior outcomes in US Veterans compared with the general population.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe U.S. military health system (MHS) provides beneficiaries with universal health care while health care access varies in the U.S. general population by insurance status/type. We divided the patients from the U.S. general population by insurance status/type and compared them to the MHS patients in survival.
methodsThe MHS patients were identified from the Department of Defense's Automated Central Tumor Registry (ACTUR). Patients from the U.S. general population were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program. Multivariable Cox regression analysis was conducted to compare different insurance status/type in SEER to ACTUR in overall survival.
resultsCompared to ACTUR patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), SEER patients showed significant worse survival. The adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) were 1.08 [95% Confidence Interval (CI) = 1.03-1.13], 1.22 (95% CI = 1.16-1.28), 1.40 (95% CI = 1.33-1.47), 1.50 (95% CI = 1.41-1.59), for insured, insured/no specifics, Medicaid, and uninsured patients, respectively. The pattern was consistently observed in subgroup analysis by race, gender, age, or tumor stage. Results were similar for small cell lung cancer (SCLC), although they were only borderline significant in some subgroups.
conclusionThe survival advantage of patients receiving care from a universal health care system over the patients from the general population was not restricted to uninsured or Medicaid as expected, but was present cross all insurance types, including patients with private insurance. Our findings highlight the survival benefits of universal health care system to lung cancer patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37532916What 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.