A look ahead to promote the early detection of lung cancer: technical and cost implications of a confirmed diagnosis before surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the costs and length of hospital stay among patients with a confirmed diagnosis of lung cancer (LC) prior to surgery versus those without confirmation. METHODS: This retrospective, single-center study was conducted in patients who underwent a surgical procedure for LC, with or without a pathologically confirmed LC diagnosis prior to surgery, between March 2017 and December 2019. The main outcomes were costs and length of hospital stay (LOS). RESULTS: Among the 269 patients who underwent surgery for lung cancer between March 2017 and December 2019, 203 (75.5%) patients underwent surgery due to a histopathological diagnosis, and 66 (24.5%) because of a Multidisciplinary Cancer Committee indication. The unadjusted mean cost was significantly lower in Group II (patients with surgery based on Multidisciplinary Cancer Committee criteria) (Є2,581.80 ± Є1,002.50) than in Group I (patients with histopathological diagnosis) (Є4,244.60 ± Є2,008.80), P < 0.0001. Once adjusted for covariables, there was a mean difference of -Є1,437.20 in the costs of Group II, P < 0.0001. Unadjusted mean hospital stay was significantly longer in Group I (5.6 days) than in Group II (3.5 days). CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that indicating surgical resection of lung cancer based on Multidisciplinary Cancer Committee criteria, rather than performing CT-guided percutaneous lung biopsy, may result in a significant decrease in cost and length of hospital stay.

Cost-effectiveness of a technology-supported multimodal prehabilitation program in moderate-to-high risk patients undergoing lung cancer resection: randomized controlled trial protocol.

BACKGROUND: Multimodal prehabilitation is a preoperative intervention with the objective to enhance cancer patients' functional status which has been showed to reduce both postoperative morbidity and hospital length of stay in digestive oncologic surgery. However, in lung cancer surgery patients further studies with higher methodological quality are needed to clarify the benefits of prehabilitation. The main aim of the current protocol is to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a multimodal prehabilitation program supported by information and communication technologies in moderate-to-high risk lung cancer patients undergoing thoracic surgery. METHODS: A Quadruple Aim approach will be adopted, assessing the prehabilitation program at the following levels: i) Patients' and professionals' experience outcomes (by means of standardized questionnaires, focus groups and structured interviews); ii) Population health-based outcomes (e.g. hospital length of stay, number and severity of postoperative complications, peak oxygen uptake and levels of systemic inflammation); and, iii) Healthcare costs. DISCUSSION: This study protocol should contribute not only to increase the scientific basis on prehabilitation but also to detect the main factors modulating service adoption. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04052100 (August 9, 2019).

Outcomes and cost of lung cancer patients treated surgically or medically in Catalunya: cost-benefit implications for lung cancer screening programs.

Lung cancer screening programs with computed tomography of the chest reduce mortality by more than 20%. Yet, they have not been implemented widely because of logistic and cost implications. Here, we sought to: (1) use real-life data to compare the outcomes and cost of lung cancer patients with treated medically or surgically in our region and (2) from this data, estimate the cost-benefit ratio of a lung cancer screening program (CRIBAR) soon to be deployed in our region (Catalunya, Spain). We accessed the Catalan Health Surveillance System (CHSS) and analysed data of all patients with a first diagnosis of lung cancer between 1 January 2014 and 31 December 2016. Analysis was carried forward until 30 months (t = 30) after lung cancer diagnosis. Main results showed that: (1) surgically treated lung cancer patients have better survival and return earlier to regular home activities, use less healthcare related resources and cost less tax-payer money and (2) depending on incidence of lung cancer identified and treated in the program (1-2%), the return on investment for CRIBAR is expected to break even at 3-6 years, respectively, after its launch. Surgical treatment of lung cancer is cheaper and offers better outcomes. CRIBAR is estimated to be cost-effective soon after launch.