Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Gesundheitswesen 2023; 85(S 03): S197-S204
DOI: 10.1055/a-2132-6797
Originalarbeit

Assessment of the Potential of Concentrating Cancer Care in Hospitals With Certification Through Survival Analysis

Article in several languages: English | deutsch
Veronika Bierbaum
1   Zentrum für Evidenzbasierte Gesundheitsversorgung, Universitätsklinikum Carl Gustav Carus, Dresden, Germany
,
Jochen Schmitt
1   Zentrum für Evidenzbasierte Gesundheitsversorgung, Universitätsklinikum Carl Gustav Carus, Dresden, Germany
,
Monika Klinkhammer-Schalke
2   Tumorzentrum Regensburg (TZR), Zentrum für Qualitätssicherung und Versorgungsforschung der Universität Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany
,
Olaf Schoffer
1   Zentrum für Evidenzbasierte Gesundheitsversorgung, Universitätsklinikum Carl Gustav Carus, Dresden, Germany
› Author Affiliations Fundings Innovationsfonds — 01VSF17020
› Further Information
Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background Certification programs seek to improve the quality of complex interdisciplinary models of care such as cancer treatment through structuring the process of care in accordance with evidence-based guidelines. In Germany, the German Cancer Society (Deutsche Krebsgesellschaft, DKG) provides a certification programme for cancer care that covers more than one thousand centers. In a recent retrospective cohort study, it has been shown on a large, nationwide data set based on data from a statutory health insurance and selected clinical cancer registries, that there is a benefit in survival for cancer patients who have received initial treatment in hospitals certified by the DKG. Here, we deduce two absolute measures from the relative benefit in survival with the aim to quantify this benefit if all patients had been treated in a certified center.

Methods The WiZen study analysed survival of adult patients insured by the AOK with a cancer diagnosis between 2009 and 2017 in certified hospitals vs. non-certified hospitals. Besides Kaplan-Meier-estimators, Cox regression with shared frailty was used for 11 types of cancer in total, adjusting for patient-specific information such as demographic characteristics and comorbidities as well as hospital characteristics and temporal trend. Based on this regression, we predict adjusted survival curves that directly address the certification effect. From the adjusted survivals, we calculated years of life lost (YLL) and number needed to treat (NNT), along with a difference in deaths 5 years after diagnosis.

Results Based on our estimate for the 537,396 patients that were treated in a non-certified hospital included in the WiZen study, corresponding to 68,7% of the study population, we find a potential of 33,243 YLL per year in Germany based on the size of the German population as of 2017. The potential to avoid death cases 5 years from diagnosis totals 4,729 per year in Germany.

Conclusion While Cox regression is an important tool to evaluate the benefit that arises from variables with a potential impact on survival such as certification, its direct results are not well suited to quantify this benefit for decision makers in health care. The estimated years of life lost and the number of deaths that could have been avoided 5 years from diagnosis avoid mis-interpretation of the hazard ratios commonly used in survival analysis and should help to inform key stakeholders in health care without specialist background knowledge in statistics. Our measures, directly adressing the effect of certification, can furthermore be used as a starting point for health-economic calculations. Steering the care of cancer patients primarily to certified hospitals would have a high potential to improve outcomes.

Key words

cancer - certification - survival analysis

Zusätzliches Material

Supplementary Material



Publication History

Article published online:
26 September 2023

© 2023. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Georg Thieme Verlag
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • Literatur

  • 1 Nationaler Krebsplan (Stand 2017) https://www.bundesgesundheitsministerium.de/fileadmin/Dateien/5_Publikationen/Praevention/Broschueren/Broschuere_Nationaler_Krebsplan.pdf
  • 2 Kowalski C, Graeven U, Kalle C. et al. Shifting cancer care towards multidisciplinarity: The cancer center certification program of the German Cancer Society. BMC Cancer 2017; 17: 1-9
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 3 Griesshammer E, Wesselmann S. European Cancer Centre Certification Programme. Gynäkologe 2019; 52: 380-385
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 4 Schoffer O, Rößler M, Bierbaum V. et al. Ergebnisbericht zum Projekt Wirksamkeit der Versorgung in onkologischen Zentren (WiZen). Berlin: Federal Joint Committee – Innovation Committee 2022; https://innovationsfonds.g-ba.de/downloads/beschluss-dokumente/268/2022-10-17_WiZen_Ergebnisbericht.pdf, in German
  • 5 Schoffer O, Gerken M, Bierbaum V. et al. https://www.wido.de/fileadmin/Dateien/Dokumente/Publikationen_Produkte/GGW/2022/wido_ggw_0422_schoffer_et_al.pdf, in German.
  • 6 Schmitt J, Klinkhammer-Schalke M, Bierbaum V. et al. Individuals with Cancer Benefit from Treatment in Certified Hospitals: Results from the Comparative Cohort Study WiZen. Deutsches Ärzteblatt (under Revision).
  • 7 Trautmann F, Reißfelder C, Pecqueux M. et al. Evidence-based quality standards improve prognosis in colon cancer care. European Journal of Surgical Oncology 2018; 44: 1324-1330
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 8 Völkel V, Draeger T, Gerken M. et al. Langzeitüberleben von Patienten mit Kolon- und Rektumkarzinomen: Ein Vergleich von Darmkrebszentren und nicht zertifizierten Krankenhäusern – [Long-Term Survival of Patients with Colon and Rectum Carcinomas: Is There a Difference Between Cancer Centers and Non-Certified Hospitals?]. Gesundheitswesen. 2018; 81: 801
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 9 Roessler M, Schmitt J, Bobeth C. et al. Kleihues-van Tol K, Reissfelder C, Rau BM, Distler M, Piso P, Günster C, Klinkhammer-Schalke M, Schoffer O, Bierbaum V. Is treatment in certified cancer centers related to better survival in patients with pancreatic cancer? Evidence from a large German cohort study. BMC Cancer 2022; 22: 621
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 10 Butea-Bocu MC, Müller G, Pucheril D. et al. Is there a clinical benefit from prostate cancer center certification? An evaluation of functional and oncologic outcomes from 22,649 radical prostatectomy patients. World Journal of Urology 2021; 39: 5-10
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 11 Birkmeyer NJ, Goodney PP, Stukel TA. et al. Do cancer centers designated by the National Cancer Institute have better surgical outcomes?. Cancer. 2005; 103: 435-441
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 12 Mehta R, Ejaz A, Hyer JM. et al. The impact of Dedicated Cancer Centers on outcomes among medicare beneficiaries undergoing liver and pancreatic cancer surgery. Annals of Surgical Oncology 2019; 26: 4083-4090
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 13 Jacob A, Albert W, Jackisch T. et al. Association of certification, improved quality and better oncological outcomes for rectal cancer in a specialized colorectal unit. Int J Colorectal Dis 2021; 36: 517-533
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 14 Reeves ME. Do Better Operative Reports Equal Better Surgery? A Comparative Evaluation of Compliance With Operative Standards for Cancer Surgery. Am Surg 2020; 86: 1281-1288
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 15 Paulson EC, Mitra N, Sonnad S. et al. National Cancer Institute Designation Predicts Improved Outcomes in Colorectal Cancer Surgery. Annals of Surgery 2008; 248
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 16 Hoffrage U, Koller M. Chancen und Risiken der Risikokommunikation in der Medizin.GMS Ger Med Sci 2015; 13: Doc07
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 17 Sashegyi A, Ferry D. On the Interpretation of the Hazard Ratio and Communication of Survival Benefit. Oncologist. 2017; 22: 484
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 18 Altman DG, Andersen PK. Calculating the number needed to treat for trials where the outcome is time to an event. BMJ. 1999; 319: 1492
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 19 Royston P, Parmar MK. Restricted mean survival time: an alternative to the hazard ratio for the design and analysis of randomized trials with a time-to-event outcome. BMC Med Res Methodol 2013; 13: 152
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 20 Syriopoulou E, Wästerlid T, Lambert PC. et al. Standardised survival probabilities: a useful and informative tool for reporting regression models for survival data. Br J Cancer 2022; 127: 1808-1815
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 21 Uno H, Claggett B, Tian L. et al. Moving beyond the hazard ratio in quantifying the between-group difference in survival analysis. J Clin Oncol 2014; 32: 2380
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 22 https://diabsurv.rki.de/Webs/Diabsurv/DE/diabetes-in-deutschland/4-37_Verlorene_Lebensjahre_YLL.html
  • 23 Wengler A, Rommel A, Plaß D. et al. Years of life lost to death—a comprehensive analysis of mortality in Germany conducted as part of the BURDEN 2020 project Dtsch Arztebl Int 2021; 118: 137
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 24 https://progressreport.cancer.gov/end/life_lost
  • 25 Wienke A. Frailty models in survival analysis. Amsterdam, The. Netherland: CRC Press; 2010
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 26 Balan TA, Putter H. A tutorial on frailty models. Stat. Methods Med Res 2020; 29: 3424-3454
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 27 https://www.bundesgesundheitsministerium.de/themen/krankenversicherung/zahlen-und-fakten-zur-krankenversicherung/kennzahlen-daten-bekanntmachungen.html
  • 28 Chudasama YV, Khunti K, Gillies CL, et al. Estimates of years of life lost depended on the method used: tutorial and comparative investigation, Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2022, Volume 150, Pages 42-50, ISSN 0895-4356, 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2022.06.012
  • 29 Bobeth C, van Tol KK, Rößler M. et al. Methodology and Attribution Success of a Data Linkage of Clinical Registry Data with Health Insurance Data. Gesundheitswesen 2023; 85: S154-S161
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 30 Cheng CY, Datzmann T, Hernandez D. et al. Do certified cancer centers provide more cost-effective care? A health economic analysis of colon cancer care in Germany using administrative data. Int J Cancer 2021; 149: 1744-1754
    Search in Google Scholar