National Healthcare Quality and Disparities Report
Latest available findings on quality of and access to health care
Data
- Data Infographics
- Data Visualizations
- Data Tools
- Data Innovations
- All-Payer Claims Database
- Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP)
- Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS)
- AHRQ Quality Indicator Tools for Data Analytics
- State Snapshots
- United States Health Information Knowledgebase (USHIK)
- Data Sources Available from AHRQ
Search All Research Studies
Topics
- Adverse Events (1)
- (-) Cancer (11)
- Cancer: Lung Cancer (1)
- Cancer: Prostate Cancer (6)
- Cancer: Skin Cancer (1)
- (-) Comparative Effectiveness (11)
- (-) Evidence-Based Practice (11)
- Medication (2)
- Men's Health (1)
- Opioids (1)
- Outcomes (8)
- Patient-Centered Outcomes Research (10)
- Practice Patterns (1)
- Quality of Life (3)
- Respiratory Conditions (2)
- Sexual Health (1)
- Shared Decision Making (1)
- Surgery (5)
- (-) Treatments (11)
AHRQ Research Studies
Sign up: AHRQ Research Studies Email updates
Research Studies is a compilation of published research articles funded by AHRQ or authored by AHRQ researchers.
Results
1 to 11 of 11 Research Studies DisplayedKrouse RS, Anderson GL, Arnold KB
Surgical versus non-surgical management for patients with malignant bowel obstruction (S1316): a pragmatic comparative effectiveness trial.
The purpose of this study was to compare surgical versus non-surgical management with the goal of determining the optimal approach for managing malignant bowel obstruction. From May 11, 2015, to April 27, 2020, 221 patients were enrolled, with 199 evaluable participants. The study found no variation between surgery and non-surgery for the primary outcome of good days: mean 42·6 days in the randomized surgery group, 43·9 days (29·5) in the randomized non-surgery group, 54·8 days (27·0) in the patient choice surgery group, and 52·7 days (30·7) in the patient choice non-surgery group. During their initial hospital stay, six participants died, five due to cancer progression and one due to malignant bowel obstruction treatment complications The most common grade 3-4 malignant bowel obstruction treatment complication was anemia.
AHRQ-funded; HS021491.
Citation: Krouse RS, Anderson GL, Arnold KB .
Surgical versus non-surgical management for patients with malignant bowel obstruction (S1316): a pragmatic comparative effectiveness trial.
Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol 2023 Oct; 8(10):908-18. doi: 10.1016/s2468-1253(23)00191-7..
Keywords: Cancer, Surgery, Treatments, Comparative Effectiveness, Evidence-Based Practice
De B, Pasalic D, Barocas DA
Patient-reported outcomes after external beam radiotherapy with low dose rate brachytherapy boost vs radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer: five-year results from a prospective comparative effectiveness study.
The purpose of this study was to compare patient reported outcomes through 5 years following radical prostatectomy or external beam radiation therapy with low dose rate brachytherapy boost for localized prostate cancer. The researchers enrolled men 80 years of age or under who had localized prostate adenocarcinoma and followed them longitudinally from 2011 to 2012. The study found that when compared with radical prostatectomy, external beam radiation therapy with low dose rate brachytherapy boost was related with clinically meaningful worse urinary irritative/obstructive and better urinary incontinence function through 5 years. Urinary function bother was similar between groups. Treatment with external beam radiation therapy with low dose rate brachytherapy boost was associated with worse bowel function through 5 years compared to radical prostatectomy. Treatment with external beam radiation therapy with low dose rate brachytherapy boost was associated with better sexual function at 1 year compared to radical prostatectomy, but there was insufficient evidence to reject the supposition that no difference was seen at 3 or 5 years. The researcher concluded that external beam radiation therapy with low dose rate brachytherapy boost was related with clinically meaningful worse urinary irritative/obstructive and bowel functions but better urinary incontinence function through 5 years after treatment compared to radical prostatectomy.
AHRQ-funded; HS019356; HS022640.
Citation: De B, Pasalic D, Barocas DA .
Patient-reported outcomes after external beam radiotherapy with low dose rate brachytherapy boost vs radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer: five-year results from a prospective comparative effectiveness study.
J Urol 2022 Dec;208(6):1226-39. doi: 10.1097/ju.0000000000002902..
Keywords: Cancer: Prostate Cancer, Cancer, Comparative Effectiveness, Evidence-Based Practice, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Treatments
Pasalic D, Barocas DA, Huang LC
Five-year outcomes from a prospective comparative effectiveness study evaluating external-beam radiotherapy with or without low-dose-rate brachytherapy boost for localized prostate cancer.
This retrospective cohort study’s objective was to determine if there were differences in treatment-related regret or survival between prostate cancer patients who received external-beam radiation therapy (EBRT) with or without a brachytherapy boost (EBRT-LDR), over a 5-year period. The cohort included 695 men who met inclusion criteria and received either EBRT (n=583) or EBRT-LDR (n=112). Men who received either treatment reported clinically worse urinary irritation and bowel function through 3 years but resolved after 5 years. Men who received EBRT-LDR continued to report moderate- to-big problems with urinary function bother and frequent urination at 5 years. There was no difference in treatment-related regret or survival between patients who received either treatment.
AHRQ-funded; HS019356; HS022640.
Citation: Pasalic D, Barocas DA, Huang LC .
Five-year outcomes from a prospective comparative effectiveness study evaluating external-beam radiotherapy with or without low-dose-rate brachytherapy boost for localized prostate cancer.
Cancer 2021 Jun 1;127(11):1912-25. doi: 10.1002/cncr.33388..
Keywords: Cancer: Prostate Cancer, Cancer, Comparative Effectiveness, Evidence-Based Practice, Outcomes, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Treatments
Gupta A, Sedhom R, Sharma R
Nonpharmacological interventions for managing breathlessness in patients with advanced cancer: a systematic review.
The purpose of this review was to evaluate the advantages and harms of nonpharmacological interventions for managing breathlessness in adults with advanced cancer. PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched for English-language studies about randomized and nonrandomized clinical trials, controlled trials, and observational studies. Findings included the safety and association with improved breathlessness of several nonpharmacological interventions for adults with advanced cancer. Recommendations included incorporating nonpharmacological interventions as first-line treatment for adults with advanced cancer and breathlessness.
AHRQ-funded; 290201500006I.
Citation: Gupta A, Sedhom R, Sharma R .
Nonpharmacological interventions for managing breathlessness in patients with advanced cancer: a systematic review.
JAMA Oncol 2021 Feb;7(2):290-98. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2020.5184..
Keywords: Cancer, Respiratory Conditions, Treatments, Evidence-Based Practice, Comparative Effectiveness, Quality of Life, Outcomes, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research
Feliciano JL, Waldfogel JM, Sharma R
Pharmacologic interventions for breathlessness in patients with advanced cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
This systematic review and meta-analysis examined the use of pharmacological interventions for breathlessness in patients with advanced cancer. Studies were identified from database inception to May 2020 using predefined eligibility criteria. Pharmacologic intervention benefits and harms were compared, focusing on breathlessness, anxiety, exercise capacity and health-related quality of life. Out of 7729 unique citations, 19 studies with a total of 1424 patients were included. Opioids were not associated with more effectiveness than placebo for improving breathlessness or exercise capacity. Anxiolytics were also not associated with more effectiveness than placebo for breathlessness or anxiety. There was limited evidence for other pharmacologic interventions. There was some harm, but it was minimal in those short-term studies.
AHRQ-funded; 290201500006I.
Citation: Feliciano JL, Waldfogel JM, Sharma R .
Pharmacologic interventions for breathlessness in patients with advanced cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
JAMA Netw Open 2021 Feb;4(2):e2037632. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.37632..
Keywords: Cancer: Lung Cancer, Cancer, Respiratory Conditions, Medication, Treatments, Opioids, Evidence-Based Practice, Comparative Effectiveness, Quality of Life, Outcomes, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research
Drucker AM, Adam GP, Rofeberg V
Treatments for primary squamous cell carcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma in situ of the skin: a systematic review and network meta-analysis summary of an Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality comparative effectiveness review.
This article discusses the results of a systematic review and network meta-analysis summary of treatments for primary squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) and squamous cell carcinoma in situ (SCCi) AHRQ comparative effective review. The authors included English-language randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with information on recurrence, histologic clearance, clinical clearance, cosmesis, and quality of life. They excluded studies enrolling less than 10 body lesions total or arms that had 5 or less lesions. They included 7 RCTs with a total of 418 participants. While they found some evidence of the best treatment options, there was little evidence to guide treatment of SC. There were no RCTs found on surgical modalities which is the first line of treatment for SCC.
AHRQ-funded; 290201500002I.
Citation: Drucker AM, Adam GP, Rofeberg V .
Treatments for primary squamous cell carcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma in situ of the skin: a systematic review and network meta-analysis summary of an Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality comparative effectiveness review.
J Am Acad Dermatol 2020 Feb;82(2):479-82. doi: 10.1016/j.jaad.2019.06.030..
Keywords: Cancer: Skin Cancer, Cancer, Comparative Effectiveness, Treatments, Evidence-Based Practice, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research
Hoffman KE, Penson DF, Zhao Z
Patient-reported outcomes through 5 years for active surveillance, surgery, brachytherapy, or external beam radiation with or without androgen deprivation therapy for localized prostate cancer.
This study compared different treatment of men with favorable-risk prostate cancer and those with unfavorable-risk disease and their functional outcomes 5 years post-treatment. Treatment options for favorable-risk disease include active surveillance, nerve-sparing prostatectomy, external beam radiation therapy (EBRT), or low-dose-rate brachytherapy with prostatectomy being the most common. Treatment options for men with unfavorable-risk disease is prostatectomy or EBRT with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). The cohort analyzed included men diagnosed with prostate cancer in 2011 through 2012, accrued from 5 Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Program sites and a US prostate cancer registry, using surveys through September 2017. A total of 2005 men met inclusion criteria. For men with favorable-risk disease low-dose-rate brachytherapy was associated with worse urinary irritative, and sexual and bowel function at 1 year compared with active surveillance. Nerve-sparing prostatectomy was associated with worse urinary incontinence at 5 years and sexual function at 3 years compared with active surveillance. EBRT was not associated with clinically different function changes from active surveillance at any point during the 5 years. For men with unfavorable-risk disease, EBRT with ADT was associated with lower hormonal function at 6 months, bowel function at 1 year, but better sexual function and incontinence than prostatectomy.
AHRQ-funded; HS019356; HS022640.
Citation: Hoffman KE, Penson DF, Zhao Z .
Patient-reported outcomes through 5 years for active surveillance, surgery, brachytherapy, or external beam radiation with or without androgen deprivation therapy for localized prostate cancer.
JAMA 2020 Jan 14;323(2):149-63. doi: 10.1001/jama.2019.20675..
Keywords: Cancer: Prostate Cancer, Cancer, Comparative Effectiveness, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Outcomes, Evidence-Based Practice, Treatments, Men's Health, Adverse Events, Surgery
Mullins BT, Basak R, Broughman JR
Patient-reported sexual quality of life after different types of radical prostatectomy and radiotherapy: analysis of a population-based prospective cohort.
This study compares the effects of different types of radical prostatectomy and radiotherapy on sexual function. A population-based cohort of 835 men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer from 2011 through 2013 was recruited in collaboration with the Rapid Case Ascertainment system of the North Carolina Central Cancer Registry. They were enrolled prior to treatment and followed retrospectively using the validated Prostate Cancer Symptom Indices (PCSI) instrument. The sexual function scores were compared among patients who received the following treatment types: external-beam RT (EBRT), EBRT with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), brachytherapy, nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy (RP), and non-nerve-sparing RP. The cohort was surveyed at 24 months post-therapy, and RT alone was found to result in the best preservation of sexual function with brachytherapy, RT with ADT, and nerve-sparing RP yielding similar outcomes. Patients treated with non-nerve-sparing RP experienced the worst sexual function outcome.
AHRQ-funded.
Citation: Mullins BT, Basak R, Broughman JR .
Patient-reported sexual quality of life after different types of radical prostatectomy and radiotherapy: analysis of a population-based prospective cohort.
Cancer 2019 Oct 15;125(20):3657-65. doi: 10.1002/cncr.32288..
Keywords: Quality of Life, Sexual Health, Surgery, Treatments, Comparative Effectiveness, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Outcomes, Cancer: Prostate Cancer, Cancer, Evidence-Based Practice
Schmidt B, Eapen RS, Cowan JE
Practice patterns of primary EBRT with and without ADT in prostate cancer treatment.
This study investigated usage of external-beam radiation therapy (EBRT), with or without neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), using data from a community-based prospective disease registry (CaPSURE). Data on 1337 men diagnosed between 1990 and 2014 with localized disease who received EBRT as primary treatment was compared. The authors conclude that use of ADT in conjunction with primary EBRT has increased in frequency and duration since 1990, and that men who received ADT have higher risk characteristics than those who receive EBRT alone.
AHRQ-funded; HS019356.
Citation: Schmidt B, Eapen RS, Cowan JE .
Practice patterns of primary EBRT with and without ADT in prostate cancer treatment.
Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2019 Mar;22(1):117-24. doi: 10.1038/s41391-018-0084-3..
Keywords: Cancer: Prostate Cancer, Cancer, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Practice Patterns, Evidence-Based Practice, Comparative Effectiveness, Outcomes, Treatments
Tyson MD, Koyama T, Lee D
Effect of prostate cancer severity on functional outcomes after localized treatment: comparative effectiveness analysis of surgery and radiation study results.
The purpose of this study was to determine whether differences in predicted function over time between radical prostatectomy (RP) or external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) for localized cancer varied by risk group. Patient-reported, disease-specific function was measured using the Expanded Prostate Index Composite and predicted function was estimated using regression models, compared by disease risk. The study found that sexual function was similar between surgery and radiation for patients with high-risk disease, and the authors conclude that high-risk patients undergoing radiation therapy should be counseled that their sexual function may not be as good as low-risk patients also undergoing radiation.
AHRQ-funded; HS019356; HS022640.
Citation: Tyson MD, Koyama T, Lee D .
Effect of prostate cancer severity on functional outcomes after localized treatment: comparative effectiveness analysis of surgery and radiation study results.
Eur Urol 2018 Jul;74(1):26-33. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2018.02.012..
Keywords: Cancer: Prostate Cancer, Cancer, Comparative Effectiveness, Treatments, Surgery, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Outcomes, Evidence-Based Practice
Semenkovich TR, Panni RZ, Hudson JL
Comparative effectiveness of upfront esophagectomy versus induction chemoradiation in clinical stage T2N0 esophageal cancer: a decision analysis.
This study examined comparative effectiveness and survival rates for upfront esophagectomy versus induction chemoradiation in patients with clinical stage T2N20 esophageal cancer. A decision analysis model was created for the two treatment strategies. Results showed comparable median survival rates for both strategies. The optimal treatment strategy depended on the accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound staging.
AHRQ-funded; HS022330.
Citation: Semenkovich TR, Panni RZ, Hudson JL .
Comparative effectiveness of upfront esophagectomy versus induction chemoradiation in clinical stage T2N0 esophageal cancer: a decision analysis.
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2018 May;155(5):2221-30.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2018.01.006..
Keywords: Treatments, Cancer, Surgery, Comparative Effectiveness, Shared Decision Making, Evidence-Based Practice, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Outcomes, Medication