The survival and cost-effectiveness analysis of adjunctive Chinese medicine therapy for patients with non-small cell lung cancer: a nationwide cohort study in Taiwan.

Introduction: Cancer, particularly lung cancer, is a significant global healthcare challenge. Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) constitutes 85% of cases. Patients often seek alternative therapies like Chinese medicine alongside Western treatments. This study investigates the survival outcomes and cost-effectiveness of adjunctive Chinese medicine therapy for NSCLC patients in Taiwan. Methods: We utilized the National Health Insurance Research Database in a retrospective cohort study from 2000 to 2018, focusing on NSCLC patients diagnosed between 2007 and 2013. After propensity score matching 1:5 ratio, then compared patients with and without adjunctive Chinese medicine therapy. Survival outcomes, cost-effectiveness, and sensitivity analyses were conducted. Results: The study involved 43,122 NSCLC patients with 5.76% receiving adjunctive Chinese medicine. There is no significant associated between the risk of death and adjuvant Chinese medicine therapy until 181-365 days of adjuvant treatment could reduce the risk of death (HR = 0.88, 95% CI: 0.80-0.98). Cost-effectiveness analysis showed an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 880,908 NT$/year. Conclusion: Adjunctive Chinese medicine therapy, particularly when administered for 181-365 days, significantly reduced the mortality risk among stage IV NSCLC patients. The cost-effectiveness aligns with willingness-to-pay thresholds, indicating economic benefit.

Cancer stages and mortality risk of breast cancer between women with and without disabilities: A national population-based cohort study in Taiwan.

BACKGROUND: The second-most common cause of cancer-related death for women worldwide is breast cancer. However, there is little information about breast cancer among women with disabilities in Taiwan. OBJECTIVES: This study investigated differences between women with and without disabilities regarding breast cancer stages and evaluated the probability of developing an advanced stage and the mortality risk of breast cancer. METHODS: This study conducted a nationwide retrospective cohort study using the National Health Insurance Research Database and other nationwide databases. Our participants were newly diagnosed breast cancer patients, including women with and without disabilities, between 2004 and 2010. We matched both of them with propensity score matching methods (1:5), and all were followed up until the end of 2016. RESULTS: This study included 50,683 participants with breast cancer. After matching, women with disabilities who did not receive breast cancer screening had a more significant proportion of advanced-stage breast cancer (19.95 %) than those without disabilities who did not receive breast cancer screening (16.87 %). After adjusting for related variables, women with disabilities were 1.27 times more likely to have advanced-stage breast cancer than those without disabilities. Additionally, after suffering from breast cancer, individuals with disabilities had a 1.23 times greater mortality risk compared to those without disabilities. CONCLUSIONS: Although cancer stages were controlled, women with disabilities still had a higher mortality risk of breast cancer. Hence, policymakers should pay more attention to women with disabilities to treat them at an early stage, which can reduce the mortality risk attributable to advanced stages.

Stroke and suicide among people with severe mental illnesses.

The associations between people with severe mental illnesses (SMI) and the risks of stroke, suicide, and death remain unclear. We examined healthcare service usage among adults with and without SMI and explored the risk of stroke, suicide, and death. We divided 18-80-year-old adults with SMI into catastrophic and non-catastrophic illness groups. These groups were subjected to a 1:5:5 propensity score matching with people without SMI. Data on demographic characteristics, economic factors, environmental factors, comorbid conditions, self-injury behavior, the number of outpatients and ED visits, and hospitalization were collected. The primary outcomes were risks of stroke, suicide, and death. We included 19,570 people with catastrophic SMI, 97,850 with non-catastrophic SMI, and 97,850 controls. Patients with SMI, especially those with catastrophic illnesses, had higher stroke risk, suicide, and death than those without SMI. People with SMI used health services more frequently than those without SMI. Patients with a history of hospitalization or ED access had a higher risk of stroke, suicide, and death. Our data indicate that special attention should be given to patients with SMI, particularly those with a history of healthcare service utilization, such as through more extended hospital stays with high-intensity interventions.

Effect of multidisciplinary team care on patient survival in chronic hepatitis B or C hepatocellular carcinoma.

Introduction: Multidisciplinary team care coordinates with medical teams to improve the quality of cancer care. This study explored multidisciplinary team care in hepatitis B or hepatitis C virus-related hepatocellular carcinoma patients from the time of diagnosis to the first-time treatment interval and investigated treatment outcomes and prognosis. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included data from a nationwide population from 2007 to 2016. Data were collected from the Taiwan Cancer Registry Database, linked to the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database. Propensity score matching was applied at a ratio of 1:2 to reduce the selection bias. A multiple regression model with generalized estimating equations was used to analyze whether multidisciplinary team care affected the diagnosis-to-treatment interval. The stratified Cox proportional hazards model examined whether involvement in multidisciplinary team care influenced survival status. Results: A total of 10,928 and 21,856 patients with hepatocellular carcinoma received multidisciplinary and non-multidisciplinary care, respectively. Participants with multidisciplinary care had a longer diagnosis-to-treatment interval but a lower risk of cumulative cancer death (HR=0.88, 95% CI:0.84-0.92). In patients with intermediate- to advanced-stage hepatocellular carcinoma, multidisciplinary team care has obvious benefits for improving survival. Conclusion: Patients with hepatocellular carcinoma who participated in multidisciplinary team care had a longer diagnosis-to-treatment interval but a lower risk of cancer death. Patients with intermediate- to advanced-stage hepatocellular carcinoma who received multidisciplinary team care significantly benefited from this outcome. Hospitals should provide HCC patients with multidisciplinary team care to improve cancer care.