Comparative study of survival among small cell lung cancer patients in the U.S. military health system and those in the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results (SEER) program

Purpose:: The U.S. military health system provides universal health care access to beneficiaries. However, whether the universal access has translated into improved patient outcome is unknown. We compared survival of small-cell lung cancer patients in the military health system with that in the U.S. general population. Stage and receipt of cancer treatment were also compared to see if they could contribute to survival difference. Methods:: The data were obtained from The Department of Defense's Automated Central Tumor Registry (ACTUR) and the national Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program, respectively. ACTUR (N = 3040) and SEER patients (N = 12,160) were matched on age, sex, race and diagnosis year. Multivariable Cox regression model was used to compare all-cause mortality between ACTUR and SEER. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to compare cancer stage and treatment. Results:: ACTUR patients exhibited significantly better survival than SEER counterparts (HR = 0.77, 95% CI= 0.71–0.83). ACTUR and SEER patients had similar stage, but ACTUR patients were more likely to receive radiation treatment (OR = 1.26, 95% CI = 1.12–1.42). The survival advantage of ACTUR patients remained across all tumor stages and radiation groups. Conclusions:: Survival of small-cell lung cancer patients with universal health care access had better survival than similar patients in the U.S. general population. Future studies are warranted to identify factors that may contribute to the improved survival.