U.S. Spends More On Cancer Care Than Most Countries But Without Better Outcomes

The U.S. spends twice as much on cancer care than average for high-income countries but mortality rates are only slightly better than average for these countries, according to a new study.

“There is a common perception that the U.S. offers the most advanced cancer care in the world,” said Ryan Chow, an M.D./Ph.D. student at Yale and lead author of the study. “Our system is touted for developing new treatments and getting them to patients more quickly than other countries. We were curious whether the substantial U.S. investment on cancer care is indeed associated with better cancer outcomes,” added Chow.

The research was published recently in JAMA Health Forum and looked at how much money was spent on cancer care in 22 high-income countries, as well as their cancer mortality rates. The study found that the U.S. spends around $200 billion per year on cancer care, approximately $600 per person. The average of the 22 countries studied was just $300 per person, per year.

Despite this, the U.S. cancer mortality rates were just marginally better than the average for all of the countries studied. Six countries in the study had both lower cancer mortality rates and lower spending than the U.S; Finland, Iceland, Japan, Australia, South Korea and Switzerland.

"Nations that spend more on malignant growth care, don't be guaranteed to have better disease results," said Chow.

It is notable that tobacco smoking is a critical gamble factor for malignant growth mortality with smokers having emphatically expanded chance of fostering a wide scope of tumors, contrasted with non smokers. A considerable lot of these including cellular breakdown in the lungs actually have high death rates. In the U.S., smoking rates ar lower than numerous different nations, remembering a portion of those for the rundown of 22 big time salary nations engaged with the examination, so the scientists expected that this could have diminished disease death rates. Be that as it may, when the scientists changed the information to consider smoking rates, U.S. disease death rates were as yet higher than nine nations in the examination.

"Adapting to smoking shows the United States in an even less positive light, on the grounds that the low smoking rates in the U.S. had been defensive against disease mortality," said Chow.

The review creators propose that medication evaluating is one of the key variables adding to the significant expense of U.S. disease care.

Something else FOR YOU

CDC: Salmonella Outbreak Has Left 279 Ill, 26 Hospitalized In 29 States

Canadians End Up In ICU After Attending 'Coronavirus Party'

White House Mandates Pfizer Vaccines for Millions of Citizens ...Before the FDA Clinical or Safety Reviews Have Been Made Public

"Different nations and frameworks have a lot to show the U.S. in the event that we could be available to change," said Elizabeth Bradley, PhD, co-creator of the work and President and Professor of science, innovation, and society at Vassar College in Poughkeepsie, NY. "The example of expenditure more and getting less is irrefutably factual in the U.S. medical services framework; presently we see it in malignant growth care, as well," Bradley added.