Cancer death rates in the U.S. are just a little much better than average, in spite of spending twice as much on cancer care as the typical high-income nation
While the United States spends twice as much on cancer care as the average high-income country, its cancer mortality rates are only somewhat better than average, according to a new analysis by scientists at Yale University and Vassar College.
The outcomes were published on May 27, 2022, in the journal JAMA Health Forum.
” There is a common understanding that the U.S. uses the most sophisticated cancer care in the world,” said lead author Ryan Chow, an M.D./ Ph.D. trainee at Yale. “Our system is promoted for developing brand-new treatments and getting them to patients quicker than other nations. We wondered whether the considerable U.S. financial investment on cancer care is undoubtedly connected with much better cancer outcomes.”
Out of the 22 high-income countries consisted of in the research study, the U.S. had the highest spending rate.
” The U.S. is spending over $200 billion each year on cancer care– approximately $600 per person, in contrast to the average of $300 per person throughout other high-income countries,” stated senior author Cary Gross, teacher of medicine and director of the National Clinician Scholars Program at Yale. “This raises the key question: Are we getting our moneys worth?”
The scientists found that nationwide cancer care costs showed no relationship to population-level cancer mortality rates. “In other words, countries that invest more on cancer care do not always have better cancer outcomes,” said Chow.
Six countries– Australia, Finland, Iceland, Japan, Korea, and Switzerland– had both lower cancer death and lower costs than the United States.
Cigarette smoking is the strongest threat aspect for cancer mortality, and cigarette smoking rates have actually historically been lower in the United States, compared to other countries. When the scientists controlled for global variations in cigarette smoking rates, U.S. cancer death rates became no different than the typical high-income nation, with 9 nations– Australia, Finland, Iceland, Japan, Korea, Luxembourg, Norway, Spain, and Switzerland– having lower smoking-adjusted cancer mortality than the United States.
” Adjusting for smoking cigarettes reveals the United States in an even less beneficial light, since the low smoking cigarettes rates in the U.S. had been protective versus cancer mortality,” stated Chow.
More research study is needed to recognize specific policy interventions that might meaningfully reform the United States cancer care system, the authors say. They point to lax regulation of cancer drug approvals and drug rates as 2 essential aspects contributing to the high expense of U.S. cancer care.
” The pattern of investing more and getting less is well-documented in the U.S. healthcare system; now we see it in cancer care, too,” said co-author Elizabeth Bradley, president of Vassar College and professor of technology, science, and society. “Other nations and systems have much to teach the U.S. if we could be open to change.”
Reference: “Comparison of Cancer-Related Spending and Mortality Rates in the US vs 21 High-Income Countries” by Ryan D. Chow, PhD; Elizabeth H. Bradley, PhD and Cary P. Gross, MD, 27 May 2022, JAMA Health Forum.DOI: 10.1001/ jamahealthforum.2022.1229.
” There is a common perception that the U.S. uses the most sophisticated cancer care in the world,” said lead author Ryan Chow, an M.D./ Ph.D. trainee at Yale. “Our system is touted for developing new treatments and getting them to clients more rapidly than other nations. We were curious whether the substantial U.S. financial investment on cancer care is certainly associated with much better cancer outcomes.”
