Association Between Reimbursement Incentives and Physician Practice in Oncology: A Systematic Review

Commercial Versus Medicaid Insurance and Use of High-Priced Anticancer Treatments

BACKGROUND

Because the markups on cancer drugs vary by payor, providers' financial incentive to use high-price drugs is differential according to each patient's insurance type. We evaluated the association between patient insurer (commercial vs Medicaid) and the use of high-priced cancer treatments.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We linked cancer registry, administrative claims, and demographic data for individuals diagnosed with cancer in North Carolina from 2004 to 2011, with either commercial or Medicaid insurance. We selected cancers with multiple FDA-approved, guideline-recommended chemotherapy options and large price differences between treatment options: advanced colorectal, lung, and head and neck cancer. The outcome was a receipt of a higher-priced option, and the exposure was insurer: commercial versus Medicaid. We estimated risk ratios (RRs) for the association between insurer and higher-priced treatment using log-binomial models with inverse probability of exposure weights.

RESULTS

Of 812 patients, 209 (26%) had Medicaid. The unadjusted risk of receiving higher-priced treatment was 36% (215/603) for commercially insured and 27% (57/209) for Medicaid insured (RR: 1.31, 95% CI: 1.02-1.67). After adjustment for confounders the association was attenuated (RR: 1.15, 95% CI: 0.81-1.65). Exploratory subgroup analysis suggested that commercial insurance was associated with increased receipt of higher-priced treatment among patients treated by non-NCI-designated providers (RR: 1.53, 95% CI: 1.14-2.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Individuals with Medicaid and commercial insurance received high-priced treatments in similar proportion, after accounting for differences in case mix. However, modification by provider characteristics suggests that insurance type may influence treatment selection for some patient groups. Further work is needed to determine the relationship between insurance status and newer, high-price drugs such as immune-oncology agents.

Impact of reimbursement systems on patient care - a systematic review of systematic reviews

BACKGROUND

There is not yet sufficient scientific evidence to answer the question of the extent to which different reimbursement systems influence patient care and treatment quality. Due to the asymmetry of information between physicians, health insurers and patients, market-based mechanisms are necessary to ensure the best possible patient care. The aim of this study is to investigate how reimbursement systems influence multiple areas of patient care in form of structure, process and outcome indicators.

METHODS

For this purpose, a systematic literature review of systematic reviews is conducted in the databases PubMed, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library. The reimbursement systems of salary, bundled payment, fee-for-service and value-based reimbursement are examined. Patient care is divided according to the three dimensions of structure, process, and outcome and evaluated in eight subcategories.

RESULTS

A total of 34 reviews of 971 underlying primary studies are included in this article. International studies identified the greatest effects in categories resource utilization and quality/health outcomes. Pay-for-performance and bundled payments were the most commonly studied models. Among the systems examined, fee-for-service and value-based reimbursement systems have the most positive impact on patient care.

CONCLUSION

Patient care can be influenced by the choice of reimbursement system. The factors for successful implementation need to be further explored in future research.

Introduction of ultra-hypofractionation in breast cancer: Implications for costs and resource use

PURPOSE

A shift towards (ultra-)hypofractionated breast irradiation can have important implications for the practice of contemporary radiation oncology. This paper presents a systematic analysis of the impact of different fractionation schedules on multiple key performance indicators, namely resource use, costs, work times, throughput and waiting times.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Time-driven activity-based costing (TD-ABC) is applied to calculate the costs and resources consumed where the perspective of the radiotherapy department in adopted. Three fractionation regimens are considered: ultra-hypofractionation (5 x 5.2 Gy, UHF), moderate hypofractionation (15 x 2.67 Gy, HF) and conventional fractionation (25 x 2 Gy, CF). Subsequently, a discrete event simulation (DES) model of the radiotherapy care pathway is developed and scenarios are compared in which the following factors are varied: distribution of fractionation regimens, patient volume and operating hours.

RESULTS

The application of (U)HF can permit radiotherapy departments to reduce the use of scarce resources, realise work time and cost savings, increase throughput and reduce waiting times. The financial advantages of (U)HF are, however, reduced in cases of excess capacity and cost savings may therefore be limited in the short-term. Moreover, although an extension of operating hours has favourable effects on throughput and waiting times, it may also reduce cost differences between fractionation schedules by increasing the capacity of resources.

CONCLUSION

By providing an in-depth analysis of the consequences associated with a shift towards (U)HF in breast cancer, the present study demonstrates how a DES model based on TD-ABC costing can assist radiotherapy professionals in making data-driven decisions.

Adoption and use of immunotherapy in breast cancer management in Africa: barriers and prospect - a narrative review

Breast cancer (BC) is the world's most frequently diagnosed cancer in women, with 7.8 million women diagnosed with BC in the past 5 years. BC has the highest incidence rate of all cancers in women worldwide (1.67 million), accounting for over 500 000 deaths annually. In Africa, BC accounts for 28% of all cancers and 20% of all cancer deaths in women. The African continent has recorded an alarming increase in incidence, with the highest mortality rate globally. Despite BC being a major health concern in Africa, there is limited access to adequate healthcare services to combat the growing need. Immunotherapy, a promising treatment approach that harnesses the immune system's power to fight cancer, has shown great potential in BC management. However, in the face of the growing body of evidence supporting its effectiveness, the adoption and use of immunotherapy in BC management in Africa remain limited. Hence, this review aimed to explore the barriers and prospects of immunotherapy adoption and use in BC management in Africa. A comprehensive search across various databases and sources using specific keywords related to immunotherapy and BC to achieve the study aim was conducted. The criteria for including data in the study were based on relevance and availability in English, with no publication year restrictions. The collected data underwent narrative analysis, supplemented by information from sources like country reports, newsletters, commentaries, policy briefs, and direct Google searches. By identifying the challenges and opportunities, this review provided insights into how healthcare providers, policymakers, and other stakeholders can work together to improve the availability and accessibility of immunotherapy to BC patients in Africa.

End-of-Life Systemic Oncologic Treatment in the Immunotherapy Era: The Role of Race, Insurance, and Practice Setting

PURPOSE

Receipt of antineoplastic systemic treatment near end of life (EOL) has been shown to harm patient and caregiver experience, increase hospitalizations, intensive care unit and emergency department use, and drive-up costs; yet, these rates have not declined. To understand factors contributing to use of antineoplastic EOL systemic treatment, we explored its association with practice- and patient-level factors.

METHODS

We included patients from a real-world electronic health record-derived deidentified database who received systemic therapy for advanced or metastatic cancer diagnosed starting in 2011 and died within 4 years between 2015 and 2019. We assessed use of EOL systemic treatment at 30 and 14 days before death. We divided treatments into three subcategories: chemotherapy alone, chemotherapy and immunotherapy in combination, and immunotherapy (with/without targeted therapy), and estimated conditional odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs for patient and practice factors using multivariable mixed-level logistic regression.

RESULTS

Among 57,791 patients from 150 practices, 19,837 received systemic treatment within 30 days of death. We observed 36.6% of White patients, 32.7% of Black patients, 43.3% of commercially insured patients, and 37.0% of Medicaid patients received EOL systemic treatment. White patients and those with commercial insurance were more likely to receive EOL systemic treatment than Black patients or those with Medicaid. Treatment at community practices was associated with higher odds of receiving 30-day systemic EOL treatment than treatment at academic centers (adjusted OR, 1.51). We observed large variations in EOL systemic treatment rates across practices.

CONCLUSION

In a large real-world population, EOL systemic treatment rates were related to patient race, insurance type, and practice setting. Future work should examine factors that contribute to this usage pattern and its impact on downstream care.

[Media: see text].

Recommended first-line management of asymptomatic brain metastases from EGFR mutant and ALK positive non-small cell lung cancer varies significantly according to specialty: an international survey of clinical practice

Background

The role for radiotherapy or surgery in the upfront management of brain metastases (BrM) in epidermal growth factor receptor mutant (EGFRm) or anaplastic lymphoma kinase translocation positive (ALK+) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is uncertain because of a lack of prospective evidence supporting tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) monotherapy. Further understanding of practice heterogeneity is necessary to guide collaborative efforts in establishing guideline recommendations.

Methods

We conducted an international survey among medical (MO), clinical (CO), and radiation oncologists (RO), as well as neurosurgeons (NS), of treatment recommendations for asymptomatic BrM (in non-eloquent regions) EGFRm or ALK+ NSCLC patients according to specific clinical scenarios. We grouped and compared treatment recommendations according to specialty. Responses were summarized using counts and percentages and analyzed using the Fisher exact test.

Results

A total of 449 surveys were included in the final analysis: 48 CO, 85 MO, 60 NS, and 256 RO. MO and CO were significantly more likely than RO and NS to recommend first-line TKI monotherapy, regardless of the number and/or size of asymptomatic BrM (in non-eloquent regions). Radiotherapy in addition to TKI as first-line management was preferred by all specialties for patients with ≥4 BrM. NS recommended surgical resection more often than other specialties for BrM measuring >2 cm.

Conclusions

Recommendations for the management of BrM from EGFRm or ALK+ NSCLC vary significantly according to oncology sub-specialties. Development of multidisciplinary guidelines and further research on establishing optimal treatment strategies is warranted.

Team-Based Care in Oncology: The Impact of the Advanced Practice Provider

Integration of APPs into care teams affects quality and safety for the oncology patient. Learn the best practices and understand the concepts of onboarding, orientation, mentorship, scope of practice, and top of license. Review how productivity and other incentive programs can be adapted to integrate APPs and focus on team-based metrics.

The Effect of Surgeon Referral and a Radiation Oncologist Productivity-Based Metric on Radiation Therapy Receipt Among Elderly Women With Early Stage Breast Cancer: Analysis From a Tertiary Cancer Network

Purpose

: Guidelines for early-stage breast cancer allow for radiation therapy (RT) omission after breast conserving surgery among older women, though high utilization of RT persists. This study explored surgeon referral and the effect of a productivity-based bonus metric for radiation oncologists in an academic institution with centralized quality assurance review.

Methods and materials

: We evaluated patients ≥70 years of age treated with breast conserving surgery for estrogen receptor (ER)+ pT1N0 breast cancer at a single tertiary cancer network between 2015 and 2018. The primary outcomes were radiation oncology referral and RT receipt. Covariables included patient and physician characteristics and treatment decisions before versus after productivity metric implementation. Univariable generalized linear effects models explored associations between these outcomes and covariables.

Results

: Of 703 patients included, 483 (69%) were referred to radiation oncology and 273 (39%) received RT (among those referred, 57% received RT). No difference in RT receipt pre- versus post-productivity metric implementation was observed (P = .57). RT receipt was associated with younger patient age (70-74 years; odds ratio [OR], 2.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.54-4.57) and higher grade (grade 3; OR, 7.75; 95% CI, 3.33-18.07). Initial referral was associated with younger age (70-74; OR, 5.64; 95% CI, 3.37-0.45) and higher performance status (Karnofsky performance status ≥90; OR, 5.34; 95% CI, 2.63-10.83).

Conclusions

: Nonreferral to radiation oncology accounted for half of RT omission but was based on age and Karnofsky performance status, in accordance with guidelines. Lack of radiation oncologist practice change in response to misaligned financial incentives is reassuring, potentially reflecting incentive design and/or centralized quality assurance review. Multi-institutional studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Trends in Medically Integrated Dispensing Among Oncology Practices

PURPOSE

The integration of pharmacies with oncology practices-known as medically integrated dispensing or in-office dispensing-could improve care coordination but may incentivize overprescribing or inappropriate prescribing. Because little is known about this emerging phenomenon, we analyzed historical trends in medically integrated dispensing.

METHODS

Annual IQVIA data on oncologists were linked to 2010-2019 National Council for Prescription Drug Programs pharmacy data; data on commercially insured patients diagnosed with any of six common cancer types; and summary data on providers' Medicare billing. We calculated the national prevalence of medically integrated dispensing among community and hospital-based oncologists. We also analyzed the characteristics of the oncologists and patients affected by this care model.

RESULTS

Between 2010 and 2019, the percentage of oncologists in practices with medically integrated dispensing increased from 12.8% to 32.1%. The share of community oncologists in dispensing practices increased from 7.6% to 28.3%, whereas the share of hospital-based oncologists in dispensing practices increased from 18.3% to 33.4%. Rates of medically integrated dispensing varied considerably across states. Oncologists who dispensed had higher patient volumes (P < .001) and a smaller share of Medicare beneficiaries (P < .001) than physicians who did not dispense. Patients treated by dispensing oncologists had higher risk and comorbidity scores (P < .001) and lived in areas with a higher % Black population (P < .001) than patients treated by nondispensing oncologists.

CONCLUSION

Medically integrated dispensing has increased significantly among oncology practices over the past 10 years. The reach, clinical impact, and economic implications of medically integrated dispensing should be evaluated on an ongoing basis.

Association of Oncologist Participation in Medicare's Oncology Care Model With Patient Receipt of Novel Cancer Therapies

IMPORTANCE

Medicare's Oncology Care Model (OCM) was an alternative payment model that tied performance-based payments to cost and quality goals for participating oncology practices. A major concern about the OCM regarded inclusion of high-cost cancer therapies, which could potentially disincentivize oncologists from prescribing novel therapies.

OBJECTIVE

To examine whether oncologist participation in the OCM changed the likelihood that patients received novel therapies vs alternative treatments.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cohort study of Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program data and Medicare claims compared patient receipt of novel therapies for patients treated by oncologists participating vs not participating in the OCM in the period before (January 2015-June 2016) and after (July 2016-December 2018) OCM initiation. Participants included Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries in SEER registries who were eligible to receive 1 of 10 novel cancer therapies that received US Food and Drug Administration approval in the 18 months before implementation of the OCM. The study excluded the Hawaii registry because complete data were not available at the time of the data request. Patients in the OCM vs non-OCM groups were matched on novel therapy cohort, outcome time period, and oncologist specialist status. Analysis was conducted between July 2021 and April 2022.

EXPOSURES

Oncologist participation in the OCM.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Preplanned analyses evaluated patient receipt of 1 of 10 novel therapies vs alternative therapies specific to the patient's cancer for the overall study sample and for racial subgroups.

RESULTS

The study included 2839 matched patients (760 in the OCM group and 2079 in the non-OCM group; median [IQR] age, 72.7 [68.3-77.6] years; 1591 women [56.0%]). Among patients in the non-OCM group, 33.2% received novel therapies before and 40.1% received novel therapies after the start of the OCM vs 39.9% and 50.3% of patients in the OCM group (adjusted difference-in-differences, 3.5 percentage points; 95% CI, -3.7 to 10.7 percentage points; P = .34). In subgroup analyses, second-line immunotherapy use in lung cancer was greater among patients in the OCM group vs non-OCM group (adjusted difference-in-differences, 17.4 percentage points; 95% CI, 4.8-30.0 percentage points; P = .007), but no differences were seen in other subgroups. Over the entire study period, patients with oncologists participating in the OCM were more likely to receive novel therapies than those with oncologists who were not participating (odds ratio, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.09-1.97; P = .01).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This study found that participation in the OCM was not associated with oncologists' prescribing novel therapies to Medicare beneficiaries with cancer. These findings suggest that OCM financial incentives did not decrease patient access to novel therapies.

Factors associated with RVU generation in common sports medicine procedures

INTRODUCTION

Relative value units (RVUs) are integral to the U.S. physician compensation system used by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. The use of 'work RVUs' (herein, wRVUs) is intended to reimburse physicians according to the amount of expertise and effort needed to safely and effectively perform a procedure. Our purpose was to determine: 1) the number of wRVUs/hour generated by common sports medicine surgical procedures; and 2) how patient characteristics, surgical approach, and practice setting are associated with the number of wRVUs/hour. This analysis was performed to infer whether wRVUs are assigned appropriately according to the factors on which they are purported to be based.

METHODS

We queried the American College of Surgeons' National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database for common sports medicine surgical procedures performed in 2018. Data from 19,877 patients (8,258 women) with a mean age of 48 years (range, 18-90) who underwent a surgical sports medicine procedure were analyzed. Work RVUs and operative time were used to calculate work RVUs/hour for each surgical procedure. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to assess correlations between patient characteristics and wRVUs/hour.

RESULTS

Knee chondroplasty generated the most mean (± standard deviation) wRVUs/hour at 22 ± 0.5, whereas 'open tenodesis of biceps tendon, long head' generated the least at 9.6 ± 0.25 wRVUs/hour. Factors associated with a greater mean number of wRVUs/hour were younger patient age, female sex, arthroscopic approach, and outpatient setting. Arthroscopic procedures also generated more wRVUs/hour than the same procedures performed through an open approach. wRVUs were not correlated with case complexity or surgical time.

CONCLUSION

wRVUs/hour in surgical sports medicine procedures vary widely depending on the procedure type, patient characteristics, surgical approach, and practice setting.

Two views of cancer medicines: Imagery versus evidence

Despite advertising imagery portraying cancer medicines as offering substantial improvement or cure, most patients can expect modest or no incremental benefit from most new treatments, according to pre-specified criteria. When improvements in overall survival are demonstrated, they average just 2.1 months. Despite limited benefits, drug prices have risen while median household incomes have remained largely unchanged, and these higher prices are poorly correlated with improved outcomes. Better alignment of perception with demonstrated drug benefit could be achieved by limitations on advertising and improved labeling or other disclosures. Reforms are also needed to remove financial incentives to prescribe costlier drugs.

Physician Incentive Compensation Plans in Academic Medical Centers: The Imperative to Prioritize Value

The emphasis on clinical volume in physician compensation plans has diminished professional vitality in academic medical centers and increased the cost of health care. Physician incentive compensation plans that focus on clinical volume can distort clinical encounters and fail to incorporate the professionalism and intrinsic motivators of clinicians. We assert herein that physician incentive compensation plans should reward clinical value (quality/cost) rather than clinical volume. The recommended change is compelled by the tenets of medical professionalism, the need to cultivate meaning in clinical practice, and the urgent financial and moral imperatives to improve health outcomes and reduce cost. The design of physician incentive compensation plans should incorporate accurate and valid measures of quality and cost, behavioral economic considerations, transparency and equity, prospective assessment of the impact on key outcomes, and flexible elements that encourage innovation and preserve fidelity to unique practice circumstances. Physicians should be recognized in compensation plans for enhancing the value of care, inspiring and educating the future clinical workforce, and improving public health through discovery.

Evaluation of Hypofractionated Radiation Therapy Use and Patient-Reported Outcomes in Men With Nonmetastatic Prostate Cancer in Australia and New Zealand

IMPORTANCE

Randomized clinical trials in prostate cancer have reported noninferior outcomes for hypofractionated radiation therapy (HRT) compared with conventional RT (CRT); however, uptake of HRT across jurisdictions is variable.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the use of HRT vs CRT in men with nonmetastatic prostate cancer and compare patient-reported outcomes (PROs) at a population level.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Registry-based cohort study from the Australian and New Zealand Prostate Cancer Outcomes Registry (PCOR-ANZ). Participants were men with nonmetastatic prostate cancer treated with primary RT (excluding brachytherapy) from January 2016 to December 2019. Data were analyzed in March 2021.

EXPOSURES

HRT defined as 2.5 to 3.3 Gy and CRT defined as 1.7 to 2.3 Gy per fraction.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Temporal trends and institutional, clinicopathological, and sociodemographic factors associated with use of HRT were analyzed. PROs were assessed 12 months following RT using the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC)-26 Short Form questionnaire. Differences in PROs were analyzed by adjusting for age and National Comprehensive Cancer Network risk category.

RESULTS

Of 8305 men identified as receiving primary RT, 6368 met the inclusion criteria for CRT (n = 4482) and HRT (n = 1886). The median age was 73.1 years (IQR, 68.2-77.3 years), 2.6% (168) had low risk, 45.7% (2911) had intermediate risk, 44.5% (2836) had high-/very high-risk, and 7.1% (453) had regional nodal disease. Use of HRT increased from 2.1% (9 of 435) in the first half of 2016 to 52.7% (539 of 1023) in the second half of 2019, with lower uptake in the high-/very high-risk (1.9% [4 of 215] to 42.4% [181 of 427]) compared with the intermediate-risk group (2.2% [4 of 185] to 67.6% [325 of 481]) (odds ratio, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.15-0.45). Substantial variability in the use of HRT for intermediate-risk disease remained at the institutional level (median 53.3%; range, 0%-100%) and clinician level (median 57.9%; range, 0%-100%) in the last 2 years of the study period. There were no clinically significant differences across EPIC-26 urinary and bowel functional domains or bother scores.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this cohort study, use of HRT for prostate cancer increased substantially from 2016. This population-level data demonstrated clinically equivalent PROs and supports the continued implementation of HRT into routine practice. The wide variation in practice observed at the jurisdictional, institutional, and clinician level provides stakeholders with information that may be useful in targeting implementation strategies and benchmarking services.

Real-World Use of Bone Modifying Agents in Metastatic Castration-Sensitive Prostate Cancer

BACKGROUND

Bone modifying agent (BMA) therapy is recommended for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) but not metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC). BMA treatment in mCSPC may therefore constitute overuse.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study using linked Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare data, we included patients diagnosed with stage IV prostate adenocarcinoma from 2007-2015, who were age ≥66 years at diagnosis and received androgen deprivation or antiandrogen therapy. We excluded patients who had previously received BMAs or had existing osteoporosis, osteopenia, hypercalcemia, or prior bone fracture. The primary outcome was receipt of BMA (zoledronic acid or denosumab) within 180 days of diagnosis (emergence of CRPC within this time frame is unlikely). Secondary outcome was BMA within 90 days. Exposures of interest included practice location (physician office vs. hospital outpatient) and specialty (medical oncologist vs. urologist) of treating physician.

RESULTS

Our sample included 2,627 patients, of which 52.9% were treated by medical oncologists and 47.1% by urologists; 77.7% and 22.3% received care in physician office and hospital outpatient locations, respectively. Overall, 23.6% received a BMA within 180 days; 18.4% did within 90 days. BMA therapy was more common among patients treated by oncologists (odds ratio = 8.23, 95% confidence interval = 6.41 to 10.57) and in physician office locations (odds ratio = 1.33, 95% confidence interval = 1.06 to 1.69). Utilization has increased: 17.3% of patients received BMAs from 2007-2009 (17.3% zoledronic acid, 0% denosumab), and 28.1% from 2012-2015 (8.4% zoledronic acid, 20.3% denosumab).

CONCLUSIONS

Among mCSPC patients who had no evidence of high osteoporotic fracture risk, over one-quarter received BMAs in recent years. This overuse may lead to excess costs and toxicity.

What are determinants of utilisation of pharmaceutical anticancer treatment during the last year of life in Norway? A retrospective registry study

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to investigate the use of, and predictors for, pharmaceutical anticancer treatment (PACT) towards the end of a patient's life in a country with a public healthcare system.

DESIGN

Retrospective registry study.

SETTING

Secondary care in Norway.

PARTICIPANTS

All Norwegian patients with cancer (International Classification of Diseases tenth revision (ICD-10) codes C00-99, D00-09, D37-48) in contact with a somatic hospital in Norway between 2009 and 2017 (N=420 655). Analyses were performed on a subsample of decedents with follow-back time of more than 1 year (2013-2017, N=52 496).

INTERVENTIONS

N/A.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Proportion of patients receiving PACT during the last year and month of life. We calculated CIs with block bootstrapping, while predictors of PACT were estimated with logistic regression.

RESULTS

24.0% (95% CI 23.4% to 24.6%) of the patients received PACT during the last year of life and 3.2% (95% CI 3.0% to 3.5%) during their final month. The proportion during the last month was highest for multiple myeloma (12.7%) and breast cancer (6.5%) and lowest for urinary tract (1.1%) and prostate and kidney cancer (1.4%). Patients living in northern (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.94) and western (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.96) Norway had lower odds of PACT during the last month, while patients with myeloma (OR 3.0, 95% CI 2.5 to 3.7) and breast (OR 1.4, 95% CI 1.1 to 1.6) had higher odds. Kidney cancer (OR 0.25, 95% CI 0.2. to 0.4), urinary tract (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.3 to 0.5) and prostate cancer (OR 0.4, 95% CI 0.3 to 0.5) were associated with lower probability of receiving PACT within the last month.

CONCLUSIONS

The proportion of patients receiving PACT in Norway is lower than in several other industrialised countries. Age, type of cancer and area of living are significant determinants of variation in PACT.

Immune-Based Cancer Treatment: Addressing Disparities in Access and Outcomes

Avoidable differences in the care and outcomes of patients with cancer (i.e., cancer care disparities) emerge or worsen with discoveries of new, more effective approaches to cancer diagnosis and treatment. The rapidly expanding use of immunotherapy for many different cancers across the spectrum from late to early stages has, predictably, been followed by emerging evidence of disparities in access to these highly effective but expensive treatments. The danger that these new treatments will further widen preexisting cancer care and outcome disparities requires urgent corrective intervention. Using a multilevel etiologic framework that categorizes the targets of intervention at the individual, provider, health care system, and social policy levels, we discuss options for a comprehensive approach to prevent and, where necessary, eliminate disparities in access to the clinical trials that are defining the optimal use of immunotherapy for cancer, as well as its safe use in routine care among appropriately diverse populations. We make the case that, contrary to the traditional focus on the individual level in descriptive reports of health care disparities, there is sequentially greater leverage at the provider, health care system, and social policy levels to overcome the challenge of cancer care and outcomes disparities, including access to immunotherapy. We also cite examples of effective government-sponsored and policy-level interventions, such as the National Cancer Institute Minority-Underserved Community Oncology Research Program and the Affordable Care Act, that have expanded clinical trial access and access to high-quality cancer care in general.

Small-molecule inhibitors of breast cancer-related targets: Potential therapeutic agents for breast cancer

Despite dramatic advances in cancer research and therapy, breast cancer remains a tricky health problem and represents a top biomedical research priority. Nowadays, breast cancer is still the leading cause of malignancy-related deaths in women, and incidence and mortality rates of it are expected to increase significantly the next years. Currently more and more researchers are interested in the study of breast cancer by its arising in young women. The common treatment options of breast cancer are chemotherapy, immunotherapy, hormone therapy, surgery, and radiotherapy. Most of them require chemical agents, such as PARP inhibitors, CDK4/6 inhibitors, and HER2 inhibitors. Recent studies suggest that some targets or pathways, including BRD4, PLK1, PD-L1, HDAC, and PI3K/AKT/mTOR, are tightly related to the occurrence and development of breast cancer. This article reviews the interplay between these targets and breast cancer and summarizes the progress of current research on small molecule inhibitors of these anti-breast cancer targets. The review aims to provide structural and theoretical basis for designing novel anti-breast cancer agents.

Prognostic Gene Expression Profiling in Cutaneous Melanoma: Identifying the Knowledge Gaps and Assessing the Clinical Benefit

Importance

Use of prognostic gene expression profile (GEP) testing in cutaneous melanoma (CM) is rising despite a lack of endorsement as standard of care.

Objective

To develop guidelines within the national Melanoma Prevention Working Group (MPWG) on integration of GEP testing into the management of patients with CM, including (1) review of published data using GEP tests, (2) definition of acceptable performance criteria, (3) current recommendations for use of GEP testing in clinical practice, and (4) considerations for future studies.

Evidence Review

The MPWG members and other international melanoma specialists participated in 2 online surveys and then convened a summit meeting. Published data and meeting abstracts from 2015 to 2019 were reviewed.

Findings

The MPWG members are optimistic about the future use of prognostic GEP testing to improve risk stratification and enhance clinical decision-making but acknowledge that current utility is limited by test performance in patients with stage I disease. Published studies of GEP testing have not evaluated results in the context of all relevant clinicopathologic factors or as predictors of regional nodal metastasis to replace sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB). The performance of GEP tests has generally been reported for small groups of patients representing particular tumor stages or in aggregate form, such that stage-specific performance cannot be ascertained, and without survival outcomes compared with data from the American Joint Committee on Cancer 8th edition melanoma staging system international database. There are significant challenges to performing clinical trials incorporating GEP testing with SLNB and adjuvant therapy. The MPWG members favor conducting retrospective studies that evaluate multiple GEP testing platforms on fully annotated archived samples before embarking on costly prospective studies and recommend avoiding routine use of GEP testing to direct patient management until prospective studies support their clinical utility.

Conclusions and Relevance

More evidence is needed to support using GEP testing to inform recommendations regarding SLNB, intensity of follow-up or imaging surveillance, and postoperative adjuvant therapy. The MPWG recommends further research to assess the validity and clinical applicability of existing and emerging GEP tests. Decisions on performing GEP testing and patient management based on these results should only be made in the context of discussion of testing limitations with the patient or within a multidisciplinary group.

Why individual-level interventions are not enough: Systems-level determinants of oral anticancer medication adherence

Nonadherence to oral anticancer medications (OAMs) in the United States is as low as 33% for some cancers. The reasons for nonadherence to these lifesaving medications are multifactorial, yet the majority of studies focus on patient-level factors influencing uptake and adherence. Individually based interventions to increase patient adherence have not been effective, and this warrants attention to factors at the payor, pharmaceutical, and clinical systems levels. Based on the authors' research and clinical experiences, this commentary brings fresh attention to the long-standing issue of OAM nonadherence, a growing quality-of-care issue, from a systems perspective. In this commentary, the key driving factors in pharmaceutical and payor systems (state and federal laws, payor/insurance companies, and pharmaceutical companies), clinical systems (hospitals and providers), and patient contexts that have trickle-down effects on patient adherence to OAMs are outlined. In the end, the authors' recommendations include examining the influence of laws governing OAM drug pricing, OAM supply, and provider reimbursement; reducing the need for prior authorization of long-approved OAMs; identifying cost-effective ways for providers to monitor nonadherence; examining issues of provider bias in OAM prescriptions; and further elucidating in which contexts patients are likely to be able to adhere. These recommendations offer a starting point for an examination of the chain of systems influencing patient adherence and may help to finally resolve persistently high levels of OAM nonadherence.

TP53 Mutations and Outcomes in Breast Cancer: Reading beyond the Headlines

TP53 is the most frequently mutated gene in breast cancer, but its role in survival is confounded by different studies concluding that TP53 mutations are associated with negative, neutral, or positive outcomes. Closer examination showed that many studies were limited by factors such as imprecise methods to detect TP53 mutations and small cohorts that combined patients treated with drugs having very different mechanisms of action. When only studies of patients receiving the same treatment(s) were compared, they tended to agree. These analyses reveal a role for TP53 in response to different treatments as complex as its different biological activities. We discuss studies that have assessed the role of TP53 mutations in breast cancer treatment and limitations in interpreting reported results.

Conflicts of interest in dialysis: A barrier to policy reforms

Conflicts of interest involving physicians are commonplace in the US, occurring across many different specialties and subspecialties in a variety of clinical settings. In nephrology, two important scenarios in which conflicts of interest arise are dialysis facility joint venture (JV) arrangements and financial participation in End-stage Kidney Disease Seamless Care Organizations (ESCOs). Whether conflicts of interest occurring in either of these settings influence decision-making or patient care outcomes is not known due to a lack of transparent, publicly available information, and opportunities to conduct independent study. We discuss possible benefits and risks of nephrologist's financial participation in JVs and ESCOs and possible mechanisms for disclosure and reporting of such arrangements as well as risk mitigation.

Use of High-Cost Cancer Treatments in Academic and Nonacademic Practice

BACKGROUND

Academic physicians, such as those affiliated with National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated Comprehensive Cancer Centers, may have different practice patterns regarding the use of high-cost cancer drugs than nonacademic physicians.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

For this cohort study, we linked cancer registry, administrative, and demographic data for patients with newly diagnosed cancer in North Carolina from 2004 to 2011. We selected cancer types with multiple U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved, National Comprehensive Cancer Network-recommended treatment options and large differences in reimbursement between higher-priced and lower-priced options (stage IV colorectal, stage IV lung, and stage II-IV head-and-neck cancers). We assessed whether provider's practice setting-NCI-designated Comprehensive Cancer Center ("NCI") versus other location ("non-NCI")-was associated with use of higher-cost treatment options. We used inverse probability of exposure weighting to control for patient characteristics.

RESULTS

Of 800 eligible patients, 79.6% were treated in non-NCI settings. Patients treated in non-NCI settings were more likely to receive high-cost treatment than patients treated in NCI settings (36.0% vs. 23.2%), with an unadjusted prevalence difference of 12.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.1%-20.0%). After controlling for potential confounding factors, non-NCI patients remained more likely to receive high-cost treatment, although the strength of association was attenuated (adjusted prevalence difference, 9.6%; 95% CI -0.1%-18.7%). Exploratory analyses suggested potential heterogeneity across cancer type and insurance status.

CONCLUSION

Use of higher-cost cancer treatments may be more common in non-NCI than NCI settings. This may reflect differential implementation of clinical evidence, local practice variation, or possibly a response to the reimbursement incentives presented by chemotherapy billing.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Oncology care delivery and practice patterns may vary between care settings. By comparing otherwise similar patients treated in National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated Comprehensive Cancer Centers with those treated elsewhere, this study suggests that patients may be more likely to receive treatment with certain expensive cancer drugs if treated in the non-NCI setting. These practice differences may result in differences in patient costs and outcomes as a result of where they receive treatment.

Cure at what (systemic) financial cost? Integrating novel therapies into first-line Hodgkin lymphoma treatment

Classic Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) stands out as success story in the field of medical oncology, with multiagent chemotherapy with or without radiation leading to durable remission for most patients. Large-scale clinical trials during the past 40 years have sought to minimize toxicities while maintaining strong efficacy, including efforts to reduce the size of radiation fields, minimize alkylator chemotherapy, reduce the number of chemotherapy cycles, and omit radiation in select populations. The last decade has also ushered in novel therapies, including brentuximab vedotin (BV), that have improved clinical outcomes for patients with cHL resistant to standard cytotoxic therapies. More recently, a large randomized trial compared BV plus chemotherapy with chemotherapy alone for first-line treatment of advanced stage cHL. With ∼24 months of available follow-up, the BV containing regimen was found to be associated with a reduction in the risk of progression, death, or incomplete response to first-line treatment (modified progression-free survival). Whether this early signal of improved efficacy is worth the additional acute toxicities and added drug-related expenses associated with incorporating BV into first-line treatment remains controversial. This chapter provides historical background; reviews the cost-effectiveness of available cHL therapies; and summarizes potential ways to balance innovation, affordability, and patient access to novel therapeutics.

Factors Associated with Reoperation in Breast-Conserving Surgery for Cancer: A Prospective Study of American Society of Breast Surgeon Members

Background

More than 20% of patients undergoing initial breast-conserving surgery (BCS) for cancer require reoperation. To address this concern, the American Society of Breast Surgeons (ASBrS) endorsed 10 processes of care (tools) in 2015 to be considered by surgeons to de-escalate reoperations. In a planned follow-up, we sought to determine which tools were associated with fewer reoperations.

Methods

A cohort of ASBrS member surgeons prospectively entered data into the ASBrS Mastery^® registry on consecutive patients undergoing BCS in 2017. The association between tools and reoperations was estimated via multivariate and hierarchical ranking analyses.

Results

Seventy-one surgeons reported reoperations in 486 (12.3%) of 3954 cases (mean 12.7% [standard deviation (SD) 7.7%], median 11.5% [range 0–32%]). There was an eightfold difference between surgeons in the 10th and 90th percentile performance groups. Actionable factors associated with fewer reoperations included routine planned cavity side-wall shaves, surgeon use of ultrasound (US), neoadjuvant chemotherapy, intra-operative pathologic margin assessment, and use of a pre-operative diagnostic imaging modality beyond conventional 2D mammography. For patients with invasive cancer, ≥ 24% of those who underwent reexcision did so for reported margins of < 1 or 2 mm, representing noncompliance with the SSO-ASTRO margin guideline.

Conclusions

Although ASBrS member surgeons had some of the lowest rates of reoperation reported in any registry, significant intersurgeon variability persisted. Further efforts to lower rates are therefore warranted. Opportunities to do so were identified by adopting those processes of care, including improved compliance with the SSO-ASTRO margin guideline, which were associated with fewer reoperations.