Skip to main content
Journal of Palliative Medicine logoLink to Journal of Palliative Medicine
. 2022 May 18;25(6):932–939. doi: 10.1089/jpm.2021.0436

Aggressive End-of-Life Care in the Veterans Health Administration versus Fee-for-Service Medicare among Patients with Advanced Lung Cancer

Carolyn J Presley 1,, Kiranveer Kaur 1, Ling Han 2, Pamela R Soulos 2,3, Weiwei Zhu 2,3, Emily Corneau 4, John R O'Leary 2, Herta Chao 2,5, Tracy Shamas 5, Michal G Rose 2,5, Karl A Lorenz 6,7, Cari R Levy 8, Vincent Mor 4,9, Cary P Gross 2,3,10
PMCID: PMC9360181  PMID: 35363053

Abstract

Background:

Unlike fee-for-service Medicare, the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) allows for the provision of concurrent care, incorporating cancer treatment while in hospice.

Methods:

We compared trends of aggressive care at end of life between Medicare and VHA decedents with advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer from 2006 to 2012, and the relation between regional level end-of-life care between Medicare and VHA beneficiaries.

Results:

Among 18,371 Veterans and 25,283 Medicare beneficiaries, aggressive care at end of life decreased 15% in VHA and 4% in SEER (Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results)-Medicare (p < 0.001). Hospice use significantly increased within both cohorts (VHA 28%–41%; SM 60%–73%, p < 0.001). Veterans receiving care in regions with higher hospice admissions among Medicare beneficiaries were significantly less likely to receive aggressive care at end of life (adjusted odds ratio: 0.13, 95% confidence interval: 0.08–0.23, p < 0.001).

Conclusions:

Patients receiving lung cancer care in the VHA had a greater decline in aggressive care at end of life, perhaps due to increasing concurrent care availability.

Keywords: cancer, hospice care, hospital referral region, nonsmall cell lung cancer, treatment

Introduction

The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) allows simultaneous cancer-directed treatment (palliative or curative intent) and hospice, termed “concurrent care.”1 The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) do not allow concurrent care. Instead, patients and caregivers are required to forgo further cancer-directed treatment to enroll in the Medicare Hospice Benefit,2 known as “the terrible choice.” Patients and caregivers are thus prevented from accessing the CMS hospice benefit if they would like to undergo any cancer-directed treatment whether of palliative or curative intent.3

The use of concurrent care is particularly important among patients with advanced lung cancer. Lung cancer is the most common cause of all cancer-related deaths.4 One health care outcome of interest for advanced lung cancer is aggressive end-of-life care. Aggressive end-of-life care is a previously defined quality measure reflecting the use of different types of care, such as chemotherapy, intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, multiple inpatient admissions, mechanical ventilation, and/or cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), within a certain period of time before death.5,6 This type of care is expensive and often not aligned with the patient's or caregiver's goals.7 Despite this, a high prevalence of aggressive care at the end of life has been demonstrated in both CMS and VHA health care systems.8–10

This study examined temporal trends of aggressive care quality measures at the end of life among VHA and Medicare beneficiaries with advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We evaluated the differences in aggressive care at the end of life between these groups and Medicare regional practice patterns to assess the potential effect of concurrent care on aggressive care at the end of life for Veterans.

Methods

Study design

This longitudinal study included Veterans and Medicare beneficiaries diagnosed with stage IV NSCLC who died between January 1, 2006 and December 31, 2012 and were enrolled within the VHA or fee-for-service Medicare during the last 30 days of life. We used 2006 to 2012 as it coincides with the increased hospice utilization and use of concurrent care within the VHA as reported by previous studies.1,11 We compared patterns of aggressive care at the end of life between both health care systems and evaluated the relationship between hospital referral region (HRR)-level Medicare spending and hospice utilization and aggressive care use at VHA. The VHA and Yale University Institutional Review Boards determined that this study did not constitute human subjects' research and included a waiver of informed consent. The VHA and Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare analyses were conducted separately and at no point were the datasets linked.

VHA sample

Decedents were identified from the Veterans Central Cancer Registry (VACCR). All Veterans with NSCLC in VACCR were diagnosed and/or received their first course of treatment within the VHA. Veterans with at least one inpatient or outpatient treatment record for diagnosis of cancer within the last six months of life were included.1 The data used for this analysis were collected over the last 30 days before the date of death. The study sample had to have a defined facility, where the patients received care. Veterans were assigned the VHA facility, where they received the majority of their care as derived from inpatient and outpatient claims in the last six months of life.1 All VHA-specific data were obtained from the VHA Information Resource Center.

Medicare sample

We used the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare-linked database. This database includes demographics and tumor characteristics for patients reported to tumor registries across the United States, covering ∼28% of the U.S. population.12 We included patients who were diagnosed with stage IV NSCLC at ages 67 to 94 years who died between 2006 and 2012. Patients must have been enrolled in fee-for-service Medicare Parts A and B continuously from two years before diagnosis until death.

Outcomes

The primary outcome, end-of-life aggressive care receipt within the last 30 days of life, was defined as the exposure to any of the following five types of care: intravenous chemotherapy, ICU admission, mechanical ventilation, CPR, or >1 inpatient admission (see Appendix). Chemotherapy use for both cohorts was defined using claims for administration of intravenous chemotherapy. ICU admission was defined as any identification of an ICU as the location of care. For the VHA sample, hospice care use was defined as any inpatient or outpatient hospice service claims in the VHA care files, VHA fee basis file, or Medicare hospice benefit claims files.

Statistical analysis

The demographic, clinical, and cancer-specific characteristics of the veteran and Medicare decedents and their exposure to the six aggressive care measures (intravenous chemotherapy, ICU admission, mechanical ventilation, CPR, >1 inpatient admission, or no-hospice use) were summarized using mean and standard deviation (SD), or frequency and percentages, as appropriate. To depict the overall trend of end-of-life care use within both the VHA and SEER-Medicare over time, we calculated prevalence proportions of each type of end-of-life care for each study year among all the decedents during that year, assuming a binomial distribution for these estimates. We compared aggregate rates of each aggressive care measure using descriptive statistics.

Results

Between 2006 and 2012, among the 18,371 Veterans and 25,180 Medicare beneficiaries, 64.8% versus 56.3% received at least one aggressive end-of-life measure, respectively (Table 1). The mean age of the VHA cohort was 67 years (SD 9.7 years) compared with 76 years (SD 6.3 years) in the SEER-Medicare cohort. The majority were male in the VHA cohort (98.3%) versus SEER-Medicare (52.7%). Geographic region and Black race also differed between the two groups (Table 1).

Table 1.

Description of VHA and Seer-Medicare Cohorts for Death Years 2006–2012

Cohort VHA SEER-Medicare
Total (N) 18,371 25,180
Age in years: mean and standard deviation 67.1 9.7 76.4 6.3
  n % n %
Sex
 Male
18,054
98.3
13,277
52.7
 Female
317
1.7
11,903
47.3
Race
 White
14,634
80.8
21,648
85.97
 Black
3380
18.7
2175
8.64
 Other
105
0.6
1357
5.39
Histology
 Adenocarcinoma
6843
37.3
11,121
44.2
 Squamous cell carcinoma
5402
29.4
5058
20.1
 Other
6126
33.3
9001
35.7
Region
 Midwest
4126
22.5
3400
13.5
 Northeast
2213
12.1
5122
20.34
 South
8329
45.3
7075
28.1
 West
3090
16.8
9583
38.06
 Not applicable
613
3.3
0
0
Comorbidity
 0
6322
34.4
10,275
40.8
 1
6655
36.2
7515
29.9
 2
3475
18.9
4077
16.2
 ≥3
1919
10.5
3313
13.2
Aggressive care measure
 Chemotherapy
2808
15.3
3660
14.5
 ICU admission
1794
9.8
6361
25.3
 CPR
89
0.5
526
2.1
 Mechanical ventilation
1089
5.9
5516
21.9
 >1 inpatient admission
665
3.6
3123
12.4
 No hospice
11,347
61.8
9194
36.5
Number of aggressive measures
 0 of 6
6464
35.19
11,017
43.8
 1 of 6
5655
30.78
6066
24.1
 2 of 6
3550
19.32
3781
15.0
 3 of 6
1797
9.78
2789
11.1
 4 of 6
712
3.88
1264
5.0
 5 of 6
185
1.01
249
1.0
 6 of 6
<10
0.04
14
0.1
 1 or more 11,907 64.8 14,163 56.3

CPR, cardiopulmonary resuscitation; ICU, intensive care unit; SEER, Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results; VHA, Veterans Health Administration.

Both cohorts had significantly decreased rates of aggressive care over the study period (chi-squared p < 0.001, within each cohort). Aggressive care use within the VHA decreased from 46.0% to 31.0%, while it decreased from 41.9% to 38.0% in Medicare (15.0% vs. 3.8% decrease, respectively). The VHA had significantly lower rates of any aggressive care at the end of life compared with Medicare beneficiaries at each death year, except 2006 (chi-squared comparison of cohorts p < 0.05, Fig. 1a). In addition, the difference in the temporal trends in receipt of aggressive care was statistically significant between the VHA and Medicare populations (model p < 0.001 for both the five- and six-measure aggressive care outcomes). When evaluating the six-measure aggressive care outcome, in comparison to SEER-Medicare, VHA had a higher percentage of any aggressive care use throughout the study period, but aggressive care use decreased more within the VHA from 2006 to 2012 (12% for VHA vs. 9.5% SEER-Medicare, Fig. 1b).

FIG. 1.

FIG. 1.

(a, b) Percent of receipt of any aggressive care at the end of life for all five measures excluding no-hospice use and all six measures including no-hospice use within the last 30 days before death for the VHA and SM. SM, SEER-Medicare; SEER, Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results; VHA, Veterans Health Administration.

Throughout the study period, there were similar percentages of chemotherapy given in both cohorts, except for 2006. Overall, the VHA had significantly lower rates of CPR, mechanical ventilation, and ICU admissions compared with SEER-Medicare (p < 0.001, Fig. 2a–d). In contrast, patients in SEER-Medicare had significantly lower rates of multiple inpatient admissions (p < 0.001, Fig. 2e). Both groups had significant decreases in no-hospice use (less aggressive care); however, rates were lower in the SEER-Medicare cohort (Fig. 2f).

FIG. 2.

FIG. 2.

FIG. 2.

FIG. 2.

Percentage of decedents receiving each aggressive care measure within the last 30 days before death by care setting. (a) Chemotherapy; (b) cardiopulmonary resuscitation; (c) mechanical ventilation; (d) intensive care unit admission; (e) >1 inpatient admission; (f) no hospice use.

At the HRR level, there was a significant inverse association between the percentage of hospice admissions among Medicare beneficiaries and the receipt of aggressive care at the end of life for Veterans in the same regions (p < 0.001). More specifically, as the percentage of hospice admissions in a Medicare HRR increased, the receipt of aggressive care at the end of life for Veterans receiving care in the matched VHA facility decreased (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 0.13, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.08–0.23, p < 0.001). Per $1,000 increase in Medicare HRR spending at the end of life, there was a nonsignificant increase in the odds of receiving aggressive care at the end of life within the matched VHA facility (aOR: 1.004, 95% CI: 1.00–1.009, p = 0.072, Table 2).

Table 2.

Patient-Level Analysis of Association between Total Hospital Referral Region, Medicare Spending (Per $1,000 Increase), and Aggressive Care Use among Hospital Referral Region-Matched Veterans Affairs Facilities VA (FC) for Years 2008–2012 (N = 13,723, Veterans Only)

Exposure OR 95% CI p Note
End-of-life Medicare HRR spending per $1,000 increase 1.004 1.000 1.009 0.072 Adjusted for age, non-White race, female, 15 comorbidities
% Hospice admissions/Medicare HRR 0.131 0.077 0.225 <0.0001 Adjusted for age, non-White race, female, 15 comorbidities
HRR % in-hospital deaths 1.019 1.002 1.036 0.024 Adjusted for age, non-White race, female, 15 comorbidities

CI, confidence interval; HRR, hospital referral region; OR, odds ratio.

Limitations

The major limitation of this study is that cancer-directed treatments have advanced substantially since the data for this study were collected (2006–2012). The VHA cohort was younger and primarily of male sex with higher percentages in the South and Midwest regions as compared with the Medicare cohort. However, it documents aggressive care use at the end of life ahead of CMS' Innovation MCCM project, and demonstrates a trend in Medicare HRR spending that could be further explored and leveraged to improve the care of all patients at the end of life.

Discussion

During the study period, within the VHA, all other measures of aggressive care decreased precipitously more so than within the Medicare health system. This significant difference in the decline of aggressive care at the end of life may be due to the increase in concurrent care within the VHA but without a decrease in receipt of chemotherapy. Even though the rates of chemotherapy were similar, the rates of other types of aggressive care dropped more significantly in the VHA versus Medicare. Veterans and their families did not have to make “the terrible choice.” They may be benefiting from hospice and aggressive symptom management at home rather than visiting the Emergency Department or hospital due to uncontrolled symptoms. These results are similar to those detailed by Miller et al., but this brief report specifically focuses on participants with advanced lung cancer.13

We also found evidence supporting the hypothesis that regional contextual factors are associated with end-of-life care within VHA facilities. We found a relation between how Medicare patients are treated in a specific region (i.e., hospice use) and how VHA patients in the same region are treated at the end of life. This highlights the importance of regional practice style and resources for both health care systems, which makes sense as the VHA purchases hospice services from non-VHA health care systems. Specifically, the availability of hospice agencies and providers within a specific Medicare HRR is significantly associated with a decrease in aggressive care at the end of life within the VHA in the same region.

In conclusion, our findings suggest that increasing the availability of hospice care could further decrease aggressive care at the end of life, while the use of chemotherapy or novel treatments would remain the same or even decrease. Even though the use of cancer-directed treatment stayed the same, there was a continued decrease in other high-cost health care, such as emergency department (ED) visits and ICU admissions. Rates of multiple inpatient admissions and no-hospice use were higher in the VHA potentially due to admissions for inpatient hospice care within the VHA setting or because some hospice care is delivered by private hospice agencies but paid for by the VHA.

These findings need to be confirmed in newer VHA and SEER-Medicare data. With increased availability of hospice care, the health care system would be aligning with patient goals and through costing more upfront, could potentially save money through less aggressive care at the end of life.14 This attractive possibility stands in contrast to the Medicare system that has continued increases in aggressive care across all cancer decedents.9,15 Improving access to hospice and palliative care during cancer-directed treatment at the end of life may further decrease receipt of aggressive care, resulting in a more compassionate treatment plan and a higher quality of life for patients and their caregivers.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Scientific Editors, Stephanie Fortier, MSc and Kamila Jaroniec, MFA, and Clinical Research Coordinator Madison Grogan, BA, at The Ohio State University, Division of Medical Oncology, for their help in the development and editing of this article.

The collection of the California cancer incidence data used in this study was supported by the California Department of Public Health as part of the statewide cancer reporting program mandated by California Health and Safety Code Section 103885; the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program under contract N01-PC-35136 awarded to the Northern California Cancer Center, contract N01-PC-35139 awarded to the University of Southern California, and contract N02-PC-15105 awarded to the Public Health Institute; and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Program of Cancer Registries, under agreement #U55/CCR921930-02 awarded to the Public Health Institute. The ideas and opinions expressed herein are those of the author(s) and endorsement by the State of California Department of Public Health, the National Cancer Institute, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention or their Contractors and Subcontractors is not intended nor should be inferred. The authors acknowledge the efforts of the Applied Research Program, NCI; the Office of Research, Development, and Information, CMS; Information Management Services (IMS), Inc.; and the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program tumor registries in the creation of the SEER-Medicare database. The interpretation and reporting of the SEER-Medicare data are the sole responsibility of the authors.

Appendix. Definition of Aggressive Care Measures in Last 30 Days of Life in SEER-Medicare Cohort*

  International Classification of Diseases 9th Revision Diagnosis Code Procedure Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System Other
Chemotherapy V07.39, V58.1, V58.11, V58.12, 999.81 99.25, 00.10, 00.15, 99.28 96401, 96402, 96405, 96406, 96408, 96409, 96410, 96411, 96412, 96413, 96414, 96415, 96416, 96417, 96420, 96422, 96423, 96425, 96440, 96445, 96446, 96450, 96520, 96521, 96522, 96523, 96530, 96542, 96545, 96549  
Mechanical ventilation 518.5, 518.51, 518.53, 518.81, 518.83, 518.84, V44.0, V55.0, V46.13, V46.1, V46.11 96.04, 96.70, 96.71, 96.72, 31.1, 31.2, 31.21, 31.29    
ICU admission       Any claim in the MedPAR file where either the ICU or coronary care indicator codes is not blank
No hospice       No claims in the Medicare Hospice file
>1 inpatient admission       Any claim in the MedPAR file not for SNF
CPR use     92950  
*

Unless otherwise specified, measures were assessed using the following Medicare claims files: MedPAR, Outpatient Facility, Carrier, Hospice, Home Health Agency, Durable Medical Equipment.

Funding Information

The work for this project was funded by grants from the Veterans Affairs Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Clinical Scholar Program and the Yale Lung SPORE Career Development Award (P50CA196530). Dr. Carolyn Presley was a Paul Calabresi Scholar supported by the OSU K12 Training Grant for Clinical Faculty Investigators (K12 CA133250). Dr. Han and Mr. O'Leary were funded by National Institute of Aging Pepper Center Grant P30AG021342.

Author Disclosure Statement

Dr. Gross has received research funding from the NCCN Foundation (Pfizer/AstraZeneca) and Genentech through Yale University, funding from Johnson & Johnson to help devise and implement new approaches to sharing clinical trial data, and funding from Flatiron Inc., for travel to and speaking at a scientific conference.

*

Correction added on May 3, 2022 after first online publication of March 30, 2022: Funding information for Dr. Han and Mr. O'Leary was inadvertently omitted from the originally published article. The article has been corrected to include this funding information.

References

  • 1. Mor V, Joyce NR, Cote DL, et al. : The rise of concurrent care for veterans with advanced cancer at the end of life. Cancer 2016;122:782–790. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2. Mor V, Teno JM: Regulating and paying for hospice and palliative care: Reflections on the medicare hospice benefit. J Health Polit Policy Law 2016;41:697–716. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3. Casarett DJ, Fishman JM, Lu HL, et al. : The terrible choice: Re-evaluating hospice eligibility criteria for cancer. J Clin Oncol 2009;27:953–959. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A: Cancer statistics, 2016. CA Cancer J Clin 2016;66:7–30. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5. Donlon R, Purington K, Williams N: Advancing Palliative Care for Adults with Serious Illness: A National Review of State Palliative Care Policies and Programs. National Academy for State Health Policy, December 2018. https://www.polstmaine.org/images/PDFs/NASHP-Palliative-Care-Brief-Final1.pdf (Last accessed March 24, 2022).
  • 6. National Quality Forum. PaE-o-LCO-CMRW. DC: National Quality Forum, September 2017. https://www.qualityforum.org/Publications/2017/09/Palliative_and_End-of-Life_Care_Off-Cycle_Measure_Review_2017.aspx (Last accessed November 12, 2021).
  • 7. Ersek M, Miller SC, Wagner TH, et al. : Association between aggressive care and bereaved families' evaluation of end-of-life care for veterans with non-small cell lung cancer who died in Veterans Affairs facilities. Cancer 2017;123:3186–3194. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8. Gidwani-Marszowski R, Needleman J, Mor V, et al. : Quality of end-of-life care is higher in the VA compared to care paid for by traditional Medicare. Health Aff (Millwood) 2018;37:95–103. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9. Wang SY, Hall J, Pollack CE, et al. : Trends in end-of-life cancer care in the Medicare program. J Geriatr Oncol 2016;7:116–125. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10. Mor V, Wagner TH, Levy C, et al. : Association of expanded VA hospice care with aggressive care and cost for veterans with advanced lung cancer. JAMA Oncol 2019;5:810–816. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11. Presley CJ, Han L, O'Leary JR, et al. : Concurrent hospice care and cancer-directed treatment for advanced lung cancer and receipt of aggressive care at the end of life in the Veteran's Health Administration. J Palliat Med 2020;23:1038–1044. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12. Number of Persons by Race and Hispanic Ethnicity for SEER Participants (2010 Census Data). 2010. https://seer.cancer.gov/registries/data.html. (Last accessed November 12, 2021).
  • 13. Miller SC, Intrator O, Scott W, et al. : Increasing veterans' hospice use: The Veterans Health Administration's focus on improving end-of-life care. Health Aff (Millwood) 2017;36:1274–1282. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14. Obermeyer Z, Makar M, Abujaber S, et al. : Association between the medicare hospice benefit and health care utilization and costs for patients with poor-prognosis cancer Medicare hospice benefit and poor-prognosis cancer Medicare hospice benefit and poor-prognosis cancer. JAMA 2014;312:1888–1896. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15. Wang SY, Aldridge MD, Gross CP, et al. : End-of-life care intensity and hospice use: A regional-level analysis. Med Care 2016;54:672–678. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Palliative Medicine are provided here courtesy of Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.

RESOURCES