Comparison of treatment of early-stage breast cancer among Nurses’ Health Study participants and other Medicare beneficiaries
- 75 Downloads
Increasingly epidemiological cohorts are being linked to claims data to provide rich data for healthcare research. These cohorts tend to be different than the general United States (US) population. We will analyze healthcare utilization of Nurses’ Health Study (NHS) participants to determine if studies of newly diagnosed incident early-stage breast cancer can be generalized to the broader US Medicare population.
Analytic cohorts of fee-for-service NHS–Medicare-linked participants and a 1:13 propensity-matched SEER–Medicare cohort (SEER) with incident breast cancer in the years 2007–2011 were considered. Screening leading to, treatment-related, and general utilization in the year following early-stage breast cancer diagnosis were determined using Medicare claims data.
After propensity matching, NHS and SEER were statistically balanced on all demographics. NHS and SEER had statistically similar rates of treatments including chemotherapy, breast-conserving surgery, mastectomy, and overall radiation use. Rates of general utilization include those related to hospitalizations, total visits, and emergency department visits were also balanced between the two groups. Total spending in the year following diagnosis were statistically equivalent for NHS and SEER ($36,180 vs. $35,399, p = 0.70).
NHS and the general female population had comparable treatment and utilization patterns following diagnosis of early-stage incident breast cancers with the exception of type of radiation therapy received. This study provides support for the larger value of population-based cohorts in research on healthcare costs and utilization in breast cancer.
KeywordsBreast cancer Epidemiology Nurses’ Health Study Generalizability study
We would like to thank the participants and staff of the Nurses’ Health Study for their valuable contributions as well as the following state cancer registries for their help: AL, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, FL, GA, ID, IL, IN, IA, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, NE, NH, NJ, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, TN, TX, VA, WA, WY. The authors assume full responsibility for analyses and interpretation of these data.
All authors contributed to the study conception and design; AMA and QW analyzed the data. AMA, ANAT, and FG prepared the manuscript. All authors provided critical revisions to the manuscript.
Supported by the National Cancer Institute (Grant Number UM1CA186107).
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
All the authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Research involving human and animal participants
This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
This study utilizes retrospective, de-identified information. Informed consent was not necessary.
- 1.National Breast Cancer Foundation, Inc. (2016) Breast Cancer Facts. https://www.nationalbreastcancer.org/breast-cancer-facts. Accessed 22 Aug 2018
- 4.Warren JL, Klabunde CN, Schrag D, Bach PB, Riley GF (2002) Overview of the SEER–Medicare data: content, research applications, and generalizability to the United States elderly population. Med Care 40(8 Suppl):IV-3-18Google Scholar
- 5.National Cancer Institute (2018) Cancer Diagnosis. https://training.seer.cancer.gov/disease/diagnosis/. Accessed 22 Aug 2018
- 9.Mayo Clinic (2018) Patient Care and Health Info: Brachytherapy. https://www.mayoclinic.org/tests-procedures/brachytherapy/about/pac-20385159. Accessed 22 Aug 2018
- 16.Lynge E, Ponti A, James T, Májek O, von Euler-Chelpin M, Anttila A, Fitzpatrick P, Frigerio A, Kawai M, Scharpantgen A et al (2014) Variation in detection of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) during screening mammography: a survey within the International Cancer Screening Network (ICSN). Eur J Cancer (Oxf Engl 1990). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2013.1008.1013 Google Scholar
- 21.Day FR, Ruth KS, Thompson DJ, Lunetta KL, Pervjakova N, Chasman DI, Stolk L, Finucane HK, Sulem P, Bulik-Sullivan B et al (2015) Large-scale genomic analyses link reproductive aging to hypothalamic signaling, breast cancer susceptibility and BRCA1-mediated DNA repair. Nat Genet 47(11):1294–1303CrossRefGoogle Scholar