IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/hecrev/v11y2021i1d10.1186_s13561-021-00322-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Economic burden of lung cancer in Turkey: a cost of illness study from payer perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Irfan Cicin

    (Trakya University)

  • Ergun Oksuz

    (Baskent University)

  • Nuri Karadurmus

    (Gulhane Training and Research Hospital)

  • Simten Malhan

    (Baskent University)

  • Mahmut Gumus

    (Istanbul Medeniyet University)

  • Ulku Yilmaz

    (University of Health Sciences, Ataturk Chest Diseases and Thoracic Surgery Training and Research Hospital)

  • Levent Cansever

    (University Of Health Sciences)

  • Halit Cinarka

    (University Of Health Sciences)

  • Erdogan Cetinkaya

    (University Of Health Sciences)

  • Murat Kiyik

    (University Of Health Sciences)

  • Ahmet Ozet

    (Gazi University)

Abstract

Background This study was designed to estimate economic burden of lung cancer in Turkey from payer perspective based on expert panel opinion on practice patterns in clinical practice. Methods In this cost of illness study, direct medical cost was calculated based on cost items related to outpatient visits, laboratory and radiological tests, hospitalizations/interventions, drug treatment, adverse events and metastasis. Indirect cost was calculated based on lost productivity due to early retirement, morbidity and premature death resulting from the illness, the value of lost productivity due to time spent by family caregivers and cost of formal caregivers. Results Cost analysis revealed the total per patient annual direct medical cost for small cell lung cancer to be €8772), for non-small-cell lung cancer to be €10,167. Total annual direct medical cost was €497.9 million, total annual indirect medical cost was €1.1 billion and total economic burden of lung cancer was €1.6 billion. Hospitalization/interventions (41%) and indirect costs (68.6%) were the major cost drivers for total direct costs and the overall economic burden of lung cancer, respectively. Conclusions Our findings indicate per patient direct medical costs of small cell lung cancer and non-small-cell lung cancer to be substantial and comparable, indicating the substantial economic burden of lung cancer in terms of both direct and indirect costs. Our findings indicate that hospitalization/interventions cost item and indirect costs were the major cost drivers for total direct costs and the overall economic burden of lung cancer, respectively. Our findings emphasize the potential role of improved cancer prevention and early diagnosis strategies, by enabling cost savings related to drug treatment and metastasis management cost items, in sustainability of cancer treatments.

Suggested Citation

  • Irfan Cicin & Ergun Oksuz & Nuri Karadurmus & Simten Malhan & Mahmut Gumus & Ulku Yilmaz & Levent Cansever & Halit Cinarka & Erdogan Cetinkaya & Murat Kiyik & Ahmet Ozet, 2021. "Economic burden of lung cancer in Turkey: a cost of illness study from payer perspective," Health Economics Review, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 1-12, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:hecrev:v:11:y:2021:i:1:d:10.1186_s13561-021-00322-2
    DOI: 10.1186/s13561-021-00322-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1186/s13561-021-00322-2
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1186/s13561-021-00322-2?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sloan,Frank A. (ed.), 1996. "Valuing Health Care," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521576468, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Katharina M. D. Merollini & Louisa G. Gordon & Yiu M. Ho & Joanne F. Aitken & Michael G. Kimlin, 2022. "Cancer Survivors’ Long-Term Health Service Costs in Queensland, Australia: Results of a Population-Level Data Linkage Study (Cos-Q)," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(15), pages 1-17, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mahesh D. Pandey & Jatin S. Nathwani, 2003. "Canada Wide Standard for Particulate Matter and Ozone: Cost‐Benefit Analysis Using a Life Quality Index," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(1), pages 55-67, February.
    2. Andronis, Lazaros & Maredza, Mandy & Petrou, Stavros, 2019. "Measuring, valuing and including forgone childhood education and leisure time costs in economic evaluation: Methods, challenges and the way forward," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 237(C), pages 1-1.
    3. Stolpe, Michael, 2003. "Ressourcen und Ergebnisse der globalen Gesundheitsökonomie: Einführung und Überblick," Kiel Working Papers 1177, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    4. Ruediger Rackwitz, 2004. "Optimal and Acceptable Technical Facilities Involving Risks," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(3), pages 675-695, June.
    5. Rackwitz, Rüdiger, 2006. "The effect of discounting, different mortality reduction schemes and predictive cohort life tables on risk acceptability criteria," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 91(4), pages 469-484.
    6. Johansson-Stenman, Olof & Martinsson, Peter, 2003. "Are Some Lives More Valuable?," Working Papers in Economics 96, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    7. Werner, Perla & Vered, Iris, 2002. "Women's knowledge of new regulations about publicly funded medications for osteoporosis," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(3), pages 275-284, June.
    8. repec:kap:iaecre:v:14:y:2008:i:3:p:329-335 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Sebastian Gurtner, 2013. "An analysis of the influence of framework aspects on the study design of health economic modeling evaluations," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 14(2), pages 221-230, April.
    10. Elodie Adida & Hamed Mamani & Shima Nassiri, 2017. "Bundled Payment vs. Fee-for-Service: Impact of Payment Scheme on Performance," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(5), pages 1606-1624, May.
    11. Raikou, Maria & McGuire, Alistair, 2009. "Parametric estimation of medical care costs under conditions of censoring," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 28857, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    12. Christopher J.L. Murray & David B. Evans & Arnab Acharya & Rob M.P.M. Baltussen, 2000. "Development of WHO guidelines on generalized cost‐effectiveness analysis," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 9(3), pages 235-251, April.
    13. Calcott, Paul, 2000. "Health care evaluation, utilitarianism and distortionary taxes," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(5), pages 719-730, September.
    14. William S. Cartwright, 1998. "Cost-Benefit and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Drug Abuse Treatment Services," Evaluation Review, , vol. 22(5), pages 609-636, October.
    15. Theodore E. Keeler & Teh‐wei Hu & Alison Keith & Richard Manning & Martin D. Marciniak & Michael Ong & Hai‐Yen Sung, 2002. "The benefits of switching smoking cessation drugs to over‐the‐counter status," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(5), pages 389-402, July.
    16. A. Freeman, 2006. "Valuing Environmental Health Effects – An Economic Perspective," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 34(3), pages 347-363, July.
    17. Gabriele Palozzi & Antonio Chirico & Leonardo Cal?, 2014. "Cost accounting del follow-up annuo per il controllo remoto dei defibrillatori impiantabili," MECOSAN, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2014(90), pages 71-98.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:hecrev:v:11:y:2021:i:1:d:10.1186_s13561-021-00322-2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/13561 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.