Costs of Diagnostic Assessment for Lung Cancer: A Medicare Claims Analysis

Clinical Lung Cancer

Volumn 18, Issue 1, 2017, Pages e27-e34

  Lokhandwala, Tasneem ^a   Bittoni, Marisa A ^b   Dann, Robert A ^c   D'Souza, Anna O ^a   Johnson, Meridith ^c   Nagy, Rebecca J ^d   Lanman, Richard B ^d   Merritt, Robert E ^b   Carbone, David P ^b  

^a XCENDA   (United States)

^b OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c GE HEALTHCARE   (United Kingdom)

^d Guardant Health   (United States)

Author keywords

5 Medicare; Adverse events; Biopsy; Diagnosis; Retrospective cohort

Indexed keywords

AGED; ARTICLE; BRONCHOSCOPY; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; ENDOBRONCHIAL ULTRASONOGRAPHY; EXCISION; FEMALE; FINE NEEDLE ASPIRATION BIOPSY; FOLLOW UP; HEALTH CARE COST; HUMAN; LUNG BIOPSY; LUNG CANCER; LUNG HEMORRHAGE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEDIASTINOSCOPY; MEDIASTINOTOMY; MEDICARE; NEEDLE BIOPSY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PNEUMOTHORAX; RESPIRATORY FAILURE; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; THORACOCENTESIS; THORACOSCOPY; THORAX RADIOGRAPHY; THORAX SURGERY; CANCER STAGING; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; ECONOMICS; INSURANCE; LUNG NEOPLASMS; PROGNOSIS; TRENDS; UNITED STATES; X-RAY COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY;

AGED; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HEALTH CARE COSTS; HUMANS; INSURANCE CLAIM REVIEW; LUNG NEOPLASMS; MALE; MEDICARE; NEOPLASM STAGING; PROGNOSIS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84995466487     PISSN: 15257304     EISSN: 19380690     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cllc.2016.07.006     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. 1 Howlader N, Noone AM, Krapcho M, et al. SEER cancer statistics review, 1975-2012. National Cancer Institute. Available at: http://seer.cancer.gov/archive/csr/1975_2012/results_merged/topic_topfifteen.pdf, based on November 2014 SEER data submission, posted to the SEER website April 2015. Accessed: August 4, 2016.
2. 2 Mariotto, A.B., Yabroff, K.R., Shao, Y., et al. Projections of the cost of cancer care in the United States: 2010-2020. J Natl Cancer Inst 103 (2011), 117–128.
3. 3 Kutikova, L., Bowman, L., Chang, S., et al. The economic burden of lung cancer and the associated costs of treatment failure in the United States. Lung Cancer 50 (2005), 143–154.
4. 4 Aberle, D.R., Adams, A.M., Berg, C.D., et al. Reduced lung-cancer mortality with low-dose computed tomographic screening. N Engl J Med 365 (2011), 395–409.
5. 5 Moyer, V.A., Screening for lung cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med 160 (2014), 330–338.
6. 6 Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Final national coverage determination on screening for lung cancer with low dose computed tomography (LDCT) (CAG-00439N). Available at: http://www.cms.gov/medicare-coverage-database/details/nca-decision-memo.aspx?NCAId=274. February 5, 2015. Accessed: March 31, 2015.
7. 7 Detterbeck, F.C., Lewis, S.Z., Diekember, R., et al. Executive summary: diagnosis and management of lung cancer, 3rd ed: American College of Chest Physicians evidence-based clinical practice guidelines. Chest 143 (2013), 7S–37S.
8. 8 Gould, M.K., Donington, J., Lynch, W.R., et al. Evaluation of individuals with pulmonary nodules: when is it lung cancer? Diagnosis and management of lung cancer: American College of Chest Physicians evidence-based clinical practice guidelines. Chest 143:5 suppl (2013), e93S–e120S.
9. 9 Balekian, A.A., Silvestri, G.A., Simkovich, S.M., et al. Accuracy of clinicians and models for estimating the probability that a pulmonary nodule is malignant. Ann Am Thorac Soc 10 (2013), 629–635.
10. 10 Gould, M.K., Tang, T., Liu, I.A., et al. Recent trends in the identification of incidental pulmonary nodules. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 192 (2015), 1208–1214.
11. 11 Tanner, N.T., Aggarwal, J., Gould, M.K., et al. Management of pulmonary nodules by community pulmonologists: a multicenter observational study. Chest 148 (2015), 1405–1414.
12. 12 Evans, W.K., Will, B.P., Berthelot, J.M., et al. Estimating the cost of lung cancer diagnosis and treatment in Canada: the POHEM model. Can J Oncol 5 (1995), 408–419.
13. 13 Doria-Rose, V.P., White, M.C., Klabunde, C.N., et al. Use of lung cancer screening tests in the United States: results from the 2010 National Health Interview Survey. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 21 (2012), 1049–1059.
14. 14 Dinan, M.A., Curtis, L.H., Hammill, B.G., et al. Changes in the use and costs of diagnostic imaging among Medicare beneficiaries with cancer, 1999-2006. JAMA 303 (2010), 1625–1631.
15. 15 Ang, S.Y., Tan, R.W., Koh, M.S., et al. Economic analysis of endobronchial ultrasound (EBUS) as a tool in the diagnosis and staging of lung cancer in Singapore. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 26 (2010), 170–174.
16. 16 Bugalho, A., Ferreira, D., Eberhardt, R., et al. Diagnostic value of endobronchial and endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration for accessible lung cancer lesions after non-diagnostic conventional techniques: a prospective study. BMC Cancer, 13, 2013, 130.
17. 17 Dale, C.R., Madtes, D.K., Fan, V.S., et al. Navigational bronchoscopy with biopsy versus computed tomography-guided biopsy for the diagnosis of a solitary pulmonary nodule: a cost–consequences analysis. J Bronchology Interv Pulmonol 19 (2012), 294–303.
18. 18 Eapen, G.A., Shah, A.M., Lei, X., et al. Complications, consequences, and practice patterns of endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration: results of the AQuIRE registry. Chest 143 (2013), 1044–1053.
19. 19 Nosotti, M., Castellani, M., Longari, V., et al. Staging non–small lung cancer with positron emission tomography: diagnostic value, impact on patient management, and cost-effectiveness. Int Surg 93 (2008), 278–283.
20. 20 Navani, N., Lawrence, D.R., Kolvekar, S., et al. Endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration prevents mediastinoscopies in the diagnosis of isolated mediastinal lymphadenopathy: a prospective trial. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 186 (2012), 255–260.
21. 21 Roth, J.A., Sullivan, S.D., Goulart, B.H., et al. Projected clinical, resource use, and fiscal impacts of implementing low-dose computed tomography lung cancer screening in Medicare. J Oncol Pract 11 (2015), 267–272.
22. 22 Silvestri, G.A., Vachani, A., Whitney, D., et al., AEGIS Study Team. A bronchial genomic classifier for the diagnostic evaluation of lung cancer. N Engl J Med 373 (2015), 243–251.
23. 23 National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN), Clinical practice guidelines in oncology. Lung cancer screening, version I. Available at: http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/lung_screening.pdf, 2016 Accessed: January 2016.
24. 24 Nair, V.S., Sundaram, V., Gould, M.K., et al. Utilization of [18F] FDG PET imaging in the National Lung Screening Trial. Chest, 2016, 10.1016/j.chest.2016.05.006 [Epub ahead of print].
25. 25 Wiener, R.S., Schwartz, L.M., Woloshin, S., et al. Population-based risk for complications after transthoracic needle lung biopsy of a pulmonary nodule: an analysis of discharge records. Ann Intern Med 155 (2011), 137–144.
26. 26 Wu, C.C., Maher, M.M., Shepard, J.A., Complications of CT-guided percutaneous needle biopsy of the chest: prevention and management. AJR Am J Roentgenol 196 (2011), W678–W682.
27. 27 Hiraki, T., Mimura, H., Gobara, H., et al. Incidence of and risk factors for pneumothorax and chest tube placement after CT fluoroscopy-guided percutaneous lung biopsy: retrospective analysis of the procedures conducted over a 9-year period. AJR Am J Roentgenol 194 (2010), 809–814.
28. 28 Cox, J.E., Chiles, C., McManus, C.M., et al. Transthoracic needle aspiration biopsy: variables that affect risk of pneumothorax. Radiology 212 (1999), 165–168.
29. 29 Accordino, M.K., Wright, J.D., Buono, D., et al. Trends in use and safety of image-guided transthoracic needle biopsies in patients with cancer. J Oncol Pract 11 (2015), e351–e359.
30. 30 Anzidei, M., Sacconi, B., Fraioli, F., et al. Development of a prediction model and risk score for procedure-related complications in patients undergoing percutaneous computed tomography-guided lung biopsy. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 48 (2015), e1–e6.
31. 31 Atwell, T.D., Smith, R.L., Hesley, G.K., et al. Incidence of bleeding after 15,181 percutaneous biopsies and the role of aspirin. AJR Am J Roentgenol 194 (2010), 784–789.
32. 32 Tomiyama, N., Yasuhara, Y., Nakajima, Y., et al. CT-guided needle biopsy of lung lesions: a survey of severe complication based on 9783 biopsies in Japan. Eur J Radiol 59 (2006), 60–64.
33. 33 Weinberg, B., Watumull, L., Landay, M., et al. Variable presentations of thoracic biopsy related hemothorax. Universal J Clin Med 1 (2013), 22–27.
34. 34 McWilliams, A., Tammemagi, M.C., Mayo, J.R., et al. Probability of cancer in pulmonary nodules detected on first screening CT. N Engl J Med 369 (2013), 910–919.
35. 35 Vachani, A., Pass, H.I., Rom, W.N., et al. Validation of a multiprotein plasma classifier to identify benign lung nodules. J Thorac Oncol 10 (2015), 629–637.
36. 36 Lanman, R.B., Mortimer, S.A., Zill, O.A., et al. Analytical and clinical validation of a digital sequencing panel for quantitative, highly accurate evaluation of cell-free circulating tumor DNA. PLoS One, 10, 2015, e0140712.
37. 37 Cipriano, L.E., Romanus, D., Earle, C.C., et al. Lung cancer treatment costs, including patient responsibility, by disease stage and treatment modality, 1992 to 2003. Value Health 14 (2011), 41–52.
38. 38 Cheung, W.Y., Butler, J.R., Kliewer, E.V., et al. Analysis of wait times and costs during the peri-diagnostic period for non–small cell lung cancer. Lung Cancer 72 (2011), 125–131.
39. 39 Mauchley, D.C., Mitchell, J.D., Current estimate of costs of lung cancer screening in the United States. Thorac Surg Clin 25 (2015), 205–215.
40. 40 Black, W.C., Computed tomography screening for lung cancer in the National Lung Screening Trial: a cost-effectiveness analysis. J Thorac Imaging 30 (2015), 79–87.
41. 41 Villanti, A.C., Jiang, Y., Abrams, D.B., et al. A cost–utility analysis of lung cancer screening and the additional benefits of incorporating smoking cessation interventions. PLoS One, 8, 2013, e71379.
42. 42 Coelho, R.F., Rocco, B., Patel, M.B., et al. Retropubic, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a critical review of outcomes reported by high-volume centers. J Endourol 24 (2010), 2003–2015.
43. 43 Metzger, R., Bollschweiler, E., Vallböhmer, D., et al. High volume centers for esophagectomy: what is the number needed to achieve low postoperative mortality?. Dis Esophagus 17 (2004), 310–314.
44. 44 Bianco, F.J., Riedel, E.R., Begg, C.B., et al. Variations among high volume surgeons in the rate of complications after radical prostatectomy: further evidence that technique matters. J Urol 173 (2005), 2099–2103.