What is the cost-effectiveness of menu calorie labelling on reducing obesity-associated cancer burdens? An economic evaluation of a federal policy intervention among 235 million adults in the USA.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of menu calorie labelling on reducing obesity-associated cancer burdens in the USA. DESIGN: Cost-effectiveness analysis using a Markov cohort state-transition model. SETTING: Policy intervention. PARTICIPANTS: A modelled population of 235 million adults aged ≥20 years in 2015-2016. INTERVENTIONS: The impact of menu calorie labelling on reducing 13 obesity-associated cancers among US adults over a lifetime was evaluated for: (1) effects on consumer behaviours; and (2) additional effects on industry reformulation. The model integrated nationally representative demographics, calorie intake from restaurants, cancer statistics and estimates on associations of policy with calorie intake, dietary change with body mass index (BMI) change, BMI with cancer rates, and policy and healthcare costs from published literature. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Averted new cancer cases and cancer deaths and net costs (in 2015 US$) among the total population and demographic subgroups were determined. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios from societal and healthcare perspectives were assessed and compared with the threshold of US$150 000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses incorporated uncertainty in input parameters and generated 95% uncertainty intervals (UIs). RESULTS: Considering consumer behaviour alone, this policy was associated with 28 000 (95% UI 16 300 to 39 100) new cancer cases and 16 700 (9610 to 23 600) cancer deaths averted, 111 000 (64 800 to 158 000) QALYs gained, and US$1480 (884 to 2080) million saved in cancer-related medical costs among US adults. The policy was associated with net cost savings of US$1460 (864 to 2060) million and US$1350 (486 to 2260) million from healthcare and societal perspectives, respectively. Additional industry reformulation would substantially increase policy impact. Greater health gains and cost savings were predicted among young adults, Hispanic and non-Hispanic Black individuals. CONCLUSIONS: Study findings suggest that menu calorie labelling is associated with lower obesity-related cancer burdens and reduced healthcare costs. Policymakers may prioritise nutrition policies for cancer prevention in the USA.

The Health and Economic Impact of Using a Sugar Sweetened Beverage Tax to Fund Fruit and Vegetable Subsidies in New York City: A Modeling Study.

Low fruit and vegetable (FV) intake and high sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) consumption are independently associated with an increased risk of developing cardiovascular disease (CVD). Many people in New York City (NYC) have low FV intake and high SSB consumption, partly due to high cost of fresh FVs and low cost of and easy access to SSBs. A potential implementation of an SSB tax and an FV subsidy program could result in substantial public health and economic benefits. We used a validated microsimulation model for predicting CVD events to estimate the health impact and cost-effectiveness of SSB taxes, FV subsidies, and funding FV subsidies with an SSB tax in NYC. Population demographics and health profiles were estimated using data from the NYC Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Policy effects and price elasticity were derived from recent meta-analyses. We found that funding FV subsidies with an SSB tax was projected to be the most cost-effective policy from the healthcare sector perspective. From the societal perspective, the most cost-effective policy was SSB taxes. All policy scenarios could prevent more CVD events and save more healthcare costs among men compared to women, and among Black vs. White adults. Public health practitioners and policymakers may want to consider adopting this combination of policy actions, while weighing feasibility considerations and other unintended consequences.

Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Nutrition Facts Added-Sugar Labeling and Obesity-Associated Cancer Rates in the US.

Importance: Obesity-associated cancer burdens are increasing in the US. Nutrition policies, such as the Nutrition Facts added-sugar labeling, may reduce obesity-associated cancer rates. Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of Nutrition Facts added-sugar labeling and obesity-associated cancer rates in the US. Design, Setting, and Participants: A probabilistic cohort state-transition model was used to conduct an economic evaluation of added-sugar labeling and 13 obesity-associated cancers among 235 million adults aged 20 years or older by age, sex, and race/ethnicity over a median follow-up of 34.4 years. Policy associations were considered in 2 scenarios: with consumer behaviors and with additional industry reformulation. The model integrated nationally representative population demographics, diet, and cancer statistics; associations of policy intervention with diet, diet change and body mass index, and body mass index with cancer risk; and policy and health-related costs from established sources. Data were analyzed from January 8, 2019, to May 6, 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: Net costs and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio were estimated from societal and health care perspectives. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses incorporated uncertainty in input parameters and generated 95% uncertainty intervals (UIs). Results: Based on consumer behaviors, the policy was associated with a reduction of 30 000 (95% UI, 21 600-39 300) new cancer cases and 17 100 (95% UI, 12 400-22 700) cancer deaths, a gain of 116 000 (95% UI, 83 800-153 000) quality-adjusted life-years, and a saving of $1600 million (95% UI, $1190 million-$2030 million) in medical costs associated with cancer care among US adults over a lifetime. The policy was associated with a savings of $704 million (95% UI, $44.5 million-$1450 million) from the societal perspective and $1590 million (95% UI, $1180 million-$2020 million) from the health care perspective. Additional industry reformulation to reduce added-sugar amounts in packaged foods and beverages would double the impact. Greater health gains and cost savings were expected among young adults, women, and non-Hispanic Black individuals than other population subgroups. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that the added-sugar labeling is associated with reduced costs and lower rates of obesity-associated cancers. Policymakers may consider and prioritize nutrition policies for cancer prevention in the US.

Assessment of Changes in Rural and Urban Primary Care Workforce in the United States From 2009 to 2017.

Importance: Access to primary care clinicians, including primary care physicians and nonphysician clinicians (nurse practitioners and physician assistants) is necessary to improving population health. However, rural-urban trends in primary care access in the US are not well studied. Objective: To assess the rural-urban trends in the primary care workforce from 2009 to 2017 across all counties in the US. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cross-sectional study of US counties, county rural-urban status was defined according to the national rural-urban classification scheme for counties used by the National Center for Health Statistics at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Trends in the county-level distribution of primary care clinicians from 2009 to 2017 were examined. Data were analyzed from November 12, 2019, to February 10, 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: Density of primary care clinicians measured as the number of primary care physicians, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants per 3500 population in each county. The average annual percentage change (APC) of the means of the density of primary care clinicians over time was calculated, and generalized estimating equations were used to adjust for county-level sociodemographic variables obtained from the American Community Survey. Results: The study included data from 3143 US counties (1167 [37%] urban and 1976 [63%] rural). The number of primary care clinicians per 3500 people increased significantly in rural counties (2009 median density: 2.04; interquartile range [IQR], 1.43-2.76; and 2017 median density: 2.29; IQR, 1.57-3.23; P < .001) and urban counties (2009 median density: 2.26; IQR. 1.52-3.23; and 2017 median density: 2.66; IQR, 1.72-4.02; P < .001). The APC of the mean density of primary care physicians in rural counties was 1.70% (95% CI, 0.84%-2.57%), nurse practitioners was 8.37% (95% CI, 7.11%-9.63%), and physician assistants was 5.14% (95% CI, 3.91%-6.37%); the APC of the mean density of primary care physicians in urban counties was 2.40% (95% CI, 1.19%-3.61%), nurse practitioners was 8.64% (95% CI, 7.72%-9.55%), and physician assistants was 6.42% (95% CI, 5.34%-7.50%). Results from the generalized estimating equations model showed that the density of primary care clinicians in urban counties increased faster than in rural counties (ß = 0.04; 95% CI, 0.03 to 0.05; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: Although the density of primary care clinicians increased in both rural and urban counties during the 2009-2017 period, the increase was more pronounced in urban than in rural counties. Closing rural-urban gaps in access to primary care clinicians may require increasingly intensive efforts targeting rural areas.

A Novel Combination of Fruits and Vegetables Prevents Diet-Induced Hepatic Steatosis and Metabolic Dysfunction in Mice.

BACKGROUND: Epidemiological studies suggest that higher fruits and vegetables (F&V) consumption correlates with reduced risk of hepatic steatosis, yet evidence for causality and the underlying mechanisms is lacking. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to determine the causal relation between F&V consumption and improved metabolic disorders in mice fed high-fat (HF) (Experiment-1) or normal-fat (Experiment-2) diets and its underlying mechanisms. METHODS: Six-week-old male C57BL/6J mice were randomly grouped and fed diets supplemented at 0%-15% (wt:wt) with a freeze-dried powder composed of 24 commonly consumed F&V (human equivalent of 0-9 servings/d) for 20 wk. In Experiment-1, mice were fed an HF (45% kcal fat) diet with 0% (HF0), 5%, 10%, or 15% (HF15) F&V or a matched low-fat control diet (10% kcal fat). In Experiment-2, mice were fed an AIN-93 diet (basal) (B, 16% kcal fat) with 0% (B0), 5%, 10%, or 15% (B15) F&V supplementation. Body weight and composition, food intake, hepatic steatosis, inflammation, ceramide levels, sphingomyelinase activity, and gut microbiota were assessed. RESULTS: In Experiment-1, mice fed the HF15 diet had lower weight gain (17.9%), hepatic steatosis (48.4%), adipose tissue inflammation, blood (24.6%) and liver (33.9%) ceramide concentrations, and sphingomyelinase activity (38.8%) than HF0 mice (P < 0.05 for all). In Experiment-2, mice fed the B15 diet had no significant changes in weight gain but showed less hepatic steatosis (28.5%), blood and adipose tissue inflammation, and lower blood (30.0%) ceramide concentrations than B0 mice (P < 0.05 for all). These F&V effects were associated with favorable microbiota changes. CONCLUSIONS: These findings represent the first evidence for a causal role of high F&V intake in mitigating hepatic steatosis in mice. These beneficial effects may be mediated through changes in ceramide and/or gut microbiota, and suggest that higher than currently recommended servings of F&V may be needed to achieve maximum health benefits.

Cost-Effectiveness of a National Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Tax to Reduce Cancer Burdens and Disparities in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) consumption contributes to obesity, a risk factor for 13 cancers. Although SSB taxes can reduce intake, the health and economic impact on reducing cancer burdens in the United States are unknown, especially among low-income Americans with higher SSB intake and obesity-related cancer burdens. METHODS: We used the Diet and Cancer Outcome Model, a probabilistic cohort state-transition model, to project health gains and economic benefits of a penny-per-ounce national SSB tax on reducing obesity-associated cancers among US adults aged 20 years and older by income. RESULTS: A national SSB tax was estimated to prevent 22 075 (95% uncertainty interval [UI] = 16 040-28 577) new cancer cases and 13 524 (95% UI = 9841-17 681) cancer deaths among US adults over a lifetime. The policy was estimated to cost $1.70 (95% UI = $1.50-$1.95) billion for government implementation and $1.70 (95% UI = $1.48-$1.96) billion for industry compliance, while saving $2.28 (95% UI = $1.67-$2.98) billion cancer-related healthcare costs. The SSB tax was highly cost-effective from both a government affordability perspective (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio [ICER] = $1486, 95% UI = -$3516-$9265 per quality-adjusted life year [QALY]) and a societal perspective (ICER = $13 220, 95% UI = $3453-$28 120 per QALY). Approximately 4800 more cancer cases and 3100 more cancer deaths would be prevented, and $0.34 billion more healthcare cost savings would be generated among low-income (federal poverty-to-income ratio [FPIR] ≤ 1.85) than higher-income individuals (FPIR > 1.85). CONCLUSIONS: A penny-per-ounce national SSB tax is cost-effective for cancer prevention in the United States, with the largest health gains and economic benefits among low-income Americans.

Preventable Cancer Burden Associated With Poor Diet in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Diet is an important risk factor for cancer that is amenable to intervention. Estimating the cancer burden associated with diet informs evidence-based priorities for nutrition policies to reduce cancer burden in the United States. METHODS: Using a comparative risk assessment model that incorporated nationally representative data on dietary intake, national cancer incidence, and estimated associations of diet with cancer risk from meta-analyses of prospective cohort studies, we estimated the annual number and proportion of new cancer cases attributable to suboptimal intakes of seven dietary factors among US adults ages 20 years or older, and by population subgroups. RESULTS: An estimated 80 110 (95% uncertainty interval [UI] = 76 316 to 83 657) new cancer cases were attributable to suboptimal diet, accounting for 5.2% (95% UI = 5.0% to 5.5%) of all new cancer cases in 2015. Of these, 67 488 (95% UI = 63 583 to 70 978) and 4.4% (95% UI = 4.2% to 4.6%) were attributable to direct associations and 12 589 (95% UI = 12 156 to 13 038) and 0.82% (95% UI = 0.79% to 0.85%) to obesity-mediated associations. By cancer type, colorectal cancer had the highest number and proportion of diet-related cases (n = 52 225, 38.3%). By diet, low consumption of whole grains (n = 27 763, 1.8%) and dairy products (n = 17 692, 1.2%) and high intake of processed meats (n = 14 524, 1.0%) contributed to the highest burden. Men, middle-aged (45-64 years) and racial/ethnic minorities (non-Hispanic blacks, Hispanics, and others) had the highest proportion of diet-associated cancer burden than other age, sex, and race/ethnicity groups. CONCLUSIONS: More than 80 000 new cancer cases are estimated to be associated with suboptimal diet among US adults in 2015, with middle-aged men and racial/ethnic minorities experiencing the largest proportion of diet-associated cancer burden in the United States.