Increased Cancer Care Cost Doesn't Reduce Mortality Rates: Study
In the United States, national cancer care spending has no association with population-level cancer mortality rates, revealed researchers at Yale University and Vassar College. The findings were published in JAMA Health Forum.
"There is a common perception that the U.S. offers the most advanced cancer care in the world," said lead author Ryan Chow, an M.D./Ph.D. student at Yale.
‘World Multiple Sclerosis (MS) Day is annually marked on May 30th to encourage a global campaign for everyone affected with MS.’
"Our system is touted for developing new treatments and getting them to patients more quickly than other countries. We were curious whether the substantial U.S. investment on cancer care is indeed associated with better cancer outcomes."
Cost of Cancer Care In United States
The researchers found that national cancer care spending showed no relationship to population-level cancer mortality rates. "In other words, countries that spend more on cancer care do not necessarily have better cancer outcomes," said Chow.In fact, six countries - Australia, Finland, Iceland, Japan, Korea, and Switzerland - had both lower cancer mortality and lower spending than the United States.
Smoking is the strongest risk factor for cancer mortality, and smoking rates have historically been lower in the United States, compared to other countries.
When the researchers controlled for international variations in smoking rates, U.S. cancer mortality rates became no different than the average high-income country, with nine countries - Australia, Finland, Iceland, Japan, Korea, Luxembourg, Norway, Spain, and Switzerland - having lower smoking-adjusted cancer mortality than the United States.
"Adjusting for smoking shows the United States in an even less favorable light, because the low smoking rates in the U.S. had been protective against cancer mortality," said Chow.
More research is needed to identify specific policy interventions that could meaningfully reform the United States cancer care system, the authors say. However, they point to lax regulation of cancer drug approvals and drug pricing as two key factors contributing to the high cost of U.S. cancer care.
"The pattern of spending more and getting less is well-documented in the U.S. healthcare system; now we see it in cancer care, too," said co-author Elizabeth Bradley, president of Vassar College and professor of science, technology, and society. "Other countries and systems have much to teach the U.S. if we could be open to change."
Source: Eurekalert