Colorectal cancer screening in newly insured Medicaid members: a review of concurrent federal and state policies

Factors Affecting Post-trial Sustainment or De-implementation of Study Interventions: A Narrative Review

In contrast to traditional randomized controlled trials, embedded pragmatic clinical trials (ePCTs) are conducted within healthcare settings with real-world patient populations. ePCTs are intentionally designed to align with health system priorities leveraging existing healthcare system infrastructure and resources to ease intervention implementation and increase the likelihood that effective interventions translate into routine practice following the trial. The NIH Pragmatic Trials Collaboratory, funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), supports the conduct of large-scale ePCT Demonstration Projects that address major public health issues within healthcare systems. The Collaboratory has a unique opportunity to draw on the Demonstration Project experiences to generate lessons learned related to ePCTs and the dissemination and implementation of interventions tested in ePCTs. In this article, we use case studies from six completed Demonstration Projects to summarize the Collaboratory's experience with post-trial interpretation of results, and implications for sustainment (or de-implementation) of tested interventions. We highlight three key lessons learned. First, ineffective interventions (i.e., ePCT is null for the primary outcome) may be sustained if they have other measured benefits (e.g., secondary outcome or subgroup) or even perceived benefits (e.g., staff like the intervention). Second, effective interventions-even those solicited by the health system and/or designed with significant health system partner buy-in-may not be sustained if they require significant resources. Third, alignment with policy incentives is essential for achieving sustainment and scale-up of effective interventions. Our experiences point to several recommendations to aid in considering post-trial sustainment or de-implementation of interventions tested in ePCTs: (1) include secondary outcome measures that are salient to health system partners; (2) collect all appropriate data to allow for post hoc analysis of subgroups; (3) collect experience data from clinicians and staff; (4) engage policy-makers before starting the trial.

Multi-level predictors of being up-to-date with colorectal cancer screening

PURPOSE

Assessing factors associated with being up-to-date with colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is important for identifying populations for which targeted interventions may be needed.

METHODS

This study used Medicare and private insurance claims data for residents of North Carolina to identify up-to-date status in the 10th year of continuous enrollment in the claims data and in available subsequent years. USPSTF guidelines were used to define up-to-date status for multiple recommended modalities. Area Health Resources Files provided geographic and health care service provider data at the county level. A generalized estimating equation logistic regression model was used to examine the association between individual- and county-level characteristics and being up-to-date with CRC screening.

RESULTS

From 2012-2016, 75% of the sample (n = 274,660) age 59-75 was up-to-date. We identified several individual- (e.g., sex, age, insurance type, recent visit with a primary care provider, distance to nearest endoscopy facility, insurance type) and county-level (e.g., percentage of residents with a high school education, without insurance, and unemployed) predictors of being up-to-date. For example, individuals had higher odds of being up-to-date if they were age 73-75 as compared to age 59 [OR: 1.12 (1.09, 1.15)], and if living in counties with more primary care physicians [OR: 1.03 (1.01, 1.06)].

CONCLUSION

This study identified 12 individual- and county-level demographic characteristics related to being up-to-date with screening to inform how interventions may optimally be targeted.

Enrollee characteristics and receipt of colorectal cancer testing in Pennsylvania after adoption of the Affordable Care Act Medicaid expansion

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the fourth most common cancer and the second leading cause of cancer-related death in the U.S. Despite increased CRC screening rates, they remain low among low-income non-older adults, including Medicaid enrollees who are more likely to be diagnosed at advanced stages.

OBJECTIVES

Given limited evidence regarding CRC screening service use among Medicaid enrollees, we examined multilevel factors associated with CRC testing among Medicaid enrollees in Pennsylvania after Medicaid expansion in 2015.

RESEARCH DESIGN

Using the 2014-2019 Medicaid administrative data, we performed multivariable logistic regression models to assess factors associated with CRC testing, adjusting for enrollment length and primary care services use.

SUBJECTS

We identified 15,439 adults aged 50-64 years newly enrolled through Medicaid expansion.

MEASURES

Outcome measures include receiving any CRC testing and by modality.

RESULTS

About 32% of our study population received any CRC testing. Significant predictors for any CRC testing include being male, being Hispanic, having any chronic conditions, using primary care services ≤4 times annually, and having a higher county-level median household income. Being 60-64 years at enrollment, using primary care services >4 times annually, and having higher county-level unemployment rates were significantly associated with a decreased likelihood of receiving any CRC tests.

CONCLUSIONS

CRC testing rates were low among adults newly enrolled in Medicaid under the Medicaid expansion in Pennsylvania relative to adults with high income. We observed different sets of significant factors associated with CRC testing by modality. Our findings underscore the urgency to tailor strategies by patients' racial, geographic, and clinical conditions for CRC screening.

Data Challenges in Identifying Patients Due for Colorectal Cancer Screening in Rural Clinics

INTRODUCTION

Colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality are disproportionately high among rural residents despite the availability of effective screening methods. Outreach activities can improve CRC screening rates but rely on accurate identification of patients due for screening. We report on data challenges in rural clinics and Medicaid health plans in Oregon in identifying patients eligible for CRC screening, in a large project implementing mailed fecal immunochemical tests (FIT) and patient navigation.

METHODS

We analyzed data from clinic intake surveys and administrative claims. Clinics were asked to identify total population numbers relevant to CRC screening and follow-up. Health plans also identified enrollees eligible for CRC screening in Spring, 2021. Clinic staff validated patient lists for eligibility using their electronic health records (EHR).

RESULTS

EHR features varied across the 29 participating and 28 responding clinics. Among the 28 responding clinics, 21 were able to report their Medicaid population (75%), 19 reported the number of patients aged 50 to 75 (68%) and the number screened for CRC in the last year (68%). Only 8 (29%) were able to report screening details such as number screened by FIT and 9 were able to report on patients with an abnormal FIT or colonoscopy completed after FIT (32%). Health plans had challenges properly identifying where enrollees received care and had missing data for race and ethnicity (range 22 to 34% unknown race, <1% to 24% unknown ethnicity).

DISCUSSION

Most participating rural primary care clinics and Medicaid health plans experienced challenges identifying the population due for a CRC screening outreach program. Better EHR functionality and data reporting capabilities could help rural clinics apply population-based strategies and ultimately attenuate disparities in cancer screening and follow-up.

Adherence to colorectal cancer screening and healthcare resource utilization: a longitudinal analysis in Medicare beneficiaries aged 66-75 years

OBJECTIVE

In this study, we examined colorectal cancer (CRC) screening adherence in Medicare beneficiaries and associated healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and Medicare costs.

METHODS

Using 20% Medicare random sample data, the study population included Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries aged 66-75 years on 1 January 2009, at average risk for CRC and continuously enrolled in Medicare Part A/B from 2008 to 2018. We excluded those who had undergone colonoscopy or flexible sigmoidoscopy during 2007-2008 and assumed everyone was due for screening in 2009; screening patterns were determined for 2009-2018. Based on US Preventive Services Task Force recommendations, individuals were categorized as adherent to screening, inadequately screened or not screened. HCRU and Medicare costs were calculated as mean per patient per year (PPPY).

RESULTS

Of 895,846 eligible individuals, 13.2% were adherent to screening, 53.4% were inadequately screened, and 33.4% were not screened. Compared with those not screened, adherent or inadequately screened individuals were more likely to be female, White and have comorbidities. These individuals also used more healthcare services, generating higher Medicare costs. For example, physician visits were 14.6, 22.9 and 25.9 PPPY and total Medicare costs were $6102, $8469 and $9102 PPPY for those not screened, inadequately screened and adherent, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In Medicare beneficiaries at average risk, adherence to CRC screening was low, although the rate might be underestimated due to lack of early Medicare data. The link between HCRU and screening status suggests that screening initiatives independent of clinical visits may be needed to reach unscreened or inadequately screened individuals.

Incident colorectal cancer screening and associated healthcare resource utilization and Medicare cost among Medicare beneficiaries aged 66-75 years in 2016-2018

Background

While prevalence of up-to-date screening status is the usual reported statistic, annual screening incidence may better reflect current clinical practices and is more actionable. Our main purpose was to examine incident colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates in Medicare beneficiaries and to explore characteristics associated with CRC screening.

Methods

Using 20% Medicare random sample data, the study population included 2016–2018 Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries covered by Parts A and B aged 66–75 years at average CRC risk. For each study year, we excluded individuals who had a Medicare claim for a colonoscopy within 9 years, flexible sigmoidoscopy within 4 years, and multitarget stool DNA test (mt-sDNA) within 2 years prior; therefore, any observed screening during study year was considered an “incident screening”. Incident screening rates were calculated as number of incident screenings per 1000 Medicare beneficiaries. Overall rates were normalized to 2018 Medicare population distributions of age, sex, and race.

Results

Each year, > 1.4 million individuals met the inclusion/exclusion criteria from > 6.5 million Medicare beneficiaries. The overall adjusted incident CRC screening rate per 1000 Medicare beneficiaries increased from 85.2 in 2016 to 94.3 in 2018. Incident screening rates decreased 11.4% (22.9 to 20.3) for colonoscopy and 2.4% (58.3 to 56.9) for fecal immunochemical test/guaiac-based fecal occult blood test; they increased 201.5% (6.5 to 19.6) for mt-sDNA. The 2018 unadjusted rate was 76.0 for men and 110.4 for women. By race/ethnicity, the highest 2018 rate was for Asian individuals and the lowest rate was for Black individuals (113.4 and 72.8, respectively).

Conclusions

The 2016–2018 observed incident CRC screening rate in average-risk Medicare beneficiaries, while increasing, was still low. Our findings suggest more work is needed to improve CRC screening overall and, especially, among male and Black Medicare beneficiaries.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-08617-8.

Health Economics Research in Cancer Screening: Research Opportunities, Challenges, and Future Directions

Cancer screening has long been considered a worthy public health investment. Health economics offers the theoretical foundation and research methodology to understand the demand- and supply-side factors associated with screening and evaluate screening-related policies and interventions. This article provides an overview of health economic theories and methods related to cancer screening and discusses opportunities for future research. We review 2 academic disciplines most relevant to health economics research in cancer screening: applied microeconomics and decision science. We consider 3 emerging topics: cancer screening policies in national as well as local contexts, "choosing wisely" screening practices, and targeted screening efforts for vulnerable subpopulations. We also discuss the strengths and weaknesses of available data sources and opportunities for methodological research and training. Recommendations to strengthen research infrastructure include developing novel data linkage strategies, increasing access to electronic health records, establishing curriculum and training programs, promoting multidisciplinary collaborations, and enhancing research funding opportunities.

Medicaid Expansions: Probing Medicaid’s Filling of the Cancer Genetic Testing and Screening Space

Cancer is the third largest source of spending for Medicaid in the United States. A working group of the American Public Health Association Genomics Forum Policy Committee reviewed 133/149 pieces of literature addressing the impact of Medicaid expansion on cancer screening and genetic testing in underserved groups and the general population. Breast and colorectal cancer screening rates improved during very early Medicaid expansion but displayed mixed improvement thereafter. Breast cancer screening rates have remained steady for Latina Medicaid enrollees; colorectal cancer screening rates have improved for African Americans. Urban areas have benefited more than rural. State programs increasingly cover BRCA1/2 and Lynch syndrome genetic testing, though testing remains underutilized in racial and ethnic groups. While increased federal matching could incentivize more states to engage in Medicaid expansion, steps need to be taken to ensure that they have an adequate distribution of resources to increase screening and testing utilization.

Clinic Factors Associated With Mailed Fecal Immunochemical Test (FIT) Completion: The Difference-Making Role of Support Staff

PURPOSE

Mailed fecal immunochemical test (FIT) programs can facilitate colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. We sought to identify modifiable, clinic-level factors that distinguish primary care clinics with higher vs lower FIT completion rates in response to a centralized mailed FIT program.

METHODS

We used baseline observational data from 15 clinics within a single urban federally qualified health center participating in a pragmatic trial to optimize a mailed FIT program. Clinic-level data included interviews with leadership using a guide informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and FIT completion rates. We used template analysis to identify explanatory factors and configurational comparative methods to identify specific combinations of clinic-level conditions that uniquely distinguished clinics with higher and lower FIT completion rates.

RESULTS

We interviewed 39 clinic leaders and identified 58 potential explanatory factors representing clinic workflows and the CFIR inner setting domain. Clinic-level FIT completion rates ranged from 30% to 56%. The configurational model for clinics with higher rates (≥37%) featured any 1 of the following 3 factors related to support staff: (1) adding back- or front-office staff in past 12 months, (2) having staff help patients resolve barriers to CRC screening, and (3) having staff hand out FITs/educate patients. The model for clinics with lower rates involved the combined absence of these same 3 factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Three factors related to support staff differentiated clinics with higher and lower FIT completion rates. Adding nonphysician support staff and having those staff provide enabling services might help clinics optimize mailed FIT screening programs.

Geographic determinants of colorectal cancer in Louisiana

Purpose

Currently, rural residents in the United States (US) experience a greater cancer burden for tobacco-related cancers and cancers that can be prevented by screening. We aim to characterize geographic determinants of colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence in Louisiana due to rural residence and other known geographic risk factors, area socioeconomic status (SES), and cultural region (Acadian or French-speaking).

Methods

Primary colorectal cancer diagnosed among adults 30 years and older in 2008–2017 were obtained from the Louisiana Tumor Registry. Population and social and economic data were obtained from US Census American Community Survey. Rural areas were defined using US Department of Agriculture 2010 rural–urban commuting area codes. Estimates of relative risk (RR) were obtained from multilevel binomial regression models of incidence.

Results

The study population was 16.1% rural, 18.4% low SES, and 17.9% Acadian. Risk of CRC was greater among rural white residents (RR Women: 1.09(1.02–1.16), RR Men: 1.11(1.04–1.18)). Low SES was associated with increased CRC for all demographic groups, with excess risk ranging from 8% in Black men (RR: 1.08(1.01–1.16)) to 16% in white men (RR: 1.16(1.08–1.24)). Increased risk in the Acadian region was greatest for Black men (RR: 1.21(1.10–1.33)) and women (RR: 1.21(1.09–1.33)). Rural–urban disparities in CRC were no longer significant after controlling for SES and Acadian region.

Conclusion

SES remains a significant determinant of CRC disparities in Louisiana and may contribute to observed rural–urban disparities in the state. While the intersectionality of CRC risk factors is complex, we have confirmed a robust regional disparity for the Acadian region of Louisiana.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10552-021-01546-7.

Cancer genetic testing in marginalized groups during an era of evolving healthcare reform

BACKGROUND

The Affordable Care Act and subsequent reforms pose tradeoffs for racial-ethnic, rural, and sex-related groups in the United States experiencing disparities in BRCA1/2 genetic counseling and testing and colorectal cancer screening, calling for policy changes.

METHODS

A working group of the American Public Health Association Genomics Forum Policy Committee engaged in monthly meetings to examine ongoing literature and identify policy alternatives in the coverage of cancer genetic services for marginalized groups. 589 items were collected; 408 examined. Efforts continued from February 2015 through September 2020.

RESULTS

African Americans and Latinos have shown 7-8 % drops in uninsured rates since the Exchanges opened. The ACA has increased BRCA1/2 test availability while several disparities remain, including by sex. Rural testing and screening utilization rates have improved. Medicaid expansion and the inclusion of Medicare in the ACA have resulted in mixed improvements in colorectal cancer screening rates in marginalized groups.

CONCLUSION

Cancer genetic testing and screening to date have only partially benefited from healthcare reforms. Sensitivity to cost concerns and further monitoring of emerging data are needed. A reduction in disparities depends on the availability of private insurance, Medicaid and Medicare to the marginalized. Attention to value-based design and the way cancer benefits are translated into actual testing and screening are crucial.

POLICY SUMMARY

The findings suggest the need for further benefits-related health agency interpretation of and amendments to the ACA, continued Medicaid and innovative Medicare expansion, and incorporation of cancer services values-based considerations at several levels, aimed at reducing group disparities.

Mailed fecal immunochemical test outreach for colorectal cancer screening: Summary of a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-sponsored Summit

Uptake of colorectal cancer screening remains suboptimal. Mailed fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) offers promise for increasing screening rates, but optimal strategies for implementation have not been well synthesized. In June 2019, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention convened a meeting of subject matter experts and stakeholders to answer key questions regarding mailed FIT implementation in the United States. Points of agreement included: 1) primers, such as texts, telephone calls, and printed mailings before mailed FIT, appear to contribute to effectiveness; 2) invitation letters should be brief and easy to read, and the signatory should be tailored based on setting; 3) instructions for FIT completion should be simple and address challenges that may lead to failed laboratory processing, such as notation of collection date; 4) reminders delivered to initial noncompleters should be used to increase the FIT return rate; 5) data infrastructure should identify eligible patients and track each step in the outreach process, from primer delivery through abnormal FIT follow-up; 6) protocols and procedures such as navigation should be in place to promote colonoscopy after abnormal FIT; 7) a high-quality, 1-sample FIT should be used; 8) sustainability requires a program champion and organizational support for the work, including sufficient funding and external policies (such as quality reporting requirements) to drive commitment to program investment; and 9) the cost effectiveness of mailed FIT has been established. Participants concluded that mailed FIT is an effective and efficient strategy with great potential for increasing colorectal cancer screening in diverse health care settings if more widely implemented.

Health Insurance Coverage Disruptions and Cancer Care and Outcomes: Systematic Review of Published Research

BACKGROUND

Lack of health insurance coverage is associated with poor access and receipt of cancer care and survival in the United States. Disruptions in coverage are common among low-income populations, but little is known about associations of disruptions with cancer care, including prevention, screening, and treatment, as well as outcomes of stage at diagnosis and survival.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of studies of health insurance coverage disruptions and cancer care and outcomes published between 1980 and 2019. We used the PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and CINAHL databases and identified 29 observational studies. Study characteristics and key findings were abstracted and synthesized qualitatively.

RESULTS

Studies evaluated associations between coverage disruptions and prevention or screening (31.0%), treatment (13.8%), end-of-life care (10.3%), stage at diagnosis (44.8%), and survival (20.7%). Coverage disruptions ranged from 4.3% to 32.8% of patients age-eligible for breast, cervical, or colorectal cancer screening. Between 22.1% and 59.5% of patients with Medicaid gained coverage only at or after cancer diagnosis. Coverage disruptions were consistently statistically significantly associated with lower receipt of prevention, screening, and treatment. Among patients with cancer, those with Medicaid disruptions were statistically significantly more likely to have advanced stage (odds ratios = 1.2-3.8) and worse survival (hazard ratios = 1.28-2.43) than patients without disruptions.

CONCLUSIONS

Health insurance coverage disruptions are common and adversely associated with receipt of cancer care and survival. Improved data infrastructure and quasi-experimental study designs will be important for evaluating the associations of federal and state policies on coverage disruptions and care and outcomes.

Initiation of Colorectal Cancer Screening Among Medicaid Enrollees

INTRODUCTION

Few studies have explored how individual- and practice-level factors influence colorectal cancer screening initiation among Medicaid enrollees newly age eligible for colorectal cancer screening (i.e., turning 50 years). This study explored colorectal cancer screening initiation among newly age-eligible Medicaid enrollees in Oregon.

METHODS

Medicaid claims data (January 2013 to June 2015) were used to conduct multivariable logistic regression (in 2018 and 2019) to explore individual- and practice-level factors associated with colorectal cancer screening initiation among 9,032 Medicaid enrollees.

RESULTS

A total of 17% of Medicaid enrollees initiated colorectal cancer screening; of these, 64% received a colonoscopy (versus fecal testing). Colorectal cancer screening initiation was positively associated with turning 50 years in 2014 (versus 2013; OR=1.21), being Hispanic (versus non-Hispanic white; OR=1.41), urban residence (versus rural; OR=1.23), and having 4 to 7 (OR=1.90) and 8 or more (OR=2.64) primary care visits compared with 1 to 3 visits in the year after turning 50 years. Having 3 or more comorbidities was inversely associated with initiation (OR=0.75). The odds of screening initiation were also higher for practices with 3 to 4 (OR=1.26) and 8 or more (OR=1.34) providers compared with 1 to 2 providers, and negatively associated with percentage of Medicaid panel age eligible for colorectal cancer screening (OR=0.92).

CONCLUSIONS

Both individual- and practice-level factors are associated with disparities in colorectal cancer screening initiation among Oregon Medicaid enrollees. Future work promoting colorectal cancer screening might focus on additional barriers to the timely initiation of colorectal cancer screening and explore the effect of practice in-reach and population outreach strategies.

Mailed FIT (fecal immunochemical test), navigation or patient reminders? Using microsimulation to inform selection of interventions to increase colorectal cancer screening in Medicaid enrollees

Colorectal cancer (CRC) can be effectively prevented or detected with guideline concordant screening, yet Medicaid enrollees experience disparities. We used microsimulation to project CRC screening patterns, CRC cases averted, and life-years gained in the population of 68,077 Oregon Medicaid enrollees 50-64 over a five year period starting in January 2019. The simulation estimated the cost-effectiveness of five intervention scenarios - academic detailing plus provider audit and feedback (Detailing+), patient reminders (Reminders), mailing a Fecal Immunochemical Test (FIT) directly to the patient's home (Mailed FIT), patient navigation (Navigation), and mailed FIT with Navigation (Mailed FIT + Navigation) - compared to usual care. Each intervention scenario raised CRC screening rates compared to usual care, with improvements as high as 11.6 percentage points (Mailed FIT + Navigation) and as low as 2.5 percentage points (Reminders) after one year. Compared to usual care, Mailed FIT + Navigation would raise CRC screening rates 20.2 percentage points after five years - averting nearly 77 cancer cases (a reduction of 113 per 100,000) and exceeding national screening targets. Over a five year period, Reminders, Mailed FIT and Mailed FIT + Navigation were expected to be cost effective if stakeholders were willing to pay $230 or less per additional year up-to-date (at a cost of $22, $59, and $227 respectively), whereas Detailing+ and Navigation were more costly for the same benefits. To approach national CRC screening targets, health system stakeholders are encouraged to implement Mailed FIT with or without Navigation and Reminders.