Advanced imaging and hospice use in end-of-life cancer care
Advanced imaging can inform prognosis and may be a mechanism to de-escalate unnecessary end-of-life care in patients with cancer. Associations between greater use of advanced imaging and less-aggressive end-of-life care in real-world practice has not been examined.
We conducted a retrospective analysis of SEER-Medicare data on patients who died from breast, lung, colorectal, or prostate cancer between 2002 and 2007. Hospital referral region (HRR)-level use of computerized tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography was categorized by tertile of imaging use and correlated with hospice enrollment overall and late hospice enrollment using multivariable logistic regression.
A total of 55,058 patients met study criteria. Hospice use ranged from 50.8% (colorectal cancer) to 62.1% (prostate cancer). In multivariable analyses, hospital referral regions (HRRs) with high rates of CT imaging were associated with lower odds of hospice enrollment (odds ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.70–0.90) and late enrollment among those who did enroll (odds ratio, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.26–1.76). HRRs with the highest rates of CT use were predominantly located in the Midwest and Northeast and associated with higher percentage population of black patients (14.5 vs 5.6%), greater comorbidity (28.4 vs 23.7%), metropolitan residence (93.9 vs 78.5%), and less than high school education (26.4 vs 19.3%).
In this population-based retrospective study, we did not observe evidence that overall and timely hospice are associated with higher rates of imaging near the end of life. An observed association between higher rates of imaging, particularly CT, may be explained in part by HRR-level differences in practice patterns and patient demographic characteristics. Further research is warranted to explore the ability of oncologic imaging to appropriately de-escalate care.
KeywordsBreast neoplasms Colorectal neoplasms Diagnostic imaging Hospice care Lung neoplasms Outcome assessment (health care) Prostatic neoplasms
Damon M. Seils, MA, Duke University, assisted with manuscript preparation. Mr. Seils did not receive compensation for his assistance apart from his employment at the institution where the work was conducted.
Dr. Dinan was supported by grant KM1CA156687 from the National Cancer Institute.
Compliance with ethical standards
The institutional review board of the Duke University Health System approved the study. For this type of study, formal consent is not required. This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.
The content of the manuscript is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Cancer Institute or the National Institutes of Health.
- 2.Bergman J, Saigal CS, Lorenz KA, Hanley J, Miller DC, Gore JL, Litwin MS, Urologic Diseases in America Project (2011) Hospice use and high-intensity care in men dying of prostate cancer. Arch Intern Med 171:204–210Google Scholar
- 19.Teno JM, Gozalo PL, Bynum JP, George EK, Groeneweg M, Norbruis OF, Tjon A Ten W, van Wering HM, Dijkgraaf MGW, Merkus MP, Benninga MA (2013) Change in end-of-life care for Medicare beneficiaries: site of death, place of care, and health care transitions in 2000, 2005, and 2009. JAMA 309:470–477CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 20.Dinan MA, Curtis LH, Hammill BG, Patz EF Jr, Abernethy AP, Shea AM, Schulman KA (2010) Changes in the use and costs of diagnostic imaging among Medicare beneficiaries with cancer, 1999-2006. JAMA 303:1625–1631Google Scholar
- 23.Maziak DE, Darling GE, Inculet RI, Gulenchyn KY, Driedger AA, Ung YC, Miller JD, Gu CS, Cline KJ, Evans WK, Levine MN (2009) Positron emission tomography in staging early lung cancer: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med 151:221–218, W-48Google Scholar
- 24.van Tinteren H, Hoekstra OS, Smit EF, van den Bergh JH, Schreurs AJ, Stallaert RA, van Velthoven PC, Comans EF, Diepenhorst FW, Verboom P, van Mourik JC, Postmus PE, Boers M, Teule GJ (2002) Effectiveness of positron emission tomography in the preoperative assessment of patients with suspected non-small-cell lung cancer: the PLUS multicentre randomised trial. Lancet 359:1388–1393CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 25.Fischer B, Lassen U, Mortensen J, Larsen S, Loft A, Bertelsen A, Ravn J, Clementsen P, Høgholm A, Larsen K, Rasmussen T, Keiding S, Dirksen A, Gerke O, Skov B, Steffensen I, Hansen H, Vilmann P, Jacobsen G, Backer V, Maltbaek N, Pedersen J, Madsen H, Nielsen H, Højgaard L (2009) Preoperative staging of lung cancer with combined PET-CT. N Engl J Med 361:32–39CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 26.Brown ML, Riley GF, Schussler N, Etzioni R (2002) Estimating health care costs related to cancer treatment from SEER-Medicare data. Med Care 40:IV-104-17Google Scholar
- 27.Warren JL, Harlan LC, Fahey A, Virnig BA, Freeman JL, Klabunde CN, Cooper GS, Knopf KB (2002) Utility of the SEER-Medicare data to identify chemotherapy use. Med Care 40:IV-55-61Google Scholar
- 29.Wennberg JE, Fisher ES, Goodman DC, Skinner JS (2008) Tracking the Care of Patients with severe chronic illness: the Dartmouth atlas of health care 2008. The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice. Lebanon, New HampshireGoogle Scholar
- 33.US Bureau of Labor Statistics (2012) Consumer Price Index. http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/surveymost?cu. Accessed 6 February 2012
- 41.MedPAC (2010) Report to congress: aligning incentives in Medicare. Medicare Payment Advisory Commission, WashingtonGoogle Scholar