ArticlePloS one2026
Association of medicaid expansion with lung cancer-specific and overall mortality: A difference-in-differences analysis.
Article in PloS one, 2026. 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.
- Medicaid Expansion and Overall Mortality Among Individuals With Renal Cell Carcinoma.The Journal of surgical research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionMedicaid expansion under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) sought to improve access to timely cancer diagnosis and treatment among low‑income populations. Lung cancer remains the leading cause of cancer-related mortality in the United States, and disparities in outcomes may be sensitive to shifts in insurance coverage. This study evaluates the association between Medicaid expansion and both cancer-specific mortality and overall mortality among adults with lung cancer in California (expansion state) compared with Texas (non-expansion state).
methodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study using SEER registry data (2007-2021) including adults aged 18-64 years diagnosed with lung cancer. The study periods were categorized as pre-ACA (2007-2013), washout year (2014), and post-ACA (2015-2021). Difference‑in‑differences (DiD) Cox proportional hazards models estimated the change in the hazard of cancer‑specific and overall mortality in California relative to Texas after Medicaid expansion, adjusting for age, sex, race/ethnicity, stage, county‑level income, and treatment. Subgroup analyses evaluated heterogeneity by race/ethnicity, disease stage, income, and treatment modality.
resultsAmong 119,937 individuals with lung cancer, 52.1% resided in California and 47.8% in Texas; sample distribution remained similar across pre‑ and post‑ACA periods. Medicaid expansion was associated with an 11.9% reduction in the hazard of cancer‑specific mortality (DiD HR 0.88; 95% CI, 0.85-0.91) and an 11.4% reduction in the hazard of overall mortality (DiD HR 0.89; 95% CI, 0.86-0.91). Mortality reductions varied across subgroups. Significant improvements were observed among White, Hispanic, and Asian/Pacific Islander patients, while no statistically significant change occurred among Black patients. Greater reductions in the hazard of death were seen among patients with distant-stage disease and those residing in higher‑income areas (≥$65,000). Treatment-stratified models showed decreases in mortality among individuals receiving surgery (10.2% reduction) and chemotherapy (8.4% reduction).
conclusionMedicaid expansion was associated with meaningful reductions in lung cancer mortality in California relative to Texas, with benefits concentrated among several racial and clinical subgroups. Persistent null effects among Black patients highlight inequities that insurance expansion alone does not eliminate.
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.