Association of insurance status among cancer patients and survival outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 4.1 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Jiashuai Tian, Jiayang Kong, Na Zhou, Liliang Zhang, Xinyu Cai, Dai Su, Guangying Gao
{"title":"Association of insurance status among cancer patients and survival outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Jiashuai Tian, Jiayang Kong, Na Zhou, Liliang Zhang, Xinyu Cai, Dai Su, Guangying Gao","doi":"10.1186/s12939-025-02629-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Health insurance coverage is a critical determinant of cancer care access. However, the association of different insurance statuses affecting survival outcomes remains understudied worldwide. This meta-analysis provides global evidence on the association between insurance status and survival and highlights structural health inequities across national health insurance systems.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched five databases for cohort studies published between 1 January 2000 and 15 July 2025. Random-effect multilevel and traditional meta-analyses were employed to address heterogeneity. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) and the ROBINS-I method assessed all studies for quality.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included 37 studies between 2000 and 2025, contributing 219 effect sizes. In the United States (US), patients insured in Medicare (HR: 1.29, 95% CI: 1.17-1.42, P < 0.001; τ<sup>2</sup><sub>(2)</sub> = 0.046, I<sup>2</sup><sub>(2)</sub> = 67.28%; τ<sup>2</sup><sub>(3)</sub> = 0.022, I<sup>2</sup><sub>(3)</sub> = 31.89%), Medicaid (HR: 1.39; 95% CI: 1.28-1.51, P < 0.001; τ<sup>2</sup><sub>(2)</sub> = 0.049, I<sup>2</sup><sub>(2)</sub> = 74.07%; τ<sup>2</sup><sub>(3)</sub> = 0.016, I<sup>2</sup><sub>(3)</sub> = 24.60%), or without insurance (HR: 1.42, 95% CI: 1.31-1.53, P = 0.001; τ<sup>2</sup><sub>(2)</sub> = 0.032, I<sup>2</sup><sub>(2)</sub> = 65.99%; τ<sup>2</sup><sub>(3)</sub> = 0.015, I<sup>2</sup><sub>(3)</sub> = 30.77%) had worse overall survival (OS) than private insurers. Cancer stage, cancer type, and the adjustment variables are moderators of effect size heterogeneity in the US. The association between insurance status and survival was stronger in early-stage (I-II) cancers and among patients with breast and prostate cancer, whereas survival disparity across insurance statuses was smaller or not statistically significant for advanced (III-IV) stages and patients diagnosed with lung, liver, and colorectal cancer. In China, patients without Urban Employee Basic Medical Insurance (non-UEBMI) showed worse OS (HR: 1.39; 95% CI: 1.22-1.59; I<sup>2</sup> = 60.0%; τ<sup>2</sup> = 0.012) than UEBMI patients. Qualitative evidence from Germany, South Korea, Thailand, and Brazil did not identify statistically significant associations between insurance status and cancer survival outcomes. Uninsured individuals were experiencing poorer OS than those with any other form of insurance status globally.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The association between insurance status and cancer survival differs across national health insurance systems. Insurance policies should prioritize early-stage cancer care, cancer types with a favorable prognosis, and uninsured groups. Future research should use prospective international cohorts to explore how insurance structures and covariate interactions affect survival and to achieve equity in global cancer care.</p>","PeriodicalId":13745,"journal":{"name":"International Journal for Equity in Health","volume":"24 1","pages":"265"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12512495/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal for Equity in Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-025-02629-6","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Health insurance coverage is a critical determinant of cancer care access. However, the association of different insurance statuses affecting survival outcomes remains understudied worldwide. This meta-analysis provides global evidence on the association between insurance status and survival and highlights structural health inequities across national health insurance systems.

Methods: We searched five databases for cohort studies published between 1 January 2000 and 15 July 2025. Random-effect multilevel and traditional meta-analyses were employed to address heterogeneity. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) and the ROBINS-I method assessed all studies for quality.

Results: We included 37 studies between 2000 and 2025, contributing 219 effect sizes. In the United States (US), patients insured in Medicare (HR: 1.29, 95% CI: 1.17-1.42, P < 0.001; τ2(2) = 0.046, I2(2) = 67.28%; τ2(3) = 0.022, I2(3) = 31.89%), Medicaid (HR: 1.39; 95% CI: 1.28-1.51, P < 0.001; τ2(2) = 0.049, I2(2) = 74.07%; τ2(3) = 0.016, I2(3) = 24.60%), or without insurance (HR: 1.42, 95% CI: 1.31-1.53, P = 0.001; τ2(2) = 0.032, I2(2) = 65.99%; τ2(3) = 0.015, I2(3) = 30.77%) had worse overall survival (OS) than private insurers. Cancer stage, cancer type, and the adjustment variables are moderators of effect size heterogeneity in the US. The association between insurance status and survival was stronger in early-stage (I-II) cancers and among patients with breast and prostate cancer, whereas survival disparity across insurance statuses was smaller or not statistically significant for advanced (III-IV) stages and patients diagnosed with lung, liver, and colorectal cancer. In China, patients without Urban Employee Basic Medical Insurance (non-UEBMI) showed worse OS (HR: 1.39; 95% CI: 1.22-1.59; I2 = 60.0%; τ2 = 0.012) than UEBMI patients. Qualitative evidence from Germany, South Korea, Thailand, and Brazil did not identify statistically significant associations between insurance status and cancer survival outcomes. Uninsured individuals were experiencing poorer OS than those with any other form of insurance status globally.

Conclusions: The association between insurance status and cancer survival differs across national health insurance systems. Insurance policies should prioritize early-stage cancer care, cancer types with a favorable prognosis, and uninsured groups. Future research should use prospective international cohorts to explore how insurance structures and covariate interactions affect survival and to achieve equity in global cancer care.

癌症患者保险状况与生存结果的关系:一项系统回顾和荟萃分析。
简介:健康保险覆盖范围是癌症治疗的关键决定因素。然而,不同保险状况对生存结果的影响在全球范围内仍未得到充分研究。本荟萃分析提供了关于保险状况与生存之间关系的全球证据,并强调了国家医疗保险系统中的结构性卫生不平等。方法:我们检索了5个数据库,检索了2000年1月1日至2025年7月15日发表的队列研究。采用随机效应多水平和传统的荟萃分析来解决异质性。纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表(NOS)和ROBINS-I方法评估了所有研究的质量。结果:我们纳入了2000年至2025年间的37项研究,贡献了219个效应量。在美国,参保患者(HR: 1.29, 95% CI: 1.17-1.42, P 2(2) = 0.046, P 2(2) = 67.28%;τ2 (3)= 0.022,I2(3) = 31.89%),医疗补助(人力资源:1.39;95%置信区间:1.28—-1.51,P 2 (2) = 0.049, I2 (2) = 74.07%;τ2 (3)= 0.016,I2(3) = 24.60%),或没有保险(人力资源:1.42,95%置信区间CI: 1.31 - -1.53, P = 0.001;τ2 (2)= 0.032,I2 (2) = 65.99%;τ2(3) = 0.015, I2(3) = 30.77%)的总生存期(OS)低于私营保险公司。在美国,癌症分期、癌症类型和调节变量是效应大小异质性的调节因子。在早期(I-II期)癌症和乳腺癌和前列腺癌患者中,保险状况与生存率之间的相关性更强,而在晚期(III-IV期)和诊断为肺癌、肝癌和结直肠癌的患者中,不同保险状况的生存率差异较小或无统计学意义。在中国,无城镇职工基本医疗保险(non- ubmi)患者的OS比ubmi患者差(HR: 1.39; 95% CI: 1.22-1.59; I2 = 60.0%; τ2 = 0.012)。来自德国、韩国、泰国和巴西的定性证据没有发现保险状况与癌症生存结果之间的统计学显著关联。在全球范围内,没有保险的人比那些有其他形式保险的人的OS更差。结论:保险状况与癌症生存之间的关系因国家医疗保险制度而异。保险政策应优先考虑早期癌症治疗、预后良好的癌症类型和未投保人群。未来的研究应该使用前瞻性的国际队列来探索保险结构和协变量相互作用如何影响生存,并实现全球癌症护理的公平性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
4.20%
发文量
162
审稿时长
28 weeks
期刊介绍: International Journal for Equity in Health is an Open Access, peer-reviewed, online journal presenting evidence relevant to the search for, and attainment of, equity in health across and within countries. International Journal for Equity in Health aims to improve the understanding of issues that influence the health of populations. This includes the discussion of political, policy-related, economic, social and health services-related influences, particularly with regard to systematic differences in distributions of one or more aspects of health in population groups defined demographically, geographically, or socially.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信