Association between surgical quality and long-term survival in lung cancer

Objectives: There are significant variations in both perioperative and long-term outcomes after lung cancer resection. While perioperative outcomes are often used as comparative measures of quality, they are unreliable, and their association with long-term outcomes remain unclear. In this context, we evaluated whether historical perioperative mortality after lung cancer resection is associated with 5-year survival.

Patients and methods: The National Cancer Database (NCDB) was queried to identify patients diagnosed with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in 2010-2016 who underwent surgical resection (n = 234200). Hospital-level reliability-adjusted 90-day mortality rate quartiles for 2010-2013 was used as the independent variable to analyze 5-year survival for patients diagnosed in 2014-2016 (n = 85396).

Results: There were 85,396 patients in the 2014-2016 cohort across 1,086 hospitals. Overall observed 90-day mortality rate was 3.2% (SD 17.6%) with 2.6% (SD 16.0%) for the historically best performing quartile vs. 3.9% (SD 19.4%) for the worst performing quartile (p < 0.0001). Patients who underwent resection at hospitals with the best historical mortality rate had significantly better 5-year survival across all stages compared to those treated at hospitals in the worst performing quartile in multivariate Cox regression analysis (all stages - HR 1.21 [95% CI 1.15-1.26]; stage I - HR 1.19 [95% CI 1.12-1.25]; stage II - HR 1.20 [95% CI 1.09-1.32]; stage III - HR 1.36 [95% CI 1.20-1.54]) and Kaplan-Meier survival estimates (all stages - p < 0.0001, stage I - p < 0.0001; stage II - p = 0.0004; stage III - p < 0.0001).

Conclusion: With expanded lung cancer screening criteria and likely increase in early-stage detection, profiling performance is paramount to ensuring mortality benefits. We found that episodes surrounding surgical resection may be used to profile long-term outcomes that likely reflect quality across a broader context of care. Evaluating lung cancer care quality using perioperative outcomes may be useful in profiling provider performance and guiding value-based payment policies.