Use of Guideline Recommended Follow-Up Care in Cancer Survivors

Virtual Colorectal Cancer Surveillance: Bringing Scope Rate to Target

BACKGROUND

Although endoscopy is recommended at 1 year after colorectal cancer (CRC) resection to detect locally recurrent CRC, earlier work at our Veterans Affairs (VA) facility demonstrated that 35% of patients achieve this metric.

STUDY DESIGN

The interdisciplinary team used quality improvement methods to standardize processes and implement a gastroenterology-managed virtual surveillance clinic. The intervention clinic was implemented in August 2014. Veterans who underwent resection for stage I to III CRC at a single VA facility from January 2010 to December 2017 were included, with those undergoing resection between January 2010 and July 2014 considered pre-intervention and those undergoing resection between August 2014 and December 2017 considered post-intervention. The primary endpoint was the proportion of eligible patients for whom endoscopy was completed within 1 year of resection. Secondary outcomes were the proportion of patients who completed endoscopy within 18 months of resection or at any time post-resection and time to surveillance endoscopy.

RESULTS

A total of 186 patients underwent resection for stage I to III CRC from 2010 to 2017; of these, 160 (86%) were eligible for endoscopy at 1-year post-resection (98 pre-intervention and 62 post-intervention). In the pre-intervention period, 30 of 98 patients (30.6%) underwent surveillance endoscopy within 1 year vs 31 of 62 (50.0%) post-intervention (p = 0.031). When evaluated at 18 months after resection, 56 of 98 patients (57.1%) in the pre-intervention group vs 52 of 62 (83.9%) in the post-intervention group underwent surveillance endoscopy (p = 0.001). Median time from resection to endoscopy decreased during the study period, from 1.19 years pre-intervention (interquartile range 0.93 to 1.74 years) to 1.0 years post-intervention (interquartile range 0.93 to 1.09 years) (p = 0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of a virtual surveillance clinic with standardized processes was associated with increased guideline-concordant endoscopic surveillance after CRC resection.

Improved quality of colon cancer surveillance after implementation of a personalized surveillance schedule

BACKGROUND

Early detection of recurrence through surveillance after curative surgery for primary colon cancer is recommended. We previously reported inadequate quality of surveillance among patients operated for colon cancer. These poor results led to the introduction of a personalized surveillance schedule. This study reassesses the quality of surveillance after the introduction of the personalized schedule.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 93 patients undergoing curative surgery for colon cancer between January 2009 and December 2014 (prospective data registration) were included in this retrospective single-center cohort study. Written informed consent was given by all patients. Compliance with surveillance was compared with national guidelines, as well as with the previous results and analyzed depending on where surveillance was conducted (general practitioner or outpatient clinic).

RESULTS

Adherence to surveillance was higher when performed by oncologists compared to general practitioners with an odds ratio (OR), 6.03 (95%CI: 3.41-10.67, P = .001). Compared with the previous study, adherence to surveillance was significantly higher in the later cohort with an OR = 4.55 (95%CI: 2.50-8.33, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates that the implementation of a personalized surveillance schedule improves adherence to recommendations and that awareness can be increased with this simple measure.

Enhancing prostate cancer survivorship care through self-management

The lack of clear roles for prostate cancer survivorship care providers places prostate cancer survivors at significant risk of inappropriate use of services delivered piecemeal by different providers, persistent bothersome symptoms, and silent suffering. Optimizing quality of care for prostate cancer survivors hinges on decreasing fragmentation of care, and providing quality symptom management. This is achieved through comprehensive, appropriate medical, surgical, pharmacological and psychosocial care, coupled with self-management, as highlighted in several recent resources addressing long-term and late effects of treatment. Although further study is warranted, prostate cancer survivors engaging in self-management may reduce the negative impact of prostate cancer in their lives through better quality of care (better symptom management and efficient use of services) and quality of life.

Surveillance Practice Patterns after Curative Intent Therapy for Stage I Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer in the Medicare Population

OBJECTIVES

Recurrence after treatment for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is common, and routine imaging surveillance is recommended by evidence-based guidelines. Little is known about surveillance patterns after curative intent therapy for early stage NSCLC. We sought to understand recent practice patterns for surveillance of stage I NSCLC in the first two years after curative intent therapy in the Medicare population.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare linked database we selected patients diagnosed with stage I NSCLC between 1998 and 2008. We studied adherence to surveillance guidelines based on specialty society recommendations for chest radiography and computed tomography (CT) scanning. We also tracked the use of Positron Emission Tomography (PET) scans, which are not recommended for surveillance. We calculated the percent of patients who received guideline-adherent surveillance imaging and used logistic regression to determine associations between patient and provider factors and guideline adherence.

RESULTS

Overall, 61.4% of patients received guideline-adherent surveillance during the initial 2 years after treatment. Use of CT scans in the first year after treatment increased from 47.4% in 1998-78.5% in 2008, and PET use increased from 5.8% to 28.9%. Adherence with surveillance imaging was associated with younger age, higher income, more comorbidities, access to primary care, and receipt of SBRT as the primary treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Adherence to specialty society guidelines for surveillance after treatment for stage I NSCLC was poor in this population of Medicare beneficiaries, with less than two-thirds of patients receiving recommended imaging, and almost 30% receiving non-recommended PET scans.

Use of posttreatment imaging and biomarkers in survivors of early-stage breast cancer: Inappropriate surveillance or necessary care?

BACKGROUND

Advanced imaging and serum biomarkers are commonly used for surveillance in patients with early-stage breast cancer, despite recommendations against this practice. Incentives to perform such low-value testing may be less prominent in integrated health care delivery systems. The purpose of the current study was to evaluate and compare the use of these services within 2 integrated systems: Kaiser Permanente (KP) and Intermountain Healthcare (IH). The authors also sought to distinguish the indication for testing: diagnostic purposes or routine surveillance.

METHODS

Patients with American Joint Committee on Cancer stage 0 to II breast cancer diagnosed between 2009 and 2010 were identified and the use of imaging and biomarker tests over an 18-month period were quantified, starting at 1 year after diagnosis. Chart abstraction was performed on a random sample of patients who received testing to identify the indication for testing. Multivariate regression was used to explore associations with the use of nonrecommended care.

RESULTS

A total of 6585 patients were identified; 22% had stage 0 disease, 44% had stage I disease, and 34% had stage II disease. Overall, 24% of patients received at least 1 imaging test (25% at KP vs 22% at IH; P = .009) and 28% of patients received at least 1 biomarker (36% at KP vs 13% at IH; P<.001). Chart abstraction revealed that 84% of imaging tests were performed to evaluate symptoms or signs. Virtually all biomarkers were ordered for routine surveillance. Stage of disease, medical center that provided the services, and provider experience were found to be significantly associated with the use of biomarkers.

CONCLUSIONS

Advanced imaging was most often performed for appropriate indications, but biomarkers were used for nonrecommended surveillance. Distinguishing between inappropriate use for surveillance and appropriate diagnostic testing is essential when evaluating adherence to recommendations.

Use of imaging for staging of early-stage breast cancer in two integrated health care systems: adherence with a choosing wisely recommendation

PURPOSE

Advanced imaging is commonly used for staging of early-stage breast cancer, despite recommendations against this practice. The objective of this study was to evaluate and compare use of imaging for staging of breast cancer in two integrated health care systems, Kaiser Permanente (KP) and Intermountain Healthcare (IH). We also sought to distinguish whether imaging was routine or used for diagnostic purposes.

METHODS

We identified patients with stages 0 to IIB breast cancer diagnosed between 2010 and 2012. Using KP and IH electronic health records, we identified use of computed tomography, positron emission tomography, or bone scintigraphy 30 days before diagnosis to 30 days postsurgery. We performed chart abstraction on a random sample of patients who received a presurgical imaging test to identify indication.

RESULTS

For the sample of 10,010 patients, mean age at diagnosis was 60 years (range, 22 to 99 years); with 21% stage 0, 47% stage I, and 32% stage II. Overall, 15% of patients (n = 1,480) received at least one imaging test during the staging window, 15% at KP and 14% at IH (P = .5). Eight percent of patients received imaging before surgery, and 7% postsurgery. We found significant intraregional variation in imaging use. Chart abstraction (n = 129, 16% of patients who received presurgical imaging) revealed that 48% of presurgical imaging was diagnostic.

CONCLUSION

Use of imaging for staging of low-risk breast cancer was similar in both systems, and slightly lower than has been reported in the literature. Approximately half of imaging tests were ordered in response to a sign or symptom.

Health services utilisation in breast cancer survivors in Taiwan

Surveillance guidelines for breast cancer survivors recommend regular history and physical and mammography, and against routine imaging for detecting distant metastasis. Stage 0, I, II breast cancer cases treated at a major cancer center were identified from the Taiwan Cancer Registry. We used multivariable negative binomial and logistic regression analyses on institutional claims data to examine factors contributing to utilisation patterns of surveillance visits and tests in disease-free survivors. The mean number of surveillance visits during months 13 to 60 after cancer treatment initiation was 18.5 (SD 8.2) among the 2,090 breast cancer survivors followed for at least five years. After adjusting for patient and disease factors, the number of visits was the highest among patients mainly followed by medical oncologists compared to surgeons and radiation oncologists. Patient cohorts treated in more recent years had lower number of visits associated with care coordination effort, the adjusted mean being 19.2 visits for the 2002 cohort, and 16.3 visits for the 2008 cohort (p < 0.0001). Although imaging tests were highly utilised, there was a significant decrease in tumor marker testing from the 2002 to the 2008 treatment cohort (adjusted rate 99.4% to 35.1% respectively, p < 0.0001) in association with an institutional guideline change.

Predictors of imaging surveillance for surgically treated early-stage lung cancer

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines recommend routine imaging surveillance for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after treatment. Little is known about surveillance patterns for patients with surgically resected early-stage lung cancer in the community at large. We sought to characterize surveillance patterns in a national cohort.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End-Results (SEER)-Medicare database (1995-2010). Patients with stage I/II NSCLC treated with surgical resection were included. Our primary outcome was receipt of imaging between 4 and 8 months after the surgical procedure. Covariates included demographics and comorbidities.

RESULTS

Chest radiography (CXR) was the most frequent initial modality (60%), followed by chest computed tomography (CT) (25%). Positron emission tomography (PET) was least frequent as an initial imaging modality (3%). A total of 13% of patients received no imaging within the initial surveillance period. Adherence to National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines for imaging by overall prevalence was 47% for receipt of CT; however, rates of CT increased over time from 28% to 61% (p < 0.01). Reduced rates of CT were associated with stage I disease and surgical resection as the sole treatment modality.

CONCLUSIONS

Imaging after definitive surgical treatment for NSCLC predominantly used CXR rather than CT. Most of this imaging is likely for surveillance, and in that context CXR has inferior detection rates for recurrence and new cancers. Adherence to guideline-recommended CT surveillance after surgical treatment is poor, but the reasons are multifactorial. Efforts to improve adherence to imaging surveillance must be coupled with greater evidence demonstrating improved long-term outcomes.

Use of imaging and biomarker tests for posttreatment care of early-stage breast cancer survivors

BACKGROUND

The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) recently released a "Top Five" list of opportunities to improve the quality of cancer care. Item 4 on the list advises against using advanced imaging and biomarkers for surveillance in patients with breast cancer who are treated with curative intent. This study examined concordance with ASCO follow-up care guidelines for breast cancer survivors treated at an academic medical center.

METHODS

Claims data and medical records were reviewed and abstracted for early stage breast cancer survivors starting 1 year post diagnosis. A trained abstractor classified imaging tests as diagnostic or surveillance. Proportions and frequencies were generated for receipt of services. Multilevel logistic regression was used to estimate factors associated with receiving recommended and nonrecommended services and biomarker tests.

RESULTS

Records were available for 258 patients. Mean age at diagnosis was 58 years (standard deviation of 13 years), mean time since diagnosis was 6 years (standard deviation of 2 years), and 71% were stage 0/1. Only 47% of the sample received a mammogram within 1 year of diagnosis, and 55% of the sample received at least 1 nonrecommended imaging service for surveillance purposes. Seventy-seven percent of the sample received at least 1 nonrecommended biomarker test. Regression results indicate that main treating physician, advanced disease stage, younger age at diagnosis, and greater number of years since diagnosis were associated with receiving nonrecommended services for surveillance.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of nonrecommended services for surveillance occurs frequently among early-stage breast cancer survivors. There are opportunities to increase use of guideline concordant posttreatment care for breast cancer survivors.

Pattern of follow-up care and early relapse detection in breast cancer patients

Routine breast cancer follow-up aims at detecting second primary breast cancers and loco regional recurrences preclinically. We studied breast cancer follow-up practice and mode of relapse detection during the first 5 years of follow-up to determine the efficiency of the follow-up schedule. The Netherlands Cancer Registry provided data of 6,509 women, operated for invasive non-metastatic breast cancer in 2003-2004. In a random sample including 144 patients, adherence to follow-up guideline recommendations was studied. Mode of relapse detection was studied in 124 patients with a second primary breast cancer and 160 patients with a loco regional recurrence. On average 13 visits were performed during the first 5 years of the follow-up, whereas nine were recommended. With one, two and three medical disciplines involved, the number of visits was 9, 14 and 18, respectively. Seventy-five percent (93/124) of patients with a second primary breast cancer, 42 % (31/74) of patients with a loco regional recurrence after breast conserving surgery and 28 % (24/86) of patients with a loco regional recurrence after mastectomy had no symptoms at detection. To detect one loco regional recurrence or second primary breast cancer preclinically, 1,349 physical examinations versus 262 mammography and/or MRI tests were performed. Follow-up provided by only one discipline may decrease the number of unnecessary follow-up visits. Breast imaging plays a major and physical examination a minor role in the early detection of second primary breast cancers and loco regional recurrences. The yield of physical examination to detect relapses early is low and should therefore be minimised.

Adherence to surveillance care guidelines after breast and colorectal cancer treatment with curative intent

BACKGROUND

Evidence-based guidelines recommend routine surveillance, including office visits and testing, to detect new and recurrent disease among survivors of breast and colorectal cancer. The extent to which surveillance practice is consistent with guideline recommendations or may vary by age is not known.

METHODS

Cohorts of adult patients diagnosed with breast (n = 6205) and colorectal (n = 2297) cancer between 2000 and 2008 and treated with curative intent in 4 geographically diverse managed care environments were identified via tumor registries. Kaplan-Meier estimates were used to describe time to initial and subsequent receipt of surveillance services. Cox proportional hazards models evaluated the relation between patient characteristics and receipt of metastatic screening.

RESULTS

Within 18 months of treatment, 87.2% of breast cancer survivors received recommended mammograms, with significantly higher rates noted for patients aged 50 years to 65 years. Among survivors of colorectal cancer, only 55.0% received recommended colon examinations, with significantly lower rates for those aged ≥ 75 years. The majority of breast (64.7%) and colorectal (73.3%) cancer survivors received nonrecommended metastatic disease testing. In patients with breast cancer, factors associated with metastatic disease testing include white race (hazards ratio [HR], 1.13), comorbidities (HR, 1.17), and younger age (HR, 1.13; 1.15; 1.13 for age groups: <50, 50-64, and 65-74 respectively). In those with colorectal cancer, these factors included younger age (HR, 1.31; 1.25 for age groups: <50 and 50-64 respectively) and comorbidities (HR, 1.10).

CONCLUSIONS

Among an insured population, wide variation regarding the use of surveillance care was found by age and relative to guideline recommendations. Breast cancer survivors were found to have high rates of both guideline-recommended recurrence testing and non-guideline-recommended metastatic testing. Only approximately 50% of colorectal cancer survivors received recommended tests but greater than 67% received metastatic testing.

First indicators of relapse in breast cancer: evaluation of the follow-up program at our hospital

BACKGROUND

Guidelines for breast cancer patient follow-up have not been widely adopted in Japan. To assess our intensive follow-up program, we evaluated first relapse and its indicators in patients with breast cancer.

PATIENTS

Of 964 patients, 126 relapsed and 43 died in the median follow-up term of 45 months. Follow-ups were scheduled every 6-12 months for imaging and tumor marker (TM) evaluation.

RESULTS

Of 126 relapsed patients, 30 (23.8%) had symptoms of relapse. First indicators of relapse in 96 asymptomatic patients were physical examination in 24 patients (19%); imaging, 57 patients (45.3%); and TMs, 15 patients (11.9%). The most sensitive indicators were physical examination for local relapse, ultrasonography for regional lymph nodes, scintigraphy for bone, computed tomography for lung, and TMs for liver metastasis. During intensive follow-up, 43% of relapsed patients were identified by symptoms or physical examination. These patients had poor prognosis compare to patients identified by imaging or TMs in overall survival and post-relapse survival (p = 0.009 and 0.019, respectively). In all 964 patients, the relapse rates for stage I, IIA, IIB, and III tumors were 7.4, 7.9, 19.9, and 43.5%, respectively. The percentage of first relapse detected by imaging or TMs for stage I, IIA, IIB, and III were 4.7, 5.1, 11.8, and 19.8%, respectively. The cost of our follow-up program for 10 years was approximately 290,000 yen per patient.

CONCLUSION

A routine intensive follow-up program involving imaging and evaluation of TMs in all patients has low efficacy and high expenditure.

Surveillance of pancreatic cancer patients after surgical resection

BACKGROUND

There are no clear recommendations to guide posttreatment surveillance in patients with pancreatic cancer. Our goal was to describe the posttreatment surveillance patterns in patients undergoing curative-intent resection for pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

We used Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare linked data (1992-2005) to identify CT scans and physician visits in patients with pancreatic cancer who underwent curative resection (n = 2393). Surveillance began 90 days after surgery, and patients were followed for 2 years at 6-month intervals. Patients were censored if they died, experienced recurrence of disease, or entered hospice.

RESULTS

A total of 2045 patients survived uncensored to the beginning of the surveillance period. CT scan use decreased from 20.9% of patients in month 4 to 6.4% in month 27. There was no temporal pattern in CT use to suggest regular surveillance. Twenty-three percent of patients did not receive a CT scan in the year after surgery, increasing to 42% the second year. Patients who underwent adjuvant therapy and patients diagnosed in later years had higher CT scan use over the surveillance periods. Most patients visited both a primary care physician and a cancer specialist in each 6-month surveillance period. Patients who visited cancer specialists were more likely to have any CT scan and to be scanned more frequently.

CONCLUSIONS

Current surveillance patterns after resection for pancreatic cancer reflect the lack of established guidelines, implying a need for evaluation and standardization of surveillance protocols. The lack of a temporal pattern in CT testing suggests that most were obtained to evaluate symptoms rather than for routine surveillance.

Population-based longitudinal study of follow-up care for breast cancer survivors

PURPOSE

To describe the patterns of follow-up care provided to a population-based cohort of breast cancer survivors, and to assess factors associated with adherence to guidelines on follow-up care.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective longitudinal study of all women with surgically treated breast cancer who were without evidence of recurrence, advanced breast cancer, or new primary cancer and were diagnosed in Ontario, Canada, within a 2-year period (n = 11,219). They were followed for 5 years. The cohort was identified through the Ontario Cancer Registry, and individuals were linked across population-based administrative health databases. Frequency of and adherence to guideline recommendations for oncologist and primary care physician (PCP) visits; surveillance imaging for metastatic disease; and surveillance mammograms by year from diagnosis, age group, and income quintile were analyzed. Factors associated with adherence to guideline recommendations were analyzed.

RESULTS

Most women saw both oncologists and PCPs in each follow-up year. Approximately two thirds had surveillance mammograms in each follow-up year. Overall, two thirds had either fewer or greater than recommended oncology visits, one quarter had fewer than recommended surveillance mammograms, and half had greater than recommended surveillance imaging for metastatic disease.

CONCLUSION

This population-based study shows substantial variation in adherence to guideline recommendations, with both overuse and underuse of surveillance visits and tests. Most importantly, a substantial proportion are receiving more than recommended imaging for metastatic disease but fewer than recommended mammograms for detection of local recurrence or new primary cancer, for which effective intervention is possible.

Underuse of long-term routine hospital follow-up care in patients with a history of breast cancer?

BACKGROUND

After primary treatment for breast cancer, patients are recommended to use hospital follow-up care routinely. Long-term data on the utilization of this follow-up care are relatively rare.

METHODS

Information regarding the utilization of routine hospital follow-up care was retrieved from hospital documents of 662 patients treated for breast cancer. Utilization of hospital follow-up care was defined as the use of follow-up care according to the guidelines in that period of time. Determinants of hospital follow up care were evaluated with multivariate analysis by generalized estimating equations (GEE).

RESULTS

The median follow-up time was 9.0 (0.3-18.1) years. At fifth and tenth year after diagnosis, 16.1% and 33.5% of the patients had less follow-up visits than recommended in the national guideline, and 33.1% and 40.4% had less frequent mammography than recommended. Less frequent mammography was found in older patients (age > 70; OR: 2.10; 95%CI: 1.62-2.74), patients with comorbidity (OR: 1.26; 95%CI: 1.05-1.52) and patients using hormonal therapy (OR: 1.51; 95%CI: 1.01-2.25).

CONCLUSIONS

Most patients with a history of breast cancer use hospital follow-up care according to the guidelines. In older patients, patients with comorbidity and patients receiving hormonal therapy yearly mammography is performed much less than recommended.

Variation in use of surveillance colonoscopy among colorectal cancer survivors in the United States

BACKGROUND

Clinical practice guidelines recommend colonoscopies at regular intervals for colorectal cancer (CRC) survivors. Using data from a large, multi-regional, population-based cohort, we describe the rate of surveillance colonoscopy and its association with geographic, sociodemographic, clinical, and health services characteristics.

METHODS

We studied CRC survivors enrolled in the Cancer Care Outcomes Research and Surveillance (CanCORS) study. Eligible survivors were diagnosed between 2003 and 2005, had curative surgery for CRC, and were alive without recurrences 14 months after surgery with curative intent. Data came from patient interviews and medical record abstraction. We used a multivariate logit model to identify predictors of colonoscopy use.

RESULTS

Despite guidelines recommending surveillance, only 49% of the 1423 eligible survivors received a colonoscopy within 14 months after surgery. We observed large regional differences (38% to 57%) across regions. Survivors who received screening colonoscopy were more likely to: have colon cancer than rectal cancer (OR = 1.41, 95% CI: 1.05-1.90); have visited a primary care physician (OR = 1.44, 95% CI: 1.14-1.82); and received adjuvant chemotherapy (OR = 1.75, 95% CI: 1.27-2.41). Compared to survivors with no comorbidities, survivors with moderate or severe comorbidities were less likely to receive surveillance colonoscopy (OR = 0.69, 95% CI: 0.49-0.98 and OR = 0.44, 95% CI: 0.29-0.66, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite guidelines, more than half of CRC survivors did not receive surveillance colonoscopy within 14 months of surgery, with substantial variation by site of care. The association of primary care visits and adjuvant chemotherapy use suggests that access to care following surgery affects cancer surveillance.

Receipt of guideline-recommended follow-up in older colorectal cancer survivors : a population-based analysis

BACKGROUND

After curative resection for colorectal cancer, routine follow-up with office visits, carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), and colonoscopy is recommended. The actual adherence to these guidelines as well as the potential overuse of testing in routine practice has not been well studied.

METHODS

The authors identified 9426 eligible patients aged > or = 66 years in a linked tumor registry-claims database who were diagnosed with adenocarcinoma of the colon or rectum from 2000 to 2001. Patients were observed to 3 years after diagnosis. Receipt of > or = 2 office visits per year, > or = 2 CEA tests per year (years 1 and 2), and > or = 1 colonoscopy within 3 years constituted guideline fulfillment.

RESULTS

Guidelines for office visits, colonoscopy, and CEA testing were met in 92.3%, 73.6%, and 46.7% of patients, respectively. In addition, receipt of 2 nonrecommended procedures, abdominal/pelvic computed tomography scans and positron emission tomography scans, was documented in 47.7% and 6.8%, respectively. Overall, 60.2% received testing below recommended levels, 17.1% at recommended frequency, and 22.7% above guideline recommendations. In a multivariate analysis, factors associated with meeting guidelines included younger age group, white race, regional stage cancers, and poorly differentiated tumors. Considerable geographic variation in meeting guidelines was also observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Many older colorectal cancer survivors in this population-based cohort underwent testing below a minimum frequency specified by clinical practice guidelines, especially with regard to CEA. Further studies should ascertain the reasons for poor compliance and the effect on patient outcome.

Cancer survivorship: challenges and changing paradigms

PURPOSE

We summarize the potential issues faced by cancer survivors, define a conceptual framework for cancer survivorship, describe challenges associated with improving the quality of survivorship care and outline proposed survivorship programs that may be implemented going forward.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a nonsystematic review of current cancer survivorship literature. Given the comprehensive scope and high profile, the recent report by the Institute of Medicine, From Cancer Patient to Cancer Survivor: Lost in Transition, served as the principal guide for the review.

RESULTS

In recognition of the increasing number of cancer survivors in the United States survivorship has become an important health care concern. The recent report by the Institute of Medicine comprehensively outlined deficits in the care provided to cancer survivors, and proposed mechanisms to improve the coordination and quality of followup care for this increasing number of Americans. Measures to achieve these objectives include improving communication between health care providers through a survivorship care plan, providing evidence based surveillance guidelines and assessing different models of survivorship care. Implementing coordinated survivorship care broadly will require additional health care resources, and commitment from health care providers and payers. Research demonstrating the effectiveness of survivorship care will be important on this front.

CONCLUSIONS

Potential shortcomings in the recognition and management of ongoing issues faced by cancer survivors may impact the overall quality of long-term care in this increasing population. Although programs to address these issues have been proposed, there is substantial work to be done in this area.

The Utility of Administrative Data for Measuring Adherence to Cancer Surveillance Care Guidelines

BACKGROUND

Adherence to professional society guidelines for follow-up or surveillance care in cancer survivors usually is measured with medical record review. Administrative data represent an alternative approach that may encompass larger numbers of patients with relatively low incremental costs.

OBJECTIVES

We sought to determine the feasibility of using claims data to measure guideline adherence.

METHODS

By reviewing paper and electronic medical records and claims data of 429 patients with 1 of 5 common cancers who received treatment with curative intent, we compared specific procedure receipt as well as guideline adherence classification as derived from claims and medical record data. Concordance was measured via kappa statistics.

MEASURES

Care in the initial 18-month follow-up period was characterized as less than recommended, recommended, or greater than recommended per practice guidelines in both medical record and administrative data.

RESULTS

Matching rates for individual procedures varied and were generally highest for certain laboratory tests and lowest for physical examinations. There were generally good-to-excellent levels of agreement (kappa=0.34-0.96) between a patient's classification in claims data and medical record data. No consistent differences in agreement were observed according to insurance type.

CONCLUSIONS

In general, claims data capturing procedures and visit use for characterizing guideline adherence was comparable with what was documented in the medical record and suggests that if validated in other settings, administrative data could be used to describe patterns of follow up care.

Temporal trends in colorectal procedure use after colorectal cancer resection

BACKGROUND

After curative cancer resection, routine colon surveillance is recommended. It is not known whether trends over time in cancer survivors parallel that of the general population.

OBJECTIVE

Our purpose was to describe temporal changes in the use of posttreatment procedures.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Linked tumor registry and Medicare claims data.

PATIENTS

Medicare beneficiaries >65 years old who were diagnosed with local or regional stage colorectal cancer from 1992-2002 and who underwent surgical resection.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Use of colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy, or barium enema within 1 year, 18 months, or 3 years of diagnosis.

RESULTS

A total of 62,882 patients were followed up for 1 year and 35,784 for 3 years. Colonoscopy within 1 year was performed in 25.9%, within 18 months in 53.8%, and within 3 years in 70.3%. Corresponding rates for sigmoidoscopy were 7.4%, 10.2%, and 14.9%, respectively, and were 3.4%, 5.1%, and 7.9%, respectively, for barium enema. There was a decrease over time in the receipt of colonoscopy within 1 year of diagnosis (31.3% in 1992 to 20.6% in 2002), no change in 18-month rates, and a smaller increase in colonoscopy use within 3 years (66.5% to 72.3%). The use of sigmoidoscopy and barium enema declined over time. Overall procedure use within 1 year and 18 months also decreased and 3-year rates were essentially unchanged. These differences were maintained in multivariate analyses.

LIMITATIONS

Accuracy of procedure coding and indications for tests could not be measured.

CONCLUSIONS

Temporal trends in procedure use in cancer survivors were consistent with the general population. Importantly, despite guideline recommendations and Medicare reimbursement, 25% of patients who undergo curative treatment do not receive surveillance examinations and this was unchanged over time.