NCCN Sattelites

I've always wondered about the remote locations of major Hospitals, and Cancer Centers.
For example, both Mayo Clinic and Cleveland Clinic have locations in Florida. In some cases I think they are buying existing facilities, or practices.
In others, such as MSKCC they are setting up their own. MSKCC has 2 facilities on Long Island (suburb of Manhattan). The one I visited when diagnosed, is a separate building on the grounds of a local hospital, but is not in any way affiliated with that hospital. The RO I met with, works with or refers to, in certain situations, like patients interested Brachytherapy , Dr Zelefsky, at the Manhattan location.

So what I wonder, is are these facilities as good as the main ones, in terms of quality of care, and mOst current treatment recommendations? Or is it just marketing BS?

I saw on another thread where someone was asking recommendations for centers. The only advantage of a center is that they have a doctor with a lot of experience and his support staff. Centers that have a lot of volume have better results because the doctors there do. I think it's a mistake to shop by center - it's the doctor that makes the difference.

What the medical facilities are doing is just branding - good marketing - but what benefit to the patient?

We frequently tell newbies to get to a center of excellence--which are not the same as the major "name" institutions in all cases. The point, I've always felt--as a guy who was living out in flyover country at the time of diagnosis--is that it's important to get to the best available where you are, not necessarily to the big coastal names.

IMO, some of it is about branding--of course it is. But I think there might be advantages. For example, someone who has retired from Cleveland to Florida might be able to plug into CC Florida because it's already familiar and his records and former doctors are readily accessible to him.

So, it's both more complicated and less so than it appears.