Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Cancer Survivorship and National Health Reform

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Health Services for Cancer Survivors

  • 655 Accesses

Abstract

There is no more compelling case for national health reform than cancer treatment and survivorship. Half of all men and more than one-third of all women will be diagnosed with cancer during their lifetimes [1]. There are more than 13 million cancer survivors in the USA with approximately 1.4 million new cases of cancer diagnosed annually [2]. As a result of earlier detection, improved therapies, and increased attention to treatment sequelae, more patients are in need of cancer treatment and follow-up care than ever before. Five-year survival rates for all cancers diagnosed between 1999 and 2005 reached 68%, up from 50% during the 1975–1977 time period [1]. In addition to an ever-increasing patient pool, cancer survivors are living longer and in need of more comprehensive follow-up care over a longer period of time.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. United States. American Cancer Society. American Cancer Society facts and figures 2010. Atlanta: American Cancer Society; 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  2. National Cancer Institute. Surveillance epidemiology and end results: cancer fact stats: all sites [document on the Internet]. Maryland: The Institute; 2010 [cited 2010 August 21]. Available from: http://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/all.html#incidence-mortality.

  3. United States Congress. Patient protection and affordable care act. Washington, DC: USC publication 111–148; 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  4. United States Congress. Health care and education reconciliation act. Washington, DC: USC publication 111–152; 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  5. United States National Cancer Institute. Presidents Cancer Panel. Bethesda: NCI; 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Schwartz KL, Crossley-May H, Vigneau FD, Brown K, Bauerjee M. Socio economic status and stage at diagnosis for five common malignancies. Cancer Causes Control. 2003;14:761–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. United States. Institute of Medicine. Unequal treatment: confronting racial and ethnic disparities in healthcare. Washington, DC: IOM; 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Thorpe KE, Howard D. Health insurance and spending among cancer patients. Health Aff. 2003;W3:189–98.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Banthin JS, Bernard DM. Changes in financial burdens for healthcare: national estimates or the populations younger than 65 years. JAMA. 2006;296(22):2712–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Schoen C, Collins SR, Kriss JL, Doty M. How many are uninsured? Trends among U.S. adults 2003–2007. Health Aff (Milwood). 2008;4:298–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Elkin EB, Bach PB. Cancer’s next frontier: addressing high and increasing cost. JAMA. 2010;303(11):1086–7.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Weaver KE, Rowland JH, Bellizzi KM, Asia NM. Foregoing medical care because of cost: assessing disparities in health care access among cancer survivors living in the United States. Cancer. 2010;116(14):3493–504.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Rabb SS, Gryzbicki DM. Quality in cancer diagnosis. CA Cancer J Clin. 2010;60(3):139–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. United States. Institute of Medicine. Insuring quality cancer care. Washington, DC: IOM; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Foley K et al. Survival disadvantage among Medicaid-insured breast patients treated with breast conserving surgery with radiation therapy. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2007;101(2):207–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Snyderman D, Wynn D. Depression in cancer patients. Prim Care. 2009;36(4):703–19.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Tornoux C, Katsahian S, Chevret S, Levy V. Factors influencing inclusion of patients with malignancies in clinical trials. Cancer. 2006;106(2):258–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Kolata G. Grant system leads cancer researchers to play it safe. The New York Times. 2009 June 27.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Gralow J et al. Clinical cancer advances 2007: major advances in cancer treatment, prevention, and screening. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(2):403–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. United States. Institute of Medicine. From cancer patient to cancer survivor: lost in transition. Washington, DC: IOM; 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Association of American Medical Colleges, Center for Workforce Studies. Forecasting the supply of and demand for oncologists: a report to the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO). Washington, DC: AAMC; 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Gostin LO. Public health law: power, duty, restraint. California: University of California Press; 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  23. United States. U.S. Constitution. Article 1 §8. Washington, DC: U.S. Constitution; 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Rosenbaum S, Gruber J. Buying health care, the individual mandate, and the constitution. N Eng J Med. 2010;363:401–3.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. United States Congress. Health insurance portability and accountability act. Washington, DC: USC publication 104-191; 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  26. United States Congress. United vs. Lopez. Washington, DC: USC; 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  27. United States. National Cancer Institute. Presidents Cancer Panel. Bethesda: NCI; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Rosenbaum S. A customary and necessary program: Medicaid and health reform. N Eng J Med. 2010;362:1950–5.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Horner et al. SEER cancer statistics review, 1975–2006, National Cancer Institute [document on the internet]. NCI: 2006 [cited 2010 August 23]. Available from: http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975 2006/.

  30. United States Congress. HITECH Act. Washington, DC: USC publication 111-5; 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  31. National Association of Community Health Centers. Access denied. Washington, DC: NACHC; 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  32. National Association of Community Health Centers. Expanding Health Centers under Health Care Reform. Washington, DC: NACHC; 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  33. World Cancer Research Fund/American Institute for Cancer Research. Food, nutrition, physical activity and the prevention of cancer: a global perspective. Washington, DC: WCRF/AICR; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Vargas RB, Ryan GW, Jackson CA, Rodriguez R, Freeman HP. Characteristics of the original patient navigation programs to reduce disparities in the diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer. Cancer [serial on the Internet]. 2008 [cited 2010 Aug 23]. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cncr.23547.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Battaglia CA, Roloff K, Posner MA, Freund KM. Improving follow-up to abnormal breast cancer screening in an urban populations: a patient navigation intervention. Cancer. 2007;109(supp):359–676.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Patierno SR, LaVerda N, Alexander L, Levine P, Young HA. Longitudinal network patient navigation: development of an integrative model to reduce breast cancer disparities in Washington, DC. Oncol Issues. 2010;25(2):28–36.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Freeman HP. Patient navigation: a community center approach to reducing mortality. J Can Educ. 2006;21(1 supp):S11–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Health Policy, The George Washington University School of Public Health and Health Services, Washington, USA

    Sara Rosenbaum

Authors
  1. Sara Rosenbaum
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jennifer Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mandi Pratt Chapman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Steven R. Patierno
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sara Rosenbaum .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Uniformed Services University of the Hea, Departments of Medical/Clinical Psycholo, Bethesda, 20817, Maryland, USA

    Michael Feuerstein

  2. Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California, Los Angeles, Charles Young Dr. S. 650, Los Angeles, 90095-6900, California, USA

    Patricia A. Ganz

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Rosenbaum, S., Lee, J., Chapman, M.P., Patierno, S.R. (2011). Cancer Survivorship and National Health Reform. In: Feuerstein, M., Ganz, P. (eds) Health Services for Cancer Survivors. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1348-7_17

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1348-7_17

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4419-1347-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4419-1348-7

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation