Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparative Effectiveness Issues in Lung Cancer

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Comparative Effectiveness in Surgical Oncology

Part of the book series: Cancer Treatment and Research ((CTAR,volume 164))

Abstract

Lung cancer accounts for more cancer deaths than breast, prostate, colorectal and pancreatic cancer combined. With an aging population, greater intensity of cancer care, and the need for care of the growing number of cancer survivors, comparative effectiveness research opportunities will continue to emerge for this disease. In this chapter, we focus on CER opportunities in lung cancer surgery from the vantage point of those factors directly influenced by the surgeon, patient and the healthcare system.

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 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
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. Institute of Medicine (2009) Initial national priorities for comparative effectiveness research. National Academies Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  2. Rich EC (2009) The policy debate over public investment in comparative effectiveness research. J Gen Intern Med 24(6):752–757

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Yabroff KR, Lund J, Kepka D et al (2011) Economic burden of cancer in the United States: estimates, projections, and future research. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 20:2006–2014

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Brambilla E, Travis WD (2014) Lung cancer. In: Stewart BW, Wild CP (eds) World cancer report. World Health Organization, Lyon

    Google Scholar 

  5. Siegel R, Ma J, Jemal A (2014) Cancer statistics 2014. Cancer J Clin 64(1):9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. American Cancer Society. Cancer facts and figures 2014. Accessed http://www.cancer.org/research/cancerfactsstatistics/cancerfactsfigures2014/index

  7. Murray N (1997) Treatment of small cell lung cancer: the state of the art. Lung Cancer S1:S75–S89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Albain KS, Crowley JJ, Livingston RB (1991) Long-term survival and toxicity in small cell lung cancer. Expanded Southwest oncology group experience. Chest 99(6):1425

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Lassen U, Osterling K, Hansen M, Domberneowsky P, Bergman B, Hansen HH (1995) Long-term survival in small-cell lung cancer: posttreatment characteristics in patients surviving 5 to 18+ years—an analysis of 1,714 consecutive patients. J Clin Oncol 13(5):1215

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Tai P, Tonita J, Yu E, Skarsgard D (2003) Twenty-year follow-up study of long-term survival of limited-stage small-cell lung cancer and overview of prognostic and treatment factors. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 56(3):626

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Dettterbeck FC, Boffa DJ, Tanoue LT (2009) The new lung cancer staging system. Chest 136(1):260–271

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. National comprehensive cancer network guidelines—non-small cell lung cancer http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/f_guidelines.asp Accessed on 19 March 2014

  13. Ginsberg RJ, Rubinstein LV (1995) Randomized trial of lobectomy versus limited resection for T1N0 non-small cell lung cancer. Lung cancer study group. Ann Thorac Surg 60(3):615

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Lederle F (1996) Lobectomy versus limited resection in T1 N0 lung cancer. Ann Thorac Surg 62(4):1249–1250

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Detterbeck FC (2013) Lobectomy versus limited resection in T1N0 lung Cancer. Ann Thorac Surg 96(2):742–744

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Jones DR, Detterbeck FC (2001) Surgery for stage I non-small cell lung cancer. In: Detterbeck FC, Rivera MP, Socinski MA, Rosenman JG (eds) Diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer: an evidence based guide. WB Saunders Company, Philadelphia, pp 177–190

    Google Scholar 

  17. Detterbeck FC, Egan TM (2001) Surgery for stage II non-small cell lung cancer. In: Detterbeck FC, Rivera MP, Socinski MA, Rosenman JG (eds) Diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer: an evidence based guide. WB Saunders Company, Philadelphia, pp 191–197

    Google Scholar 

  18. Scott WJ, Howington J, Feigenberg S, Movsas B, Pisters K (2007) Treatment of non-small cell lung cancer stage I and stage II: ACCP evidence based clinical practice guidelines (2nd Edition). Chest 132:234S–242S

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Nesbitt JC, Putman JB, Walsh GL, Roth JA, Mountain CF (1995) Survival in early stage non-small cell lung cancer. Ann Thorac Surg 60:466–472

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Thomas P, Doddoli C, Thirion X et al (2002) Stage I non-small cell lung cancer: a pragmatic approach to prognosis after complete resection. Ann Thorac Surg 73:1065–1070

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Reif MS, Socinski MA, Rivera MP (2000) Evidence-based medicine in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer. Clin Chest Med 21(1):107–120

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Ost D, Goldberg J, Ronitzky L, Rom WN (2008) Survival after surgery in stage IA and IB non-small cell lung cancer. Am J Resp Crit Care Med 177:516–523

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Flehinger BJ, Kimmel M, Melamed MR (1992) The effect of surgical treatment on survival from early lung cancer: implications for screening. Chest 101:1013–1018

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Sobue T, Suzuki T, Matsuda M et al (1992) Survival for clinical stage I lung cancer not surgically treated: comparison between screen-detected and symptom-detected cases. Cancer 69:685–692

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Rowell NP, Williams C (2001) Radical radiotherapy for stage I/II non-small cell lung cancer in patients not sufficiently fit for or declining surgery (medically inoperable). Cochrane Database Syst Rev 56(1):628–638

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Robinson LA, Ruckdeschel JC, Wanger H Jr, Stevens W (2007) Treatment of non-small cell lung cancer stage IIIA: ACCP evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (2nd edition). Chest 123(3 Suppl):243S–265S

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Ferguson MK, Lehman AG (2003) Sleeve lobectomy or pneumonectomy: optimal strategy using decision analytic techniques. Ann Thorac Surg 76(6):1782

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. El-Sherif A, Gooding WE, Santos R et al (2006) Outcomes of sublobar resection versus lobectomy for stage I non-small cell lung cancer: a 13-year analysis. Ann Thorac Surg 82(2):408

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Kodama K, Doi O, Higashiyama M, Yokouchi H (1997) Intentional limited resection for selected patients with T1N0M0 non-small cell lung cancer: a single-institution study. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 114(3):347

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Lee W, Daly BD, DiPetrillo TA et al (2003) Limited resection for non-small cell lung cancer: observed local control with implantation of I-125 brachytherapy seeds. Ann Thorac Surg 75(1):237

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. CALGB NCT00499330—comparison of different types of surgery in treating patients with stage IA non-small cell lung cancer. Clinicaltrials.gov http://www.clinicaltrials.gov.offcampus.lib.washington.edu/ct2/show/NCT00499330?term=nct00499330&rank=1 Accessed 15 May 2014

  32. Asamura H. Role of limited sublobar resection for early-stage lung cancer: steady progress. J Clin Oncol 2014 Jun 30 (Epub ahead of print)

    Google Scholar 

  33. De Ruysscher D, Nakagawa K, Asamura H (2014) Surgical and nonsurgical approaches to small-size nonsmall cell lung cancer. Eur Respir J 44(2):483–494

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Demmy TL, James TA, Swanson SJ et al (2005) Trouble-shooting video-assisted thoracic surgery lobectomy. Ann Thorac Surg 79(5):1744–1752 discussion 1753

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Berry MF, D’Amico TA (2007) Complications of thoracoscopic pulmonary resection. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 19(4):350–354

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Farjah F, Wood DE, Mulligan MS et al (2009) Safety and efficacy of video-assisted versus conventional lung resection for lung cancer. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 137(6):1415–1421

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Cattaneo SM, Park BJ, Wilton AS et al (2008) Use of video-assisted thoracic surgery for lobectomy in the elderly results in fewer complications. Ann Thorac Surg 85:231–236

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Kirby TJ, Rice TW (1993) Thoracoscopic lobectomy. Ann Thorac Surg 56:784–786

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Whitson BA, Andrade RS, Boettcher A et al (2007) Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery is more favorable than thoracotomy that resection of clinical stage I non-small cell lung cancer. Ann Thorac Surg 83:1965–1970

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Paul S, Altorki NK, Sheng S et al (2010) Thoracoscopic lobectomy is associated with lower morbidity than open lobectomy: a propensity-matched analysis from the STS database. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 139:366–378

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Swanson SJ, Meyers BF, Gunnarsson CL et al (2012) Video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy is less costly and morbid than open lobectomy: a retrospective multiinstitutional database analysis. Ann Thorac Surg 93:372–379

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Handy JR Jr, Asaph JW, Douville EC et al (2010) Does video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy for lung cancer provide improved functional outcomes compared with open lobectomy? Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 37:451–455

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Scott WJ, Allen MS, Darling G et al (2010) Video-assisted thoracic surgery versus open lobectomy for lung cancer: a secondary analysis of data from the American College of Surgeons Oncology Group Z0030 randomized clinical trial. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 139:976–981

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Park HS, Deterbeck FC, Boffa DJ, Kim AW (2012) Impact of hospital volume of thoracoscopic lobectomy on primary lung cancer outcomes. Ann Thorac Surg 93:372–379

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Gopaldas RR, Bakeen FG, Dao TK et al (2010) Video-assisted thoracoscopic versus open thoracotomy lobectomy in a cohort of 13,619 patients. Ann Thorac Surg 89:1563–1570

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Farjah F, Backhus LM, Varghese TK et al (2014) Ninety-day costs of video-assisted thoracic surgery versus open lobectomy for lung cancer. Ann Thorac Surg 98:191–196

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Farjah F, Wood DE, Varghese TK et al (2009) Health care use among surgically treated medicare beneficiaries with lung cancer. Ann Thorac Surg 88:1749–1756

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Freeman RK, Dilts JR, Ascioti AJ et al (2013) A comparison of length of stay, readmission rate and facility reimbursement after lobectomy of the lung. Ann Thorac Surg 96:1740–1745

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Boffa DJ, Asslen MS, Grab JD et al (2008) Data from the society of thoracic surgeons general thoracic surgery database: the surgical management of primary lung tumors. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 135:247–254

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. McKenna RJ Jr, Houck W, Fuller CB (2006) Video-assisted thoracic surgery lobectomy: experience with 1,100 cases. Ann Thorac Surg 9:421–425

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Onaitis MW, Petersen RP, Balderson SS et al (2006) Thoracoscopic lobectomy is a safe and versatile procedure: experience with 500 consecutive patients. Ann Surg 9:420–425

    Google Scholar 

  52. Shigemura N, Akashi A, Nakagiri T et al (2004) Complete versus assisted thoracosocpic approach: a prospective randomized trial comparing. Surg Endosc Other Intervent Tech 18:1492–1497

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Whilston BA, Groth SS, Dival SJ et al (2008) Surgery for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review of the video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery versus thoracotomy approaches to lobectomy. Ann Thorac Surg 9:2008–2018

    Google Scholar 

  54. Yan TD, Black D, Bannon PG, McCaughan BC (2009) Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized and nonrandomized trials on safety and efficacy of video-assisted thoracic surgery lobectomy for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 9:2553–2562

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Swanson SJ, Herndon JE 2nd, D’Amico TA et al (2007) Video-assisted thoracic surgery lobectomy: report of CALGB 39802- a prospective, multi-institution feasibility study. J Clin Oncol 9:4993–4997

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Park BJ, Melfi F, Mussi A et al (2012) Robotic lobectomy for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): long-term oncologic results. J Thoracic Cardiovasc Surg 143:383–389

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Louie BE, Farivar AS, Aye RW, Vallieres E (2012) Early experience with robotic lung resection results in similar operative outcomes and morbidity when compared with matched video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery cases. Ann Thorac Surg 93:1598–1604

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Cerfolio RJ, Bryant AS, Skylizard L, Minnich DJ (2011) Initial consecutive experience of completely portal robotic pulmonary resection with 4 arms. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 142:740–746

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Flored RM, Alam N (2008) Video-assisted thoracic surgery lobectomy (VATS), open thoracotomy, and the robot for lung cancer. Ann Thoracic Surg 85:S710–S715

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Halm EA, Lee C, Chassin MR (2002) Is volume related to outcome in health care? A systematic review and methodologic critique of the literature. Ann Intern Med 137:511–520

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Dudley RA, Johansen KL, Brand R et al (2000) Selective referral to high-volume hospitals: estimating potentially avoidable deaths. JAMA 283:1159–1166

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Birkmeyer JD, Siewers AE, Finlayson EV et al (2002) Hospital volume and surgical mortality in the United States. N Engl J Med 346:1128–1137

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Schipper PH, Diggs BS, Ungerleifer RM, Welke KF (2009) The influence of surgeon specialty on outcomes in general thoracic surgery: a national sample 1996 to 2005. Ann Thorac Surg 88:1566–1573

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Goodney PP, Lucas FL, Stukel TA et al (2005) Surgeon specialty and operative mortality with lung resection. Ann Surg 241:179–184

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Luchtenborg M, Riaz SP, Coupland VH, Lim E, Jakobsen E, Kransik M, Page R, Lind MJ, Peake MD, Moller H (2013) High procedure volume is strongly associated with improved survival after lung cancer surgery. J Clin Oncol 31(25):3141–3146

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Freeman RK, Dilts JR, Ascioti AJ et al (2013) A comparision of quality and cost indicators by surgical specialty for lobectomy of the lung. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 145(1):68–73 discussion 73–74

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Farjah F, Flum DR, Varghese TK Jr et al (2009) Surgeon specialty and long-term survival after pulmonary resection for lung cancer. Ann Thorac Surg 87:995–1006

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Lee PV, Berenson RA, Tooker J (2010) Payment reform—the need to harmonize approaches in Medicare and the private sector. N Engl J Med 362:3–5

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Ein D, Jefferson A (2014) The patient protection and affordable care act: causes and effects. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 112:6–8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Devettere RJ (2000) Making health care decisions. In: Devettere RJ (ed) Practical decision making in health care ethics. Georgetown University Press, Washington DC, p 94

    Google Scholar 

  71. Itani KM (2009) Fifteen years of the national surgical quality improvement program in review. Am J Surg 198(5 Suppl):S9–S18

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Magee MJ, Wright CD, McDonald D et al (2013) External validation of the society of thoracic surgeons general thoracic surgery database. Ann Thorac Surg 96(5):1734–1739

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. National Quality Forum endorses national consensus standards promoting accountability and public reporting—National Quality Forum Endorsed Measure #0456 http://www.qualityforum.org Accessed 15 May, 2014

  74. LaPar DJ, Bhamidipati CM, Lau CL et al (2012) The society of thoracic surgeons general thoracic surgery database: establishing generalizability to national lung cancer resection outcomes. Ann Thorac Surg 94:216–221

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Topol EJ, Califf RM (1994) Scorecard cardiovascular medicine. its impact and future directions. Ann Intern Med 120:65–70

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Hannan EL, Kilburn H Jr, O’Donnell JF et al (1990) Adult open heart surgery in New York state. An analysis of risk factors and hospital mortality rate. JAMA 264:2768–2774

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Epstein A (1995) Performance reports on quality—prototypes, problems and prospects. N Engl J Med 333:57–61

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Schneider EC, Epstein AM (1998) Use of public performance reports: a survey of patients undergoing cardiac surgery. JAMA 279:1638–1642

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Prager RL, Armenti FR, Bassett JS et al (2009) Cardiac surgeons and the quality movement: the Michigan experience. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 21:20–27

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Flum DR, Fisher N, Thompson J et al (2005) Washington state’s approach to variability in surgical processes/outcomes: surgical clinical outcomes assessment program (SCOAP). Surgery 138:821–828

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Aldea GS, Mokadam NA, Melford R et al (2009) Changing volumes, risk profiles, and outcomes of coronary artery bypass grafting and percutaneous coronary interventions. Ann Thorac Surg 87:1828–1838

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Clark RE, The STS (1995) Cardiac surgery national database: an update. Ann Thorac Surg 59:1376–1381

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Wright CD, Gaissert HA, Grab JD et al (2008) Predictors of prolonged length of stay after lobectomy for lung cancer: a society of thoracic surgeons general thoracic database risk-adjustment model. Ann Thorac Surg 85:1857–1865

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Farjah F, Varghese TK, Costas K et al (2014) Lung resection outcomes and costs in Washington state: a case for regional quality improvement. Ann Thorac Surg 98(1):175–182

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Cassel CK, Guest JA (2012) Choosing wisely: helping physicians and patients make smart decisions about their care. JAMA 307:1801–1802

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Wood DE, Mitchell JD, Schmitz DS et al (2013) Choosing wisely: cardiothoracic surgeons partnering with patients to make good health care decisions. Ann Thorac Surg 95(3):1130–1135

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. The national lung screening trial research team (2011) Reduced lung-cancer mortality with low-dose computed tomographic screening. N Engl J Med 365:395–409

    Article  Google Scholar 

  88. Qiu R, Eberth JM, Porter N et al (2013) Annual number of lung cancer deaths potentially avertable by screening in the United States. Cancer 119(7):1381–1385

    Article  Google Scholar 

  89. Eberth JM, Qiu R, Adams SA et al. Lung cancer screening using low-dose CT: the current national landscape. Lung Cancer 2014 Jul 21 (Epub ahead of print)

    Google Scholar 

  90. Wood DE, Kazerooni EA Medicare’s puzzling refusal to cover lung-cancer screening. Wall Street J 2014 June 17. http://online.wsj.com/articles/douglas-wood-andella-kazerooni-medicares-puzzling-refusal-to-cover-lung-cancer-screening-1403046693. Accessed 20 June 2014

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Harborview Medical Center, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA

    Thomas K. Varghese

Authors
  1. Thomas K. Varghese
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Thomas K. Varghese .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois, USA

    Karl Y. Bilimoria

  2. Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois, USA

    Christina A. Minami

  3. Department of Surgery, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois, USA

    David M. Mahvi

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Varghese, T.K. (2015). Comparative Effectiveness Issues in Lung Cancer. In: Bilimoria, K., Minami, C., Mahvi, D. (eds) Comparative Effectiveness in Surgical Oncology. Cancer Treatment and Research, vol 164. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12553-4_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12553-4_7

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-12552-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-12553-4

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation