Cost effectiveness of evidence-based treatment guidelines for the treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer in the community setting

The Relationship Between Guideline-Recommended Initiation of Therapy, Outcomes, and Cost for Patients with Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

BACKGROUND

Guideline-recommended therapy for metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC) encourages evidence-based treatment; however, there is a knowledge gap regarding the influence of guideline-recommended initiation of therapy on outcomes and cost.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate if lack of guideline-recommended initiation of first-line systemic therapy was associated with worse patient outcomes and increased costs for patients with mNSCLC.

METHODS

In this retrospective analysis, 1,344 Medicare patients with mNSCLC were identified from Humana data. Performance status (PS) was imputed using procedure, diagnosis, and durable medical equipment codes pre-index. Guideline-recommended initiation of therapy was defined as ≥1 cycle of National Comprehensive Cancer Network-recommended first-line therapy based on age and PS or targeted therapies regardless of age and PS. Demographics and clinical characteristics were compared by guideline-recommended initiation of therapy. A Cox model assessed factors associated with 6-month mortality. End-of-life quality of care indicators included hospital admission and oncology infusions 30 days preceding death and were evaluated using logistic regression models. A generalized linear model assessed the relationship between guideline-recommended initiation of therapy and total health care costs in the 6 months post-index controlling for clinical, demographic, and treatment characteristics. Logistic models for inpatient stays and emergency department visits were also evaluated.

RESULTS

Guideline-recommended therapy initiation was observed in 75.5% of patients. Patients not initiating guideline-recommended therapy were older, with a mean (SD) age of 72.5 (6.7) versus 71.2 (6.2) years (P = 0.001), and more frequently identified as having a low-income subsidy (30.0% vs. 16.4%; P < 0.001). Among the 24.6% of patients who died ≤ 6 months post-index, a greater percentage had not initiated guideline-recommended therapy (28.8% vs. 23.2%; P = 0.040). In adjusted models, PS (not initiation of guideline-recommended therapy) was predictive of mortality (patients with poor PS had an 84% higher probability of death [P = 0.014]). Among decedents, 64.2% were hospitalized, and 33.9% had an oncology-related infusion within 30 days of death, with no differences by guideline-recommended initiation of therapy. These end-of-life quality indicators were not associated with guideline-recommended initiation of therapy in adjusted models. Overall, 47.5% of patients who initiated guideline-recommended therapy were hospitalized compared with 55.0% of patients who did not (P = 0.026). Patients initiating guideline-recommended therapy had higher post-index total and oncology-related health care costs and fewer hospitalizations. In models, these differences in costs and hospitalizations were not associated with initiation of guideline-recommended therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Most patients initiated guideline-recommended therapy, with no differences in mortality and quality of care at the end of life by guideline-recommended initiation of therapy, though adherence beyond treatment initiation was not assessed. Unadjusted hospitalization rates were lower and costs were higher for patients who initiated guideline-recommended therapy. These differences were no longer observed after risk adjustment, suggesting that they may have been influenced by patient characteristics, disease progression, and subsequent treatment decisions.

DISCLOSURES

This study was sponsored by Genentech. Khoury, Michael, Parikh, and Bunce are employed by Genentech. Casebeer, Drzayich Antol, DeClue, Hopson, Li, and Stemkowski are employed by Comprehensive Health Insights, Humana, which was contracted by Genentech to conduct this study. Sehman is employed by Humana. Based on this research, 2 posters were presented at the Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy Nexus 2017 on October 16-19, 2017, in Dallas, Texas. Another poster was also presented at the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) Annual European Congress on October 29-November 2, 2016, in Vienna, Austria.

Three-Year Results of a Medicare Advantage Cancer Management Program

Purpose:

Reform of cancer care delivery seeks to control costs while improving quality. Texas Oncology collaborated with Aetna to conduct a payer-sponsored program that used evidence-based treatment pathways, a disease management call center, and an introduction to advance care planning to improve patient care and reduce total costs.

Methods:

From June 1, 2013, to May 31, 2016, 746 Medicare Advantage patients with nine common cancer diagnoses were enrolled. Patients electing for patient support services were telephoned by oncology nurses who assessed symptoms and quality of life and introduced advance care planning. Shared cost savings were determined by comparing the costs of drugs, hospitalization, and emergency room use for 509 eligible patients in the study group with a matched cohort of 900 Medicare Advantage patients treated by non–Texas Oncology providers. Physician adherence to treatment pathways and performance and quality metrics were evaluated.

Results:

During the 3 years of the study, the cumulative cost savings were $3,033,248, and savings continued to increase each year. Drug cost savings per patient per treatment month were $1,874 (95% CI, $1,373 to $2,376; P < .001) after adjusting for age, diagnosis, and study year. Solid tumors contributed most of the savings; hematologic cancers showed little savings. For years 1, 2, and 3, adherence to treatment pathways was 81%, 84%, and 90%, patient satisfaction with patient support services was 94%, 93%, and 94%, and hospice enrollment was 55%, 57%, and 64%, respectively.

Conclusion:

A practice-based program supported by a payer sponsor can reduce costs while maintaining high adherence to treatment pathways and patient satisfaction in older patients.

The Affordable Care Act and Cancer Care Delivery

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) has reformed US health care delivery through insurance coverage expansion, experiments in payment design, and funding for patient-centered clinical and health care delivery research. The impact on cancer care specifically has been far reaching, with new ACA-related programs that encourage coordinated, patient-centered, cost-effective care. Insurance expansions through private exchanges and Medicaid, along with preexisting condition clauses, have helped more than 20 million Americans gain health care coverage. Accountable care organizations, oncology patient-centered medical homes, and the Oncology Care Model-all implemented through the Center for Medicare & Medicaid Innovation-have initiated an accelerating shift toward value-based cancer care. Concurrently, evidence for better cancer outcomes and improved quality of cancer care is starting to accrue in the wake of ACA implementation.

INTEGRATED CARE PATHWAYS IN LUNG CANCER: A QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT

BACKGROUND

Non small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) diagnosis and treatment is a highly complex process, requiring managerial skills merged with clinical knowledge and experience. Integrated care pathways (ICPs) might be a good strategy to overview and improve patient's management. The aim of this study was to review the ICPs of NSCLC patients in a University Hospital and to identify areas of quality improvement.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The electronic medical records of 169 NSCLC patients visited at the University Hospital were retrospectively reviewed. Quality of care (QoC) has been measured trough fifteen indicators, selected according main international Guidelines and approved by the multi-disciplinary team for thoracic malignancies. Results have been compared with those of a similar retrospective study conducted at the same hospital in 2008.

RESULTS

A total of 146 patients were considered eligible. Eight of fifteen indicators were not in line with the benchmarks. We compared the results obtained in the two separate periods. Moreover, we process some proposal to be discussed with the general management of the hospital, aimed to redesign NSCLC care pathways.

CONCLUSIONS

ICPs confirm to be feasible and to be an effective tool in real life. The periodic measurement of QoC indicators is necessary to ensure clinical governance of patients pathways.

Impact of a clinical pathway tool on appropriate palliative radiation therapy for bone metastases

PURPOSE

Clinical pathways increase compliance with treatment guidelines, improve outcomes, and reduce costs. Guidelines recommend single fraction radiation therapy (SFRT) for palliation of uncomplicated bone metastases, but implementation is variable. We examined the effects of a pathway tool on SFRT rates in an academic radiation oncology practice.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Using published literature, clinical guidelines, and expert input, we designed a clinical pathway for bone metastases radiation therapy displayed on a Web-based electronic interface. In March 2016, the pathway launched on a palliative radiation service at the Dana Farber/Brigham and Women's Cancer Center main campus and at affiliated community sites. Providers were surveyed pre- and postimplementation to assess expectations and elicit feedback. Rates of pathway utilization, compliance with SFRT recommendations, and reasons for noncompliance were assessed.

RESULTS

The final pathway includes 20 endpoints and several validated prognostic scoring systems. It was used in 38% of 723 bone metastases radiation prescriptions, with appropriate SFRT rates rising from 18% before implementation to 48% after launch (P < .01). Major reasons for rejecting recommendations included disagreement with life expectancy prognostication and patient convenience. The pathway increased physicians' confidence regarding compliance with treatment guidelines and made it easier to find well-supported treatment recommendations. Workflow disruptions and the inability to handle nuanced situations emerged as limitations.

CONCLUSIONS

Our experience demonstrates the utility of clinical pathway decision support for bone metastases radiation in complex academic settings. Next steps include increasing the pathway's ease of use, refining the pathway's prognostic abilities, and measuring cost savings related to the pathway.

Lung cancer guidelines in Sweden, Denmark, Norway and Finland: a comparison

BACKGROUND

The Nordic countries are similar in terms of demographics and health care organization. Yet there are marked differences in lung cancer mortality, for which Denmark historically has had the poorest outcome. One of several possible reasons for these differences could have to do with how lung cancer is diagnosed and treated in the different Nordic countries. However, among the four most populous Nordic countries: Sweden, Denmark, Norway and Finland, there is a paucity of knowledge about differences and similarities in recommendations in the national guidelines for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and the methodology by which the guidelines are developed.

METHODS

We identified and evaluated the development and content of the available clinical care guidelines for NSCLC in the four countries. Moreover, we compared the integrated cancer pathways in these countries. We have used case examples to illustrate areas with clear differences in clinical care recommendations.

RESULTS

There are notable differences in the methodology by which the guidelines are developed, published and updated to comply with international recommendations. The Norwegian guidelines are developed and updated according to the most rigorous methodology and have so far been updated most frequently. We found that on the basis of recommendations patients with NSCLC are treated differently with regard to bevacizumab therapy and radiation dosing regimens. Cerebral imaging practices in patients with locally advanced NSCLC also differ. There is, moreover, a marked difference with regard to efforts to help patients to quit smoking. All except Finland have integrated cancer pathways for fast track diagnosis and treatment. Guidelines for follow-up of lung cancer patients also differ, with the Danish follow-up regimen as the most comprehensive. To obtain consensus on optimal clinical care, areas with differences in recommendations or where recommendations are based on a low level of evidence should be subjected to further studies.

Cost and Survival Analysis Before and After Implementation of Dana-Farber Clinical Pathways for Patients With Stage IV Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer

PURPOSE

Increasing costs and medical complexity are significant challenges in modern oncology. We explored the use of clinical pathways to support clinical decision making and manage resources prospectively across our network.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We created customized lung cancer pathways and partnered with a commercial vendor to provide a Web-based platform for real-time decision support and post-treatment data aggregation. Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (DFCI) Pathways for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) were introduced in January 2014. We identified all DFCI patients who were diagnosed and treated for stage IV NSCLC in 2012 (before pathways) and 2014 (after pathways). Costs of care were determined for 1 year from the time of diagnosis.

RESULTS

Pre- and postpathway cohorts included 160 and 210 patients with stage IV NSCLC, respectively. The prepathway group had more women but was otherwise similarly matched for demographic and tumor characteristics. The total 12-month cost of care (adjusted for age, sex, race, distance to DFCI, clinical trial enrollment, and EGFR and ALK status) demonstrated a $15,013 savings after the implementation of pathways ($67,050 before pathways v $52,037 after pathways). Antineoplastics were the largest source of cost savings. Clinical outcomes were not compromised, with similar median overall survival times (10.7 months before v 11.2 months after pathways; P = .08).

CONCLUSION

After introduction of a clinical pathway in metastatic NSCLC, cost of care decreased significantly, with no compromise in survival. In an era where comparative outcomes analysis and value assessment are increasingly important, the implementation of clinical pathways may provide a means to coalesce and disseminate institutional expertise and track and learn from care decisions.

Value-Based Medicine and Integration of Tumor Biology

Clinical oncology is in the midst of a genomic revolution, as molecular insights redefine our understanding of cancer biology. Greater awareness of the distinct aberrations that drive carcinogenesis is also contributing to a growing armamentarium of genomically targeted therapies. Although much work remains to better understand how to combine and sequence these therapies, improved outcomes for patients are becoming manifest. As we welcome this genomic revolution in cancer care, oncologists also must grapple with a number of practical problems. Costs of cancer care continue to grow, with targeted therapies responsible for an increasing proportion of spending. Rising costs are bringing the concept of value into sharper focus and challenging the oncology community with implementation of value-based cancer care. This article explores the ways that the genomic revolution is transforming cancer care, describes various frameworks for considering the value of genomically targeted therapies, and outlines key challenges for delivering on the promise of personalized cancer care. It highlights practical solutions for the implementation of value-based care, including investment in biomarker development and clinical trials to improve the efficacy of targeted therapy, the use of evidence-based clinical pathways, team-based care, computerized clinical decision support, and value-based payment approaches.

Sharpening the attack on non-small cell lung cancer

Advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has long been a diagnosis with few treatment options and poor outcomes. However, recent discoveries about the molecular biology of NSCLC are changing the way it is treated. Driver mutations that cause uncontrolled cancer cell proliferation have been discovered in some types of NSCLC. This has led to the discovery of therapies that can target a specific driver mutation in advanced NSCLC and halt cancer progression. This article reviews standard treatment of NSCLC and explores the targetable mutations of NSCLC, available targeted treatments, treatment obstacles, and the future of targeted therapy in NSCLC.

Assessing guideline adherence and patient outcomes in cervical cancer

AIM

To investigate adherence to clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) in cervical cancer and the correlation with clinical outcomes.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was conducted using patient information from a population-based cancer registry (2005-2011, n = 208). Compliance to 10 widely accepted CPGs was assessed. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to assess sociodemographic factors associated with CPG adherence. Multivariate Cox regression was performed to assess the relationship between CPG adherence and 5-year survival.

RESULTS

Adherence to individual CPGs ranged from 47% to 100%. Compliance to all applicable CPGs was seen in 54% (n = 72) of patients, 62% of stage I and II patients and 22% of stage III and IV patients. Poorest adherence was seen with those with locally advanced disease receiving chemoradiotherapy. Patients who lived within 5 km of the treatment facility were more likely to be compliant. No difference was found for either age, country of birth or socioeconomic status group. Five-year survival was greater for stage I and II patients who received guideline adherent care (93.7% vs 69.7%, P = 0.002), and they had a significant lower risk of death on multivariate analysis (HR = 0.22, P = 0.015). There was no significant difference for those with stage III or IV disease.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, CPG adherence is variable between treatment modalities and only half complied to all applicable CPGs. There was better adherence in those with early-stage disease and this was associated with improved patient outcomes. CPG adherence may be a useful surrogate for quality of care.

Preparing for Value-Based Payment: A Stepwise Approach for Cancer Centers

Most cancer centers are ill-equipped to pursue value-based payment (VBP) because of limited information on their population’s cost of care. Herein, we outline the stepwise approach used by Smilow Cancer Hospital at Yale-New Haven in our pursuit of better value care. First, we addressed institutional barriers. A move toward value required demonstration to Yale-New Haven Health System leadership that OCM would improve patient care, fund new infrastructure, and provide the opportunity to gain experience with VBP without a major threat to the financial stability of the health system. We evaluated patterns of care and found that of patients presenting to the emergency department (ED), 88% were admitted, 62% arrived during the workday, and 50% could have been stabilized with urgent care services. Within 30 days of death, 27% were admitted to the intensive care unit, 38% presented to the ED, and 52% were admitted. To quantify total cost of care, we accessed the 5% Medicare Limited Data Set to map out total cost of care for patients receiving chemotherapy at Smilow Cancer Hospital. Costs increased as patients moved through 6-month episodes, used the ED (patients with two or more visits were twice as expensive as those with one or fewer), or died during an episode (costs were twice as high as episodes in which the patient lived). To determine strategic interventions to improve value, we targeted investments in urgent care to reduce ED utilization, care management to prevent hospital admissions, and referral to palliative care for clarification of goals of care and avoidance of costly futile treatment. Developing internal metrics to evaluate success will require monitoring our interventions by having utilization measures for each site of care and individual provider.

Creating Virtual Integration and Improved Oncology Care Quality Through a Co-Management Services Agreement

PURPOSE

Implementation of a co-management services agreement (Co-MSA) creates agreed-upon cancer care delivery quality metrics, a forum for discussion of service line oversight, and virtually integrated care without institutional employment of oncologists. The goal of this project was to demonstrate that a Co-MSA improved predefined quality metrics and provided enhanced communications between a health system's oncology service line and a group of independent oncologists.

METHODS

Iterative planning discussions were scheduled biweekly over an 18-month period. Contractual, quality, and clinical data with benchmarking were considered in the creation of the Co-MSA. Review of the first year's implementation occurred through examination of the metric achievements and qualitative themes that arose through committee meetings, clinical implementation processes, and cross-organizational discussions.

RESULTS

Metrics designed for the Co-MSA included improved adherence to the breast cancer, colon cancer, and non-small-cell lung cancer level I pathways; improvement of the medical oncology physician communication component of the hospital system's Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems survey scores; and increased delivery of survivorship care plans to appropriate patients. Nonquantifiable themes from the first year of implementation included the need for technology to collect data, both organizations needing a wider understanding of quality improvement techniques, and a need for greater executive leadership involvement.

CONCLUSION

In its first year, the Co-MSA resulted in improvement of the delivery of survivorship care plans and adherence to value pathways powered by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network. Improvement of Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems scores did not occur.

Regional differences in recommended cancer treatment for the elderly

BACKGROUND

Little is known about regional variation in cancer treatment and its determinants. We compare rates of adherence to treatment guidelines for elderly patients across Texas and whether local specialist supply is an important determinant of treatment variation.

METHODS

Previous literature reviewed indicated 7 recommended courses of treatment for colorectal, pancreatic, and prostate cancer. We analyzed Texas Cancer Registry data linked with Medicare claims for the years 2004 to 2007 to study patients with these cancers. We tested for unadjusted and adjusted differences in treatment rates across 22 hospital referral regions (HRR). We tested whether variation in the local supply of specialists treating each cancer was an important determinant of treatment.

RESULTS

We found significant differences in adjusted treatment rates across regions. For removal and examination of 12+ lymph nodes with colon cancer resection, 13 of 22 HRRs had rates significantly different from the median region. For adjuvant chemotherapy for regional colon cancer, five HRRs significantly differed from the median. For prostate cancer treatment with a favorable diagnosis, nine HRRs differed from the median HRR. Of the 7 treatments, only the local availability of surgeons was an important determinant for excision of lymph nodes for colon cancer patients.

CONCLUSIONS

There are significant variations across Texas for seven recommended cancer treatments. No one region has consistently higher or lower treatments than other regions, and local specialist supply is not an important predictor of treatment. Different factors may be determining regional variation in treatment rates across cancer types and treatment options.

Getting Past No in Cancer Care

This article examines the potential impact of several proposals for controlling the rapidly increasing costs of cancer care.

Effectiveness of a thoracic multidisciplinary clinic in the treatment of stage III non-small-cell lung cancer

Introduction

The Institute of Medicine, the American Society of Clinical Oncology, and the European Society of Medical Oncology promote a multidisciplinary approach for the treatment of cancer. Stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) represents a heterogeneous group of diseases necessitating coordination of care among medical, radiation, and surgical oncology. The optimal care of stage III NSCLC underscores the need for a multidisciplinary approach.

Methods

From tumor registry data, we identified all cases of stage III NSCLC seen at Lehigh Valley Health Network between March 2010 and March 2013. The care received by patients when seen in the thoracic multidisciplinary clinic (MDC) was compared with the care received when not seen in the thoracic MDC.

Results

All patients seen in the MDC, compared to <50% of patients seen outside the MDC, were evaluated by more than one physician prior to beginning the treatment. Time to initiate treatment was shorter in MDC patients than in non-MDC patients. Patients seen in the MDC had a greater concordance with clinical pathways. A greater percentage of patients seen in the thoracic MDC had pathologic staging of their mediastinum. Patients seen in the MDC were more likely to receive all of their care at Lehigh Valley Health Network.

Conclusion

Multidisciplinary care is essential in the treatment of patients with stage III NSCLC. Greater utilization of MDCs for this complex group of patients will result in more efficient coordination of care, pretreatment evaluation, and therapy, which in turn should translate to improve patients’ outcomes.

Variations in Oncologist Recommendations for Chemotherapy for Stage IV Lung Cancer: What Is the Role of Performance Status?

PURPOSE

Chemotherapy prolongs survival in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. However, few studies have included patients with poor performance status. This study examined rates of oncologists' recommendations for chemotherapy by patient performance status and symptoms and how physician characteristics influence chemotherapy recommendations.

METHODS

We surveyed medical oncologists involved in the care of a population-based cohort of patients with lung cancer from the CanCORS (Cancer Care Outcomes Research and Surveillance) study. Physicians were queried about their likelihood to recommend chemotherapy to patients with stage IV lung cancer with varying performance status (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 [good] v 3 [poor]) and presence or absence of tumor-related pain. Repeated measures logistic regression was used to estimate the independent associations of patients' performance status and symptoms and physicians' demographic and practice characteristics with chemotherapy recommendations.

RESULTS

Nearly all physicians (adjusted rate, 97% to 99%) recommended chemotherapy for patients with good performance status, and approximately half (adjusted rate, 38% to 53%) recommended chemotherapy for patients with poor performance status (P < .001). Compared with patient factors, physician and practice characteristics were less strongly associated with chemotherapy recommendations in adjusted analyses.

CONCLUSION

Strong consensus among oncologists exists for chemotherapy in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer and good performance status. However, the relatively high rate of chemotherapy recommendations for patients with poor performance status despite the unfavorable risk-benefit profile highlights the need for ongoing work to define high-value care in oncology and to implement and evaluate strategies to align incentives for such care.

American Society of Clinical Oncology Policy Statement on Clinical Pathways in Oncology

The use of clinical pathways in oncology care is increasingly important to patients and oncology providers as a tool for enhancing both quality and value. However, with increasing adoption of pathways into oncology practice, concerns have been raised by ASCO members and other stakeholders. These include the process being used for pathway development, the administrative burdens on oncology practices of reporting on pathway adherence, and understanding the true impact of pathway use on patient health outcomes. To address these concerns, ASCO’s Board of Directors established a Task Force on Clinical Pathways, charged with articulating a set of recommendations to improve the development of oncology pathways and processes, allowing the demonstration of pathway concordance in a manner that promotes evidence-based, high-value care respecting input from patients, payers, and providers. These recommendations have been approved and adopted by ASCO’s Board of Directors on August 12, 2015, and are presented herein.

Evidence-Based Plastic Surgery: Its Rise, Importance, and a Practical Guide

There is a perfect storm developing in 21st century healthcare; rising complexity and patient expectations in the context of fiscal restraint. Evidence-based medicine (EBM) may be the best-kept secret in dealing with the "storm." Such an approach prefers management pathways that deliver better outcomes at less relative cost. In this article, the rise of EBM, its significance, a guide to practicing it, and its future in the field of plastic, reconstructive, and aesthetic surgery are presented.

The Oncology Care Model: A Critique

Rapidly increasing national health care expenditures are a major area of concern as threats to the integrity of the health care system. Significant increases in the cost of care for patients with cancer are driven by numerous factors, most importantly the cost of hospital care and escalating pharmaceutical costs. The current fee-for-service system (FFS) has been identified as a potential driver of the increasing cost of care, and multiple stakeholders are interested in replacing FFS with a system that improves the quality of care while at the same time reducing cost. Several models have been piloted, including a Center for Medicare &amp; Medicaid Innovation (CMMI)-sponsored medical home model (COME HOME) for patients with solid tumors that was able to generate savings by integrating a phone triage system, pathways, and seamless patient care 7 days a week to reduce overall cost of care, mostly by decreasing patient admissions to hospitals and referrals to emergency departments. CMMI is now launching a new pilot model, the Oncology Care Model (OCM), which differs from COME HOME in several important ways. It does not abolish FFS but provides an additional payment in 6-month increments for each patient on active cancer treatment. It also allows practices to participate in savings if they can decrease the overall cost of care, to include all chemotherapy and supportive care drugs, and fulfill certain quality metrics. A critical discussion of the proposed model, which is scheduled to start in 2016, will be provided at the 2016 American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Annual Meeting with practicing oncologists and a Centers for Medicare &amp; Medicaid Services (CMS) representative.

Tumor boards: optimizing the structure and improving efficiency of multidisciplinary management of patients with cancer worldwide

Multidisciplinary management tumor boards are now conducted worldwide for the management of patients with cancer. Studies evaluating their influence on decision making and patient outcome are limited; however, single-center studies have reported significant changes in diagnosis and treatment plans. A survey from Arabic countries showed widespread use and reliance on tumor boards for decision making. A recent multi-institutional survey of veteran affairs (VA) hospitals in the United States found limited association between the presence of tumor boards and care and outcomes. The Cancer Care Outcomes Research and Surveillance Consortium looked at the association between tumor board features and measures of quality of care. Results of overall survival among the patients of these physicians participating in tumor boards is ongoing, but preliminary results are outlined along with a recent ASCO survey of international members on the presence, utilization, and influence of tumor boards in this article. Tumor boards allow for implementation of clinical practice guidelines and may help capture cases for clinical trials. Efforts to improve preparations, structure, and conduct of tumor boards, research methods to monitor their performance, teamwork, and outcomes are outlined also in this article. The concept of mini-tumor boards and more efficient methods for MDM in countries with limited resources are also discussed. In suboptimal settings, such as small community hospitals, rural areas, and areas with limited resources, boundaries in diagnosis and management can be overcome, or at least improved, with tumor boards, especially with the use of video-conferencing facilities. Studies from the United Kingdom showed that special training of multidisciplinary teams (MDT) led to better team dynamics and communication, improved patient satisfaction, and improved clinical outcome. The weight of the benefits versus the time and effort spent to improve efficiency, patient care, and better time management in the United States and in the international oncology community is also reviewed in this article.

Costs of non-small cell lung cancer in the Netherlands

OBJECTIVES

Real-world resource use and cost data on non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are scarce. This data is needed to inform health-economic modelling to assess the impact of new diagnostic and/or treatment technologies. This study provides detailed insight into real-world medical resource use and costs of stage I-IV NSCLC in the Netherlands.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A random sample of patients newly diagnosed with NSCLC (2009-2011) was selected from four Dutch hospitals. Data was retrospectively collected from patient charts. This data included patient characteristics, tumour characteristics, treatment details, adverse events, survival and resource use. Resource use was multiplied by Dutch unit costs expressed in EUR 2012. Total mean costs were corrected for censoring using the Bang and Tsiatis weighted complete-case estimator. Furthermore, costs of adverse events, costs per phase of NSCLC management and costs of second opinions are presented.

RESULTS

Data was collected on 1067 patients. Total mean costs for NSCLC diagnosis, treatment and follow-up are €28,468 during the study period and €33,143 when corrected for censoring. Adverse events were recorded in the patient charts for 369 patients (41%) and 82 patients (9%) experienced an adverse event of grade III or higher. For these patients, adverse event-related hospital admissions cost on average €2,091. Mean total costs are €1,725 for the diagnostic period, €17,296 for first treatment line, and €13,236 for each later treatment line. Costs of providing a second opinion are €2,580 per patient.

CONCLUSIONS

Total mean hospital costs per NSCLC patient are €33,143 for the total duration of the disease. Ignoring censoring in our data underestimates these costs by 14%. Main limitations of the study relate to the short follow-up time, staging difficulties and missing data. Its main strength is that it provides highly detailed, real-world data on the costs of NSCLC.

Trends in the Cost and Use of Targeted Cancer Therapies for the Privately Insured Nonelderly: 2001 to 2011

PURPOSE

This study sought to define and identify drivers of trends in cost and use of targeted therapeutics among privately insured nonelderly patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy between 2001 and 2011.

METHODS

We classified oncology drugs as targeted oral anticancer medications, targeted intravenous anticancer medications, and all others. Using the LifeLink Health Plan Claims Database, we studied and disaggregated trends in use and in insurance and out-of-pocket payments per patient per month and during the first year of chemotherapy.

RESULTS

We found a large increase in the use of targeted intravenous anticancer medications and a gradual increase in targeted oral anticancer medications; targeted therapies accounted for 63% of all chemotherapy expenditures in 2011. Insurance payments per patient per month and in the first year of chemotherapy for targeted oral anticancer medications more than doubled in 10 years, surpassing payments for targeted intravenous anticancer medications, which remained fairly constant throughout. Substitution toward targeted therapies and growth in drug prices both at launch and postlaunch contributed to payer spending growth. Out-of-pocket spending for targeted oral anticancer medications was ≤ half of the amount for targeted intravenous anticancer medications.

CONCLUSION

Targeted therapies now dominate anticancer drug spending. More aggressive management of pharmacy benefits for targeted oral anticancer medications and payment reform for injectable drugs hold promise. Restraining the rapid rise in spending will require more than current oral drug parity laws, such as value-based insurance that makes the benefits and costs transparent and involves the patient directly in the choice of treatment.

Expectations in the care of lung cancer

One of the main challenges oncologists face in the care of patients with lung cancer is the decision to incorporate new clinical trial data into routine clinical practice. Beyond the question of statistical significance, which is a more objective metric, are the results meaningful and applicable to a broader population? Furthermore, in an era of value care, do the results justify a potential increase in costs? This article discusses the main points that clinicians consider in their decision-making process and illustrates the arguments with real-life examples.

Oncology payment reform to achieve real health care reform

Cancer care is transforming, moving toward increasingly personalized treatment with the potential to save and improve many more lives. Many oncologists and policymakers view current fee-for-service payments as an obstacle to providing more efficient, high-quality cancer care. However, payment reforms create new uncertainties for oncologists and may be challenging to implement. In this article, we illustrate how accountable care payment reforms that directly align payments with quality and cost measures are being implemented and the opportunities and challenges they present. These payment models provide more flexibility to oncologists and other providers to give patients the personalized care they need, along with more accountability for demonstrating quality improvements and overall cost or cost growth reductions. Such payment reforms increase the importance of person-level quality and cost measures as well as data analysis to improve measured performance. We describe key features of quality and cost measures needed to support accountable care payment reforms in oncology. Finally, we propose policy recommendations to move incrementally but fundamentally to payment systems that support higher-value care in oncology.

Centers for medicare and medicaid services: using an episode-based payment model to improve oncology care

PURPOSE

Cancer is a medically complex and expensive disease with costs projected to rise further as new treatment options increase and the United States population ages. Studies showing significant regional variation in oncology quality and costs and model tests demonstrating cost savings without adverse outcomes suggest there are opportunities to create a system of oncology care in the US that delivers higher quality care at lower cost.

DESIGN

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) have designed an episode-based payment model centered around 6 month periods of chemotherapy treatment. Monthly per-patient care management payments will be made to practices to support practice transformation, including additional patient services and specific infrastructure enhancements. Quarterly reporting of quality metrics will drive continuous quality improvement and the adoption of best practices among participants. Practices achieving cost savings will also be eligible for performance-based payments. Savings are expected through improved care coordination and appropriately aligned payment incentives, resulting in decreased avoidable emergency department visits and hospitalizations and more efficient and evidence-based use of imaging, laboratory tests, and therapeutic agents, as well as improved end of life care.

CONCLUSION

New therapies and better supportive care have significantly improved cancer survival in recent decades. This has come at a high cost, with cancer therapy consuming $124 billion in 2010. CMS has designed an episode-based model of oncology care that incorporates elements from several successful model tests. By providing care management and performance based payments in conjunction with quality metrics and a rapid learning environment, it is hoped that this model will demonstrate how oncology care in the US can transform into a high value, high quality system.

Innovative payment models and measurement for cancer therapy

The rising cost of health care in the United States is on an unsustainable trajectory. Payment models that reward cost-effective and high-quality care are desperately needed.

Treatment Patterns and Health Resource Utilization Among Patients Diagnosed With Early Stage Resected Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer at US Community Oncology Practices

Data on adjuvant therapy in resected non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in routine practice are lacking in the United States. This retrospective observational database study included 609 community oncology patients with resected stage IB to IIIA NSCLC. Use of adjuvant therapy was 39.1% at disease stage IB and 64.9% to 68.2% at stage II to IIIA. The most common regimen at all stages was carboplatin and paclitaxel.

BACKGROUND

Platin-based adjuvant chemotherapy has extended survival in clinical trials in patients with completely resected non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). There are few data on the use of adjuvant therapy in community-based clinical practice in the United States.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective observational study using electronic medical record and billing data collected during routine care at US community oncology sites in the Vector Oncology Data Warehouse between January 2007 and January 2014. Patients aged ≥ 18 years with a primary diagnosis of stage IB to IIIA NSCLC were eligible if they had undergone surgical resection. Treatment patterns, health care resource use, and cost were recorded, stratified by stage at diagnosis.

RESULTS

The study included 609 patients (mean age, 64.8 years, 52.9% male), of whom 215 had stage IB disease, 130 stage IIA/II, 110 stage IIB, and 154 stage IIIA. Adjuvant systemic therapy after resection was provided to 345 (56.7%) of 609 patients, with lower use in patients with stage IB disease (39.1%) than stage II to IIIA disease (64.9-68.2%) (P < .0001). The most common adjuvant regimen at all stages was the combination of carboplatin and paclitaxel. There were no statistically significant differences in office visits or incidence of hospitalization by disease stage. During adjuvant treatment, the total monthly median cost per patient was $17,389.75 (interquartile range, $8,815.61 to $23,360.85).

CONCLUSION

Adjuvant systemic therapy was used in some patients with stage IB NSCLC and in the majority of patients with stage IIA to IIIA disease. There were few differences in regimen or health care resource use by disease stage.

Economic evaluation of first-line and maintenance treatments for advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review

During these last years, there have been an increased number of new drugs for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), with a growing financial effect on patients and society. The purpose of this article was to review the economics of first-line and maintenance NSCLC treatments. We reviewed economic analyses of NSCLC therapies published between 2004 and 2014. In first-line settings, in unselected patients with advanced NSCLC, the cisplatin gemcitabine doublet appears to be cost-saving compared with other platinum doublets. In patients with nonsquamous NSCLC, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) per life-year gained (LYG) were $83,537, $178,613, and more than $300,000 for cisplatin-pemetrexed compared with, respectively, cisplatin-gemcitabine, cisplatin-carboplatin-paclitaxel, and carboplatin-paclitaxel-bevacizumab. For all primary chemotherapy agents, use of carboplatin is associated with slightly higher costs than cisplatin. In all the analysis, bevacizumab had an ICER greater than $150,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). In epidermal growth factor receptor mutated advanced NSCLC, compared with carboplatin-paclitaxel doublet, targeted therapy based on testing available tissue yielded an ICER of $110,644 per QALY, and the rebiopsy strategy yielded an ICER of $122,219 per QALY. Compared with the triplet carboplatin-paclitaxel-bevacizumab, testing and rebiopsy strategies had ICERs of $25,547 and $44,036 per QALY, respectively. In an indirect comparison, ICERs per LYG and QALY of erlotinib versus gefitinib were $39,431 and $62,419, respectively. In anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive nonsquamous advanced NSCLC, the ICER of first-line crizotinib compared with that of chemotherapy was $255,970 per QALY. For maintenance therapy, gefitinib had an ICER of $19,214 per QALY, erlotinib had an ICER of $127,343 per LYG, and pemetrexed had an ICER varying between $183,589 and $205,597 per LYG. Most recent NSCLC strategies are based on apparently no cost-effective strategies if we consider an ICER below $50,000 per QALY an acceptable threshold. We need, probably on a countrywide level, to have a debate involving public health organizations and pharmaceutical companies, as well as clinicians and patients, to challenge the rising costs of managing lung cancer.

Outcomes in thoracic surgical management of non-small cell lung cancer

Thoracic surgeons traditionally have measured their outcomes in terms of mortality, complication rates, recurrence patterns, and long-term survival for their cancer patients. These metrics of quality continue to be important today, but increasingly surgeons are under scrutiny for resource utilization, patient experience, and cost effectiveness. Intelligent decisions about resource use require knowledge of utility, disutility, and cost -- information that is still limited and not easily implemented at the time treatment decisions are made. If we accept the proposition that lung cancer care requires a multidisciplinary team making best use of available resources to minimize unwarranted variation, maximize outcomes, and control costs, then three critical needs can be identified: consensus on goals, robust data, and alignment of incentives across disciplines.

Economic Value of a Cancer Case Management Program

Participation in the cancer support program was associated with lower cancer-related medical costs and greater hospice use.

First do no harm: population-based study shows non-evidence-based trastuzumab prescription may harm elderly women with breast cancer

Trastuzumab, although cardiotoxic, is associated with improved survival in HER2-positive breast cancer. Non-compliance with HER2 testing guidelines before prescribing trastuzumab occurs in practice; however, the clinical consequences are unclear. Using SEER-Medicare database (2000-2009), we assessed differences in baseline characteristics between women ≥ 65 with breast cancer who received and did not receive HER2 testing prior to trastuzumab prescription. We used propensity score matched-pair analysis to balance the confounders between these two groups. We assessed the differences in overall survival and 3-year rates of avoiding congestive heart failure (CHF) between women who received trastuzumab without HER2 testing (trastuzumab group) and women who had chemotherapy but did not receive trastuzumab (irrespective of testing) (chemo-only group). Based on the matched data, we used Cox regression in these assessments with double robust estimation or with stratification. Among women who received trastuzumab, 140 (4.7 %) had no documentation of HER2 testing. Breast surgery, south residential region, and an earlier year of diagnosis were predictive of no HER2 testing in multivariate logistic regression. Women in the chemo-only group had similar overall survival (HR = 1.28; P = 0.108) over an 8-year follow-up post-diagnosis and significantly higher likelihood of avoiding CHF over 3 years after the first administration of chemotherapy or trastuzumab (HR = 1.66, P = 0.036) compared to women in the trastuzumab group, using the propensity score-matched data. Non-evidence-based prescription of trastuzumab is associated with increased rates of CHF with no additional survival benefit among older women with breast cancer. Inappropriate prescriptions of targeted therapies agent can lead to detrimental health and financial consequences.

The State of Cancer Care in America, 2014: A Report by the American Society of Clinical Oncology

This publication is ASCO's inaugural report on the state of cancer care in America. Going forward, these annual reports will track progress against cancer and examine the most important trends that affect the oncology community's ability to provide high-quality, high-value cancer care.

Improving the quality of cancer care: implications for palliative care

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

In September 2013 the Institute of Medicine (IOM) released a report on the quality of cancer care in the United States. We report here on the recommendations of the IOM report and the implications for the palliative care community.

METHODS

The IOM report is based on a consensus of literature and expert opinion. The recommendations provide direction for health policy, education, and clinical practice. The report emphasizes the significance of the aging population and implications for cancer care.

RESULTS

The recommendations from the report offer many opportunities for palliative care including enhancing the use of advance care planning and integration of palliative care across the cancer trajectory.

CONCLUSIONS

Quality cancer care depends on the integration of quality palliative care. The palliative care community can use this IOM report to guide their collaboration with oncology and to enhance the quality of care provided to cancer patients and their families.

Delivering maximum clinical benefit at an affordable price: engaging stakeholders in cancer care

Cancer costs continue to increase alarmingly despite much debate about how they can be reduced. The oncology community needs to take greater responsibility for our own practice patterns, especially when using expensive tests and treatments with marginal value: we cannot continue to accept novel therapeutics with very small benefits for exorbitant prices. Patients, payers, and pharmaceutical communities should be constructively engaged to communicate medically and economically possible goals, and eventually, to reduce use and costs. Diagnostic tests and treatments should have to show true value to be added to existing protocols. In this article, we discuss three key drivers of costs: end-of-life care patterns, medical imaging, and drugs. We propose health-care models that have the potential to decrease costs and discuss solutions to maintain clinical benefit at an affordable price.

Trends and issues in oncology costs

Approximately 18% of US gross domestic product is spent on healthcare and 5% of that is for cancer care. With rapidly increasing oncologic drug prices, growth in cancer spending will likely far outpace overall healthcare spending growth. Developing cost-saving strategies is imperative, but economizing must not compromise patients' well-being. Providing quality care at the most economical price is the main aim. This article summarizes trends in rising cancer costs, and reviews cost-management strategies, including those proposed in the Affordable Care Act. Many programs economize by correcting inefficiencies, preventing therapeutic failures and eliminating errors. Process improvement is important, but in oncology, medications substantially drive costs. Identifying the most effective and economical treatments requires cost-effectiveness research. At the current pace, the US payers cannot continue to afford increasing costs for cancer treatments. Research on maximizing patient outcomes for reasonable costs is essential. More analyses of quality of life assessment and cost-effectiveness can support future decisions about cancer care.

Practice-Changing Strategies to Deliver Affordable, High-Quality Cancer Care: Summary of an Institute of Medicine Workshop

The authors summarize presentations and discussion from the Delivering Affordable Cancer Care in the 21st Century workshop and focus on proposed strategies to improve the affordability of cancer care while maintaining or improving the quality of care.

Meaningful Physician Payment Reform in Oncology

The authors describe various new models of physician payment that can serve as a foundation for a shift away from the current reimbursement system for cancer care to support better outcomes and avoid preventable costs, as well as how these reforms can be supported in a blended payment model that transitions away from but still contains elements of fee-for-service payments.

Documenting the Benefits and Cost Savings of a Large Multistate Cancer Pathway Program From a Payer's Perspective

Broadly implemented clinical pathways can achieve reasonable physician compliance, resulting in substantial cost savings.