Dataset Information

Trends in use and cost of initial cancer treatment in Ontario: a population-based descriptive study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Cancer incidence and treatment-related costs are rising in Canada. We estimated health care use and costs in the first year after diagnosis for patients with 7 common types of cancer in Ontario to examine temporal trends in patterns of care and costs.

Methods

We selected patients aged 19-44 years who had received a diagnosis of melanoma, breast cancer (female only), testicular cancer or thyroid cancer, in addition to patients aged 45 years and older who had received a diagnosis of breast (female only), prostate, lung or colorectal cancer, between 1997 and 2007. Patients were identified from the Ontario Cancer Registry. Using linked administrative databases, we determined use and costs of chemotherapy, radiotherapy, cancer-related surgery, other admissions to hospital and home care. We adjusted all costs to 2009 Canadian dollars.

Results

We identified 20 821 patients aged 19-44 years and 178 797 patients aged 45 years and older. The greatest increases in costs during the study period were for melanoma, breast cancer, colorectal cancer, lung cancer and prostate cancer (p < 0.05). For prostate and lung cancers, mean costs increased 50% (from $11 490 and $22 037 to $15 170 and $34 473, respectively). Mean costs doubled for breast (from $15 460 and $12 909 to $35 977 and $29 362 for younger and older patients, respectively) and colorectal cancers (from $24 769 to $43 964), and nearly tripled for melanoma (from $3581 to $8934). Costs related to hospital admissions accounted for the largest portion of total costs. The use of chemotherapy, radiotherapy and home care generally increased for all cancers.

Interpretation

The significant increase in mean costs of initial cancer treatment among the patients included in this study was primarily due to more patients receiving adjuvant therapy and home care, and to the increasing expenditures for these services and cancer-related surgeries. Understanding trends in health care use and costs can help policy-makers to take the necessary measures to achieve a more accountable, high-performing health care system.

SUBMITTER: de Oliveira C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3986020 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Trends in use and cost of initial cancer treatment in Ontario: a population-based descriptive study.

de Oliveira Claire C Bremner Karen E KE Pataky Reka R Gunraj Nadia N Haq Mahbubul M Chan Kelvin K Cheung Winson Y WY Hoch Jeffrey S JS Peacock Stuart S Krahn Murray D MD

CMAJ open 20131001 4

<h4>Background</h4>Cancer incidence and treatment-related costs are rising in Canada. We estimated health care use and costs in the first year after diagnosis for patients with 7 common types of cancer in Ontario to examine temporal trends in patterns of care and costs.<h4>Methods</h4>We selected patients aged 19-44 years who had received a diagnosis of melanoma, breast cancer (female only), testicular cancer or thyroid cancer, in addition to patients aged 45 years and older who had received a d ...[more]

PMID: 25077117

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIn 2014, Ontario augmented its publicly funded multiple-marker screening program for prenatal aneuploidy by incorporating cell-free fetal DNA (cffDNA) analysis for high-risk pregnancies. We assessed trends in the use of multiple-marker screening, cffDNA screening and prenatal diagnostic testing before and after implementation of public funding.MethodsWe conducted a descriptive study based on data from the Better Outcomes Registry & Network (BORN) Ontario. The study population included all pregnant women in Ontario with a singleton pregnancy and an expected date of delivery between July 1, 2012, and Mar. 31, 2016, with pregnancy data captured in BORN. Pregnancy losses and terminations before 20 weeks' gestation not captured in BORN were excluded. We generated descriptive statistics to show trends and regional variations in use.ResultsThe study sample included 534 210 singleton pregnancies. After cffDNA screening was funded for specific indications, uptake of multiple-marker screening increased slightly, from 66.5% to 68.1% (p < 0.001). Uptake of cffDNA screening among women with a positive multiple-marker screening result increased substantially, from 3.2% to 48.8% (p < 0.001). In contrast, the rate of prenatal diagnostic testing in this group decreased from 54.8% to 30.8% (p < 0.001). Although women aged 40 years or older are eligible for primary cffDNA screening, only a small decrease in the use of multiple-marker screening was observed in this group. The greatest use of cffDNA screening and greatest decline in prenatal diagnostic testing were seen in women with a level of risk for trisomy 21 of 1:101-1:200 based on multiple-marker screening.InterpretationAfter public funding of cffDNA screening was implemented in Ontario, there was a significant increase in cffDNA screening and a significant decrease in prenatal diagnostic testing among women with a positive multiple-marker screening result. These changing patterns show the significant impact of public policy and funding decisions on women's choices regarding prenatal testing.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Repeat antinuclear antibody (ANA) testing may be unnecessary, potentially harmful and costly. Our aim was to assess the frequency and correlates of repeat ANA testing in Ontario. METHODS:We performed a retrospective descriptive study identifying ANA tests performed over 2008-2015 among adults within the Ontario Laboratories Information System. Our primary outcome was any ANA test performed within 1 year of a previous ANA test. Our secondary outcome was any repeat test after a previous positive result. Repeat testing overall (regardless of who performed the previous test) and repeat testing by the same provider who performed the previous test were determined separately. We assessed correlates of repeat testing (e.g., patient and physician characteristics) and of repeat testing after a positive result using separate logistic regression models by means of generalized estimating equations to account for clustering of repeat testing within patients and within physician practices. RESULTS:In total, 587 357 ANA tests were performed in 437 966 patients over the study period, of which 126 322 (21.5%) gave a positive result and 164 913 (28.1%) were repeat tests. Family physicians ordered 358 422 tests (61.0%), and rheumatologists ordered 65 071 tests (11.1%). Of the repeat tests, 82 332 (49.9%) were ordered within 12 months of the previous test. Among the 73 961 repeat tests ordered by the same practitioner within 12 months, the previous test result was positive for 22 657 (30.6%). A higher proportion of rheumatologists than other physicians ordered repeat tests within 12 months (36.1% v. 11.3%). The most significant correlate of potentially redundant testing was testing among patients with suspected or confirmed connective tissue disease. INTERPRETATION:Over a quarter of ANA tests in Ontario were repeat tests; rheumatologists were most likely to order repeat testing. Our findings may be useful to inform quality-improvement initiatives related to the appropriateness of ANA testing.

Project description:BackgroundNegative health outcomes associated with the use of both prescribed and nonprescribed opioids are increasingly prevalent. We examined long-term trends in opioid-related harms in Ontario across a set of 6 indicators and the relation between harms and neighbourhood income in 2016.MethodsWe examined rates of neonatal abstinence syndrome, opioid poisoning (fatal and nonfatal) and nonpoisoning opioid-related events from 2003 to 2016 in Ontario using population-based health administrative databases. We conducted descriptive analyses for harm indicators across neighbourhood income quintiles in 2016 (2015 for death). We examined social inequalities in opioid-related harms on both relative (prevalence ratio) and absolute (potential rate reduction) scales.ResultsRates of opioid-related harms increased dramatically between 2003 and 2016. In 2016, neonatal abstinence syndrome and opioid poisoning and nonpoisoning events showed a strong social gradient, with harm rates being lowest in higher-income neighbourhoods and highest in lower-income neighbourhoods. Prevalence ratios for the lowest-income neighbourhoods compared to the highest-income neighbourhoods ranged from 2.36 (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.15-2.58) for emergency department visits for opioid poisoning to 3.70 (95% CI 2.62-5.23) for neonatal abstinence syndrome. Potential rate reductions for opioid-related harms ranged from 34.8% (95% CI 29.1-40.1) to 49.9% (95% CI 36.7-60.5), which suggests that at least one-third of all harmful events could be prevented if all neighbourhoods had the same socioeconomic profile as the highest-income neighbourhoods.InterpretationRates of opioid-related harms increased in Ontario between 2003 and 2016, and people in lower-income neighbourhoods experienced substantially higher rates of opioid-related harms than those in higher-income neighbourhoods. This finding can inform planning for opioid-related public health interventions with consideration of health equity.

Project description:Cardiovascular disease is costly, and annual expenditures are projected to increase. Our objective was to examine the variation in patient-level costs and identify drivers of cost in patients with stable coronary artery disease.In this retrospective cohort study using administrative databases in Ontario, Canada, we identified all patients with stable coronary artery disease after index angiography between Oct. 1, 2008, and Sept. 30, 2011. We excluded patients with a myocardial infarction within 90 days before the index, with normal coronaries, or with mild coronary disease. We categorized hospitals into low, medium or high revascularization ratio centres. The primary outcome was cumulative 1-year health care costs. A hierarchical generalized linear model identified patient, physician and hospital characteristics associated with patient costs, with 2 main covariates of interest: treatment allocation (medical v. percutaneous coronary intervention v. coronary artery bypass grafting) and hospital revascularization ratio.A total of 183?630 angiography procedures were performed in Ontario during the study period. The final cohort included 39?126 patients with stable coronary artery disease, of which 15?138 received medical treatment and 23?988 received revascularization. The mean 1-year cost was $24 026 (interquartile range $8235-$30 511). The mean costs for medical management and revascularization were $18 069 and $27 786, respectively. The strongest predictor of costs was revascularization (percutaneous coronary intervention: cost ratio 1.27, 95% CI [confidence interval] 1.24-1.31; coronary artery bypass grafting: cost ratio 2.62, 95% CI 2.53-2.71). Hospital revascularization ratio did not significantly affect costs. There was no significant interaction between treatment and revascularization ratio.Most health care costs were due to acute care hospital admissions, and costs were higher for patients undergoing revascularization than medical therapy. This study suggests that treatment decision has a substantial impact on health care resources.

Dataset Information

Trends in use and cost of initial cancer treatment in Ontario: a population-based descriptive study.

Background

Methods

Results

Interpretation

Publications

Trends in use and cost of initial cancer treatment in Ontario: a population-based descriptive study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets