| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
Guest Access | Sign In via User Name/Password
|
|
|
|||||||
Guest Access | Sign In via User Name/Password |
|||||||||
* From the Department of Thoracic Surgery, Hospital do Câncer A.C. Camargo, Fundação Antonio Prudente, and LIM-62 University of São Paulo, UNIP, São Paulo, Brazil.
Objectives: The present study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of two follow-up routines: a strict follow-up with frequent visits, imaging, and laboratory examinations was compared to a follow-up with infrequent visits that were scheduled mainly on the basis of the patient's symptoms.
Methods: A retrospective evaluation was undertaken of 130 patients who underwent a complete resection of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). All patients had complete follow-up for at least 2 years after their operation. The patients were separated into two groups: strict (n = 67), with a routine follow-up policy; and symptom (n = 63), seen on a symptom-oriented basis. The costs of the follow-up routines and the yield of each schedule were compared between the two groups.
Results: There were no significant differences in the disease-free interval until the first detection of recurrence. In most patients, metastatic diseases were diagnosed on the basis of symptoms, rather than by routine tests. The patients who had recurrent cancer diagnosed after surgery had a dismal survival rate irrespective of the follow-up schedule. The majority of patients with recurrence died of malignancy within a 2-year period. The costs of strict vs symptom follow-up were significantly different, because of the greater number of routine imaging procedures performed in patients having strict follow-up. On the other hand, when we analyzed only the frequency of hospitalization and the cost per day of hospital treatment for medical problems other than cancer recurrence, the patients in the strict group had a less expensive follow-up than the patients in the symptom group.
Conclusions: The present study showed that a more cost-effective routine follow-up scheme should be advised for patients with completely resected NSCLC, without affecting overall outcome. Routine imaging follow-up is of questionable value, and it may be indicated only in academic settings.
Key Words: costs • follow-up • lung cancer • surgery
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  R. Lai Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration for Diagnosis of Recurrent Nonsmall Cell Lung Cancer Ann. Thorac. Surg., December 1, 2005; 80(6): 2346 - 2349. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. S. Kent, P. Korn, J. L. Port, P. C. Lee, N. K. Altorki, and R. J. Korst Cost Effectiveness of Chest Computed Tomography After Lung Cancer Resection: A Decision Analysis Model Ann. Thorac. Surg., October 1, 2005; 80(4): 1215 - 1223. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 R. J. Korst, H. T. Gold, M. S. Kent, J. L. Port, P. C. Lee, and N. K. Altorki Surveillance computed tomography after complete resection for non-small cell lung cancer: Results and costs J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., March 1, 2005; 129(3): 652 - 660. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 Z. Keidar, N. Haim, L. Guralnik, M. Wollner, R. Bar-Shalom, A. Ben-Nun, and O. Israel PET/CT Using 18F-FDG in Suspected Lung Cancer Recurrence: Diagnostic Value and Impact on Patient Management J. Nucl. Med., October 1, 2004; 45(10): 1640 - 1646. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 D. G. Pfister, D. H. Johnson, C. G. Azzoli, W. Sause, T. J. Smith, S. Baker Jr, J. Olak, D. Stover, J. R. Strawn, A. T. Turrisi, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology Treatment of Unresectable Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer Guideline: Update 2003 J. Clin. Oncol., January 15, 2004; 22(2): 330 - 353. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C.-H. Chiu, M.-S. Chern, M.-H. Wu, W.-H. Hsu, Y.-C. Wu, M.-H. Huang, and S.-C. Chang Usefulness of low-dose spiral CT of the chest in regular follow-up of postoperative non-small cell lung cancer patients: Preliminary report J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., June 1, 2003; 125(6): 1300 - 1305. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 H. Kattlove and R. J. Winn Ongoing Care of Patients After Primary Treatment for Their Cancer CA Cancer J Clin, May 1, 2003; 53(3): 172 - 196. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 G. L. Colice, J. Rubins, and M. Unger Follow-up and Surveillance of the Lung Cancer Patient Following Curative-Intent Therapy Chest, January 1, 2003; 123(1_suppl): 272S - 283S. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 U. Egermann, K. Jaeggi, J.M. Habicht, A.P. Perruchoud, P. Dalquen, and M. Soler Regular follow-up after curative resection of nonsmall cell lung cancer: a real benefit for patients? Eur. Respir. J., March 1, 2002; 19(3): 464 - 468. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 G Laking and P Price 18-Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) and the staging of early lung cancer Thorax, September 1, 2001; 56(90002): ii38 - 44. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. B. Ponn Lightning Can Strike Twice : Second Primary Lung Cancers Chest, December 1, 2000; 118(6): 1526 - 1529. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
V. Westeel, D. Choma, F. Clement, M.-C. Woronoff-Lemsi, J.-F. Pugin, A. Dubiez, and A. Depierre Relevance of an intensive postoperative follow-up after surgery for non-small cell lung cancer Ann. Thorac. Surg., October 1, 2000; 70(4): 1185 - 1190. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
