Interventions addressing health-related social needs among patients with cancer

Health-related social needs are prevalent among cancer patients; associated with substantial negative health consequences; and drive pervasive inequities in cancer incidence, severity, treatment choices and decisions, and outcomes. To address the lack of clinical trial evidence to guide health-related social needs interventions among cancer patients, the National Cancer Institute Cancer Care Delivery Research Steering Committee convened experts to participate in a clinical trials planning meeting with the goal of designing studies to screen for and address health-related social needs among cancer patients. In this commentary, we discuss the rationale for, and challenges of, designing and testing health-related social needs interventions in alignment with the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine 5As framework. Evidence for food, housing, utilities, interpersonal safety, and transportation health-related social needs interventions is analyzed. Evidence regarding health-related social needs and delivery of health-related social needs interventions differs in maturity and applicability to cancer context, with transportation problems having the most maturity and interpersonal safety the least. We offer practical recommendations for health-related social needs interventions among cancer patients and the caregivers, families, and friends who support their health-related social needs. Cross-cutting (ie, health-related social needs agnostic) recommendations include leveraging navigation (eg, people, technology) to identify, refer, and deliver health-related social needs interventions; addressing health-related social needs through multilevel interventions; and recognizing that health-related social needs are states, not traits, that fluctuate over time. Health-related social needs-specific interventions are recommended, and pros and cons of addressing more than one health-related social needs concurrently are characterized. Considerations for collaborating with community partners are highlighted. The need for careful planning, strong partners, and funding is stressed. Finally, we outline a future research agenda to address evidence gaps.

Cost-Effectiveness of Reduced-Intensity Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation for Older Patients With High-Risk Myelodysplastic Syndrome: Analysis of BMT CTN 1102

PURPOSE

BMT CTN 1102 was a phase III trial comparing reduced-intensity allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (RIC alloHCT) to standard of care for persons with intermediate- or high-risk myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS). We report results of a cost-effectiveness analysis conducted alongside the clinical trial.

METHODS

Three hundred eighty-four patients received HCT (n = 260) or standard of care (n = 124) according to availability of a human leukocyte antigen-matched donor. Cost-effectiveness was calculated from US commercial and Medicare perspectives over a 20-year time horizon. Health care utilization and costs were estimated using propensity score-matched cohorts of HCT recipients in the OptumLabs Data Warehouse (age 50-64 years) and Medicare (age 65 years and older). EuroQol 5 Dimension (EQ-5D) surveys of trial participants were used to derive health state utilities.

RESULTS

Extrapolated 20-year overall survival for those age 50-64 years was 29% for HCT (n = 105) versus 13% for usual care (n = 44) and 31% for HCT (n = 155) versus 12% for non-HCT (n = 80) for those age 65 years and older. HCT was more effective (+2.36 quality-adjusted life-years [QALYs] for age 50-64 years and +2.92 QALYs for age 65 years and older) and more costly (+$452,242 in US dollars (USD) for age 50-64 years and +$233,214 USD for age 65 years and older) than usual care, with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of $191,487 (USD)/QALY and $79,834 (USD)/QALY, respectively. For persons age 50-64 years, there was a 29% chance that HCT was cost-effective using a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $150K (USD)/QALY and 51% at a $200K (USD)/QALY. For persons age 65 years and older, the probability was 100% at a WTP >$150K (USD)/QALY.

CONCLUSION

Among patients age 65 years and older with high-risk MDS, RIC HCT is a high-value strategy. For those age 50-64 years, HCT is a lower-value strategy but has similar cost-effectiveness to other therapies commonly used in oncology.

Gene Therapy Versus Common Care for Eligible Individuals With Sickle Cell Disease in the United States : A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

BACKGROUND

Sickle cell disease (SCD) and its complications contribute to high rates of morbidity and early mortality and high cost in the United States and African heritage community.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of gene therapy for SCD and its value-based prices (VBPs).

DESIGN

Comparative modeling analysis across 2 independently developed simulation models (University of Washington Model for Economic Analysis of Sickle Cell Cure [UW-MEASURE] and Fred Hutchinson Institute Sickle Cell Disease Outcomes Research and Economics Model [FH-HISCORE]) using the same databases.

DATA SOURCES

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services claims data, 2008 to 2016; published literature.

TARGET POPULATION

Persons eligible for gene therapy.

TIME HORIZON

Lifetime.

PERSPECTIVE

U.S. health care sector and societal.

INTERVENTION

Gene therapy versus common care.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), equity-informed VBPs, and price acceptability curves.

RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS

At an assumed $2 million price for gene therapy, UW-MEASURE and FH-HISCORE estimated ICERs of $193 000 per QALY and $427 000 per QALY, respectively, under the health care sector perspective. Corresponding estimates from the societal perspective were $126 000 per QALY and $281 000 per QALY. The difference in results between models stemmed primarily from considering a slightly different target population and incorporating the quality-of-life (QOL) effects of splenic sequestration, priapism, and acute chest syndrome in the UW model. From a societal perspective, acceptable (>90% confidence) VBPs ranged from $1 million to $2.5 million depending on the use of alternative effective metrics or equity-informed threshold values.

RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS

Results were sensitive to the costs of myeloablative conditioning before gene therapy, effect on caregiver QOL, and effect of gene therapy on long-term survival.

LIMITATION

The short-term effects of gene therapy on vaso-occlusive events were extrapolated from 1 study.

CONCLUSION

Gene therapy for SCD below a $2 million price tag is likely to be cost-effective when applying a societal perspective at an equity-informed threshold for cost-effectiveness analysis.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.

Intervention Nonadherence in the TrACER (S1415CD) Study: A Pragmatic Randomized Trial of a Standardized Order Entry for CSF Prescribing

PURPOSE

We conducted a pragmatic, cluster-randomized trial to test whether a guideline-based standing order entry (SOE) improves use of primary prophylactic CSF (PP-CSF) prescribing for patients receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy. We investigated variability in adherence to the intervention.

METHODS

We conducted a cluster-randomized trial among 32 oncology clinics from the NCI Community Oncology Research Program. Clinics were randomized 3:1 to a guideline-based PP-CSF SOE or usual care. Among SOE sites, automated orders for PP-CSF were included for regimens at high risk for febrile neutropenia (FN) and an alert not to use PP-CSF for low FN risk. A secondary 1:1 randomization was done among intervention sites to either SOE to prescribe or an alert to not prescribe PP-CSF for patients receiving intermediate risk-regimens. Providers were allowed to override the SOE.

RESULTS

Overall, PP-CSF use among patients receiving high FN risk treatment was high and not different between arms; however, rates of PP-CSF use varied widely by site, ranging from 48.6% to 100%. Among those receiving low FN risk regimens, PP-CSF use was low and not different between arms; however, PP-CSF use ranged from 0% to 19.4% across sites. In the intermediate-risk substudy, PP-CSF was five-fold higher among sites randomized to SOE; however, there was considerable variability in adherence to intervention assignment: PP-CSF use ranged from 0% to 75% among sites randomized to SOE. Despite an alert to not prescribe, PP-CSF prescribing ranged from 0% to 33%.

CONCLUSION

In this randomized pragmatic trial aimed at improving PP-CSF prescribing, there was substantial variability in site adherence to the intervention assignment. Although the ability to opt out of the intervention is a feature of pragmatic trials, planning to estimate nonadherence is critical to ensure adequate power.

Universal Viral Screening of Patients with Newly Diagnosed Cancer in the United States: A Cost-efficiency Evaluation

Recommendations for universal screening of patients with cancer for hepatitis B virus (HBV), hepatitis C virus (HCV), and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) are inconsistent. A recent multisite screening study (S1204) from the SWOG Cancer Research Network found that a substantial number of patients with newly diagnosed cancer had previously unknown viral infections. The objective of this study was to determine the cost-efficiency of universal screening of patients with newly diagnosed cancer. We estimated the cost-efficiency of universal screening of new cancer cases for HBV, HCV, or HIV, expressed as cost per virus detected, from the health care payer perspective. The prevalence of each virus among this cohort was derived from S1204. Direct medical expenditures included costs associated with laboratory screening tests. Costs per case detected were estimated for each screening strategy. Secondary analysis examined the cost-efficiency of screening patients whose viral status at cancer diagnosis was unknown. Among the possible options for universal screening, screening for HBV alone ($581), HCV alone ($782), HBV and HCV ($631) and HBV, HCV, and HIV ($841) were most efficient in terms of cost per case detected. When screening was restricted to patients with unknown viral status, screening for HBV alone ($684), HBV and HCV ($872), HBV and HIV ($1,157), and all three viruses ($1,291) were most efficient in terms of cost per newly detected case. Efficient viral testing strategies represent a relatively modest addition to the overall cost of managing a patient with cancer. Screening for HBV, HCV, and HIV infections may be reasonable from both a budget and clinical standpoint.

SIGNIFICANCE

Screening patients with cancer for HBV, HCV, and HIV is inconsistent in clinical practice despite national recommendations and known risks of complications from viral infection. Our study shows that while costs of viral screening strategies vary by choice of tests, they present a modest addition to the cost of managing a patient with cancer.

Impact of treatment experience on patient knowledge of colony-stimulating factors among patients receiving cancer chemotherapy: evidence from S1415CD-a large pragmatic trial

PURPOSE

Primary prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (PP-CSFs) are prescribed alongside chemotherapy regimens that carry a significant risk of febrile neutropenia (FN). As part of S1415CD, a prospective, pragmatic trial evaluating the impact of automated orders to improve PP-CSF prescribing, we evaluated patients' baseline knowledge of PP-CSF and whether that knowledge improved following the first cycle of chemotherapy.

METHODS

Adult patients with breast, colorectal, or non-small-cell lung cancer initiating chemotherapy were enrolled in S1415CD between January 2016 and April 2020. Eight questions assessing knowledge of CSF indications, risks, benefits, and out-of-pocket costs were included in a baseline survey and in a follow-up survey at the end of the first cycle of chemotherapy. Responses were stratified by the trial arm and whether chemotherapy was low, intermediate, or high FN risk.

RESULTS

Of the 3605 eligible patients, 3580 (99.3%) completed the baseline survey, and 3420 (95.5%) completed the follow-up survey. At baseline, 803 (22.4%) patients responded "Don't know" to all 8 questions, and all patients averaged 2.75 correct questions. At follow-up, knowledge increased by 0.34 in the high-FN-risk group (p < 0.001) but declined for the other FN-risk groups. In multivariate analysis, receiving a high-FN-risk regimen and younger age were significantly associated with knowledge improvement.

CONCLUSION

Chemotherapy patients had poor knowledge of PP-CSF that improved only modestly among recipients of high-FN-risk chemotherapy. Further efforts to inform patients about the risks, benefits, and costs of PP-CSF may be warranted, particularly for those in whom prophylaxis is indicated.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT02728596, April 6, 2016.

Assessment of financial screening and navigation capabilities at National Cancer Institute community oncology clinics

BACKGROUND

Cancer-related financial hardship is a side effect of cancer diagnosis and treatment, and affects both patients and caregivers. Although many oncology clinics have increased financial navigation services, few have resources to proactively provide financial counseling and assistance to families affected by cancer before financial hardship occurs. As part of an ongoing randomized study testing a proactive financial navigation intervention, S1912CD, among sites of the National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP), we conducted a baseline survey to learn more about existing financial resources available to patients and caregivers.

METHODS

The NCORP sites participating in the S1912CD study completed a required 10-question survey about their available financial resources and an optional 5-question survey that focused on financial screening and navigation workflow and challenges prior to starting recruitment. The proportion of NCORP sites offering financial navigation services was calculated and responses to the optional survey were reviewed to determine current screening and navigation practices and identify any challenges.

RESULTS

Most sites (96%) reported offering financial navigation for cancer patients. Sites primarily identified patients needing financial assistance through social work evaluations (78%) or distress screening tools (76%). Sites revealed challenges in addressing financial needs at the outset and through diagnosis, including lack of proactive screening and referral to financial navigation services as well as staffing challenges.

CONCLUSIONS

Although most participating NCORP sites offer some form of financial assistance, the survey data enabled identification of gaps and challenges in providing services. Utilizing community partners to deliver comprehensive financial navigation guidance to cancer patients and caregivers may help meet needs while reducing site burden.

Long-term survival with sickle cell disease: a nationwide cohort study of Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries

To our knowledge, we report the first population-based period life table, the expected lifetime survival for Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries with sickle cell disease (SCD), and the disparities in survival by insurance types in the United States. We constructed a retrospective cohort of individuals with diagnosed SCD receiving common care (any real-world patterns of care except transplant) based on nationwide Medicare and Medicaid claim data (2008-2016), covering beneficiaries in all 50 states. We analyzed lifetime survival probabilities using Kaplan-Meier curves and projected life expectancies at various ages for all, stratified by sex and insurance types. Our analysis included 94 616 individuals with SCD that have not undergone any transplant. Life expectancy at birth was 52.6 years (95% confidence interval: 51.9-53.4). Compared with the adults covered by Medicaid only, those covered by Medicare for disabilities or end-stage renal disease and those dually insured by Medicare and Medicaid had significantly worse life expectancy. Similarly, for beneficiaries aged ≥65 years, these 2 insurance types were associated with significantly shorter life expectancy than those enrolled in Medicare old age and survivor's insurance. Our study underscores the persistent life expectancy shortfall for patients with SCD, the burden of premature mortality during adulthood, and survival disparities by insurance status.

Risk prediction of hepatitis B or C or HIV among newly diagnosed cancer patients

BACKGROUND

Screening for viral infection in cancer patients is inconsistent. A mechanism to readily identify cancer patients at increased risk of existing or prior viral infection could enhance screening efforts while reducing costs.

METHODS

We identified factors associated with increased risk of past or chronic hepatitis virus B, hepatitis virus C, or HIV infection before initiation of systemic cancer therapy. Data were from a multicenter prospective cohort study of 3051 patients with newly diagnosed cancer (SWOG-S1204) enrolled between 2013 and 2017. Patients completed a survey with questions pertaining to personal history and behavioral, socioeconomic, and demographic risk factors for viral hepatitis or HIV. We derived a risk model to predict the presence of viral infection in a random set of 60% of participants using best subset selection. The derived model was validated in the remaining 40% of participants. Logistic regression was used.

RESULTS

A model with 7 risk factors was identified, and a risk score with 4 levels was constructed. In the validation cohort, each increase in risk level was associated with a nearly threefold increased risk of viral positivity (odds ratio = 2.85, 95% confidence interval = 2.26 to 3.60, P < .001). Consistent findings were observed for individual viruses. Participants in the highest risk group (with >3 risk factors), comprised of 13.4% of participants, were 18 times more likely to be viral positive compared with participants with no risk factors (odds ratio = 18.18, 95% confidence interval = 8.00 to 41.3, P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

A risk-stratified screening approach using a limited set of questions could serve as an effective strategy to streamline screening for individuals at increased risk of viral infection.

Association between patient, clinic, and geographical-level factors and 1-year surveillance colonoscopy adherence

INTRODUCTION

Surveillance colonoscopy 1-year after surgical resection for patients with stages I-III colorectal cancer (CRC) is suboptimal and data on factors associated with lack of adherence are limited. Using surveillance colonoscopy data from Washington state, we aimed to determine the patient, clinic, and geographical factors associated with adherence.

METHODS

Using administrative insurance claims linked to Washington (WA) cancer registry data we conducted a retrospective cohort study of adult patients diagnosed with stage I-III CRC between 2011 and 2018 with continuous insurance for at least 18 months after diagnosis. We determined the adherence rate to 1-year surveillance colonoscopy and conducted logistic regression analysis to identify factors associated with completion.

RESULTS

Of 4,481 stage I-III CRC patients identified, 55.8% completed a 1-year surveillance colonoscopy. The median time to colonoscopy completion was 370 days. On multivariate analysis, older age, higher stage CRC, Medicare insurance or multiple insurance carriers, higher Charlson Comorbidity Index score and living without a partner were significantly associated with decreased adherence to 1-year surveillance colonoscopy. Among 29 eligible clinics, 51% (n=15) reported lower than expected surveillance colonoscopy rates based on patient mix.

CONCLUSION

Surveillance colonoscopy 1-year after surgical resection is sub-optimal in WA state. Patient and clinic factors, but not geographic factors (Area Deprivation Index), were significantly associated with surveillance colonoscopy completion. This data will inform the development of patient and clinic level interventions to address an important quality of care issue across Washington.

Cost-Effectiveness of Unrelated Umbilical Cord Blood vs. HLA Haploidentical Related Bone Marrow Transplant: Evidence from BMT CTN 1101

BACKGROUND

BMT CTN 1101 was a Phase III randomized controlled trial comparing reduced intensity conditioning followed by double unrelated umbilical cord blood (UCB) versus HLA-haploidentical related donor bone marrow (haplo-BM) transplantation for patients with high-risk hematologic malignancies.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study is to report the results of a parallel cost-effectiveness analysis.

STUDY DESIGN

Three hundred sixty-eight patients were randomized to unrelated UCB (n=186) or haplo-BM (n=182) transplant. We estimated healthcare utilization and costs using propensity score-matched BMT patients from the OptumLabs^Ⓡ Data Warehouse for trial participants <65 years and Medicare claims for participants ≥65 years. Weibull models were used to estimate 20-year survival. EQ-5D surveys by trial participants were used estimate Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALYs).

RESULTS

At 5-year follow-up, survival was 42% for haplo-BM versus 36% for UCB (P=.06). Over a 20-year time horizon, haplo-BM is expected to be more effective (+0.63 QALY) and more costly +$118,953) for persons under 65. For those over 65, haplo-BM is expected to be more effective and less costly. In one-way uncertainty analyses, for persons <65, the cost per QALY result was most sensitive to life years and health state utilities. For persons ≥65, life years were more influential than costs and health state utilities.

CONCLUSION

Compared to UCB, haplo-BM was moderately cost-effective for patients aged <65 years, and less costly and more effective for persons ≥65 years. Haplo-BM is a fair value choice for commercially insured patients with high-risk leukemia and lymphoma who require HCT. For Medicare enrollees, haplo-BM is a preferred choice when considering costs and outcomes.

Effect of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Place of Death Among Medicaid and Commercially Insured Patients With Cancer in Washington State

PURPOSE

The COVID-19 pandemic-related disruptions in health care delivery might have affected end-of-life care in patients with cancer. We examined changes in place of death and hospice support for Medicaid and commercially insured patients during the pandemic.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We linked Washington State cancer registry records with claims from Medicaid and two commercial insurers for patients with solid tumor age 18-64 years. The study included 322 Medicaid and 162 commercial patients who died between March 2017 and June 2019 (pre-COVID-19), along with 90 Medicaid and 47 commercial patients who died between March and June 2020 (COVID-19). Place of death was categorized as hospital, hospice (home or nonhospital facility), and home without hospice. Place of death was compared using adjusted multinomial logistic regressions stratified by payer and time period (pre-COVID-19 v COVID-19). The clinical and sociodemographic factors associated with dying at home without hospice were examined, and adjusted marginal effects (ME) are reported.

RESULTS

In the adjusted pre-COVID-19 analysis, Medicaid patients were more likely than commercially insured patients to die in hospital (48% v 36%; adjusted ME, 11%; P = .02). In the pre-COVID-19/COVID-19 analysis, Medicaid patients' place of death shifted from hospital (48% v 32%; ME, -16%; P < .01) to home without hospice (19.9% v 38.0%; ME, 16.5%; P < .01). However, there were no statistically significant changes pre-COVID-19/COVID-19 for commercial patients. As a result, during COVID-19, Medicaid patients were more likely than commercial patients to die at home without hospice (38% v 22%; ME, 16%; P = .04) as were male versus female patients (ME, 16%; P < .01).

CONCLUSION

The pandemic might have disproportionately worsened the end-of-life experience for Medicaid enrollees with cancer. Attention should be paid to societal and health system factors that decrease access to care for Medicaid patients.

A Framework for a Health Economic Evaluation Model for Patients with Sickle Cell Disease to Estimate the Value of New Treatments in the United States of America

BACKGROUND

Sickle cell disease (SCD) is an inherited blood disorder associated with lifelong morbidity and increased risk of mortality that affects approximately 100,000 individuals in the United States (US), primarily of African-American descent. Due to these complications, individuals with SCD typically incur high healthcare costs. With a number of costly but potentially curative SCD therapies on the horizon, understanding the progression of SCD and economic burden to insurers and patients is vital.

OBJECTIVE

The aim is to develop a framework to understand the progression and costs of SCD that could be used to estimate how new treatments can impact the progression and costs of the disease.

METHODS

We detail how we will create a simulation model that represents the natural history of a population and allows for the characterization of the impact of novel therapies on the disease, associated costs, and outcomes in comparison to current management.

CONCLUSION

In this report, we describe a conceptual approach to modeling SCD to determine the relative clinical and economic impact of new gene therapies compared to conventional therapies with a goal of providing a flexible approach that could inform the clinical management of SCD for patients, payers, and policy makers.

Lifetime medical costs attributable to sickle cell disease among nonelderly individuals with commercial insurance

Sickle cell disease (SCD) is a severe monogenic disease associated with high morbidity, mortality, and a disproportionate burden on Black and Hispanic communities. Our objective was to estimate the total healthcare costs and out-of-pocket (OOP) costs attributable to SCD among commercially insured individuals over their nonelderly lifetimes (0 to 64 years of age). We constructed a retrospective cohort of individuals with diagnosed SCD using Truven Health Marketscan commercial claims data from 2007 through 2018, compared with matched control subjects from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. We estimated Kaplan-Meier sample average costs using previously reported survival curves for SCD and control subjects. Individuals with SCD (20 891) and control subjects (33 588) were included in our analysis. The SCD sample had a mean age of 25.7 (standard deviation, 17.4) years; 58.0% were female. Survival-adjusted costs of SCD peaked at age 13 to 24 years and declined at older ages. There was no significant difference in total medical costs or OOP costs between the sexes. SCD-attributable costs over 0 to 64 years of age were estimated to be $1.6 million (95% confidence interval [CI], $1.3M-$1.9M) and $1.7 million (95% CI, $1.4M-$2.1M) for females and males with SCD, respectively. The corresponding OOP estimates were $42 395 (95% CI, $34 756-$50 033) for females and $45 091 (95% CI, $36 491-$53 691) for males. These represent a 907% and 285% increase in total medical and OOP costs over control subjects, respectively. Although limited to the commercially insured population, these results indicate that the direct economic burden of SCD is substantial and peaks at younger ages, suggesting the need for curative and new medical therapies.

Translating an Economic Analysis into a Tool for Public Health Resource Allocation in Cancer Survivorship

Background. The complexity of decision science models may prevent their use to assist in decision making. User-centered design (UCD) principles provide an opportunity to engage end users in model development and refinement, potentially reducing complexity and increasing model utilization in a practical setting. We report our experiences with UCD to develop a modeling tool for cancer control planners evaluating cancer survivorship interventions. Design. Using UCD principles (described in the article), we developed a dynamic cohort model of cancer survivorship for individuals with female breast, colorectal, lung, and prostate cancer over 10 y. Parameters were obtained from the National Program of Cancer Registries and peer-reviewed literature, with model outcomes captured in quality-adjusted life-years and net monetary benefit. Prototyping and iteration were conducted with structured focus groups involving state cancer control planners and staff from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the American Public Health Association. Results. Initial feedback highlighted model complexity and unclear purpose as barriers to end user uptake. Revisions addressed complexity by simplifying model input requirements, providing clear examples of input types, and reducing complex language. Wording was added to the results page to explain the interpretation of results. After these updates, feedback demonstrated that end users more clearly understood how to use and apply the model for cancer survivorship resource allocation tasks. Conclusions. A UCD approach identified challenges faced by end users in integrating a decision aid into their workflow. This approach created collaboration between modelers and end users, tailoring revisions to meet the needs of the users. Future models developed for individuals without a decision science background could leverage UCD to ensure the model meets the needs of the intended audience.

Highlights

Model complexity and unclear purpose are 2 barriers that prevent lay users from integrating decision science tools into their workflow.Modelers could integrate the user-centered design framework when developing a model for lay users to reduce complexity and ensure the model meets the needs of the users.

A Pragmatic Cluster-Randomized Trial of a Standing Order Entry Intervention for Colony-Stimulating Factor Use Among Patients at Intermediate Risk for Febrile Neutropenia

PURPOSE

Primary prophylactic colony-stimulating factors (PP-CSFs) are prescribed to reduce febrile neutropenia (FN) but their benefit for intermediate FN risk regimens is uncertain. Within a pragmatic, randomized trial of a standing order entry (SOE) PP-CSF intervention, we conducted a substudy to evaluate the effectiveness of SOE for patients receiving intermediate-risk regimens.

METHODS

TrACER was a cluster randomized trial where practices were randomized to usual care or a guideline-based SOE intervention. In the primary study, sites were randomized 3:1 to SOE of automated PP-CSF orders for high FN risk regimens and alerts against PP-CSF use for low-risk regimens versus usual care. A secondary 1:1 randomization assigned 24 intervention sites to either SOE to prescribe or an alert to not prescribe PP-CSF for intermediate-risk regimens. Clinicians were allowed to over-ride the SOE. Patients with breast, colorectal, or non-small-cell lung cancer were enrolled. Mixed-effect logistic regression models were used to test differences between randomized sites.

RESULTS

Between January 2016 and April 2020, 846 eligible patients receiving intermediate-risk regimens were registered to either SOE to prescribe (12 sites: n = 542) or an alert to not prescribe PP-CSF (12 sites: n = 304). Rates of PP-CSF use were higher among sites randomized to SOE (37.1% v 9.9%, odds ratio, 5.91; 95% CI, 1.77 to 19.70; P = .0038). Rates of FN were low and identical between arms (3.7% v 3.7%).

CONCLUSION

Although implementation of a SOE intervention for PP-CSF significantly increased PP-CSF use among patients receiving first-line intermediate-risk regimens, FN rates were low and did not differ between arms. Although this guideline-informed SOE influenced prescribing, the results suggest that neither SOE nor PP-CSF provides sufficient benefit to justify their use for all patients receiving first-line intermediate-risk regimens.

An evaluation of stakeholder engagement in comparative effectiveness research: lessons learned from SWOG S1415CD

Aim: Stakeholder engagement is central to comparative effectiveness research yet there are gaps in definitions of success. We used a framework developed by Lavallee et al. defining effective engagement criteria to evaluate stakeholder engagement during a pragmatic cluster-randomized trial. Methods: Semi-structured interviews were developed from the framework and completed to learn about members' experiences. Interviews were analyzed in a deductive approach for themes related to the effective engagement criteria. Results: Thirteen members participated and described: respect for ideas, time to achieve consensus, access to information and continuous feedback as areas of effective engagement. The primary criticism was lack of diversity. Discussion: Feedback was positive, particularly among themes of respect, trust and competence, and led to development of a list of best practices for engagement. The framework was successful for evaluating engagement. Conclusion: Standardized frameworks allow studies to formally evaluate their stakeholder engagement approach and develop best practices for future research.

Prevalence of comorbidities associated with sickle cell disease among non-elderly individuals with commercial insurance-A retrospective cohort study

Sickle cell disease (SCD) is a severe monogenic disease associated with high morbidity and mortality and a disproportionate burden on Black communities. Few population-based studies have examined the prevalence of comorbidities among persons with SCD. We estimated the prevalence of comorbidities experienced by individuals with SCD enrolled in employer-based health insurance plans in the US over their non-elderly lifetimes (0-64 years of age) with a retrospective cohort design using Truven Health MarketScan commercial claims data from 2007-2018. ICD-9/10 codes were used to identify individuals with SCD using a previously published algorithm. For this cohort, comorbidities associated with SCD were identified across 3 age categories (<18, 18-45, 46-64 years-old), based on the CMS Chronic Comorbidities Warehouse or SCD-specific diagnosis codes, when applicable. The total number of SCD patients available for analysis in each age category was 7,502 (<18 years), 10,183 (18-45 years) and 4,459 (46-64 years). Across all ages, vaso-occlusive pain, infections (non-specific), and fever were the most common comorbidities. Vaso-occlusive pain and infection were the most prevalent conditions for persons age <18- and 18-45-year-olds, while in the 46-54-year-old age group, infection and cardiovascular including pulmonary hypertension were most prevalent. Compared to persons <18 years old, the prevalence of vaso-occlusive pain, fever, and acute chest syndrome claims declined in older populations. The comorbidity burden of SCD is significant across all age groups. SCD patients experience comorbidities of age such as chronic pain, cardio-vascular conditions including pulmonary hypertension and renal disease at far higher rates than the general population. Novel disease modifying therapies in development have the potential to significantly reduce the comorbidity burden of SCD.

The Potential Value-Based Price of a Multi-Cancer Early Detection Genomic Blood Test to Complement Current Single Cancer Screening in the USA

BACKGROUND

Multi-cancer early detection (MCED) testing could increase detection of cancer at early stages, when survival outcomes are better and treatment costs are lower, but is expected to increase screening costs. This study modeled an MCED test for 19 solid cancers in a US population and estimated the potential value-based price (the maximum price to meet a given willingness to pay) of the MCED test plus current single cancer screening (usual care) compared to usual care alone from a third-party payer perspective over a lifetime horizon.

METHODS

A hybrid cohort-level state-transition and decision-tree model was developed to estimate the clinical and economic outcomes of annual MCED testing between age 50 and 79 years. The impact on time and stage of diagnosis was computed using an interception modeling approach, with the consequences of cancer modeled based on stage at diagnosis. The model parameters were mainly sourced from the literature, including a published case-control study to inform MCED test performance. All costs were inflated to 2021 US dollars.

RESULTS

Multi-cancer early detection testing shifted cancer diagnoses to earlier stages, with a 53% reduction in stage IV cancer diagnoses, resulting in longer overall survival compared with usual care. Addition of MCED decreased per cancer treatment costs by $5421 and resulted in a gain of 0.13 and 0.38 quality-adjusted life-years across all individuals in the screening program and those diagnosed with cancer, respectively. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained, the potential value-based price of an MCED test was estimated at $1196. The projected survival of individuals diagnosed with cancer and the number of cancers detected at an earlier stage by MCED had the greatest impact on outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

An MCED test with high specificity would potentially improve long-term health outcomes and reduce cancer treatment costs, resulting in a value-based price of $1196 at a $100,000/quality-adjusted life-year willingness-to-pay threshold.

Effects of a Guideline-Informed Clinical Decision Support System Intervention to Improve Colony-Stimulating Factor Prescribing: A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Colony-stimulating factors are prescribed to patients undergoing chemotherapy to reduce the risk of febrile neutropenia. Research suggests that 55% to 95% of colony-stimulating factor prescribing is inconsistent with national guidelines.

OBJECTIVE

To examine whether a guideline-based standing order for primary prophylactic colony-stimulating factors improves use and reduces the incidence of febrile neutropenia.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cluster randomized clinical trial, the Trial Assessing CSF Prescribing Effectiveness and Risk (TrACER), involved 32 community oncology clinics in the US. Participants were adult patients with breast, colorectal, or non-small cell lung cancer initiating cancer therapy and enrolled between January 2016 and April 2020. Data analysis was performed from July to October 2021.

INTERVENTIONS

Sites were randomized 3:1 to implementation of a guideline-based primary prophylactic colony-stimulating factor standing order system or usual care. Automated orders were added for high-risk regimens, and an alert not to prescribe was included for low-risk regimens. Risk was based on National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was to find an increase in colony-stimulating factor use among high-risk patients from 40% to 75%, a reduction in use among low-risk patients from 17% to 7%, and a 50% reduction in febrile neutropenia rates in the intervention group. Mixed model logistic regression adjusted for correlation of outcomes within a clinic.

RESULTS

A total of 2946 patients (median [IQR] age, 59.0 [50.0-67.0] years; 2233 women [77.0%]; 2292 White [79.1%]) were enrolled; 2287 were randomized to the intervention, and 659 were randomized to usual care. Colony-stimulating factor use for patients receiving high-risk regimens was high and not significantly different between groups (847 of 950 patients [89.2%] in the intervention group vs 296 of 309 patients [95.8%] in the usual care group). Among high-risk patients, febrile neutropenia rates for the intervention (58 of 947 patients [6.1%]) and usual care (13 of 308 patients [4.2%]) groups were not significantly different. The febrile neutropenia rate for patients receiving high-risk regimens not receiving colony-stimulating factors was 14.9% (17 of 114 patients). Among the 585 patients receiving low-risk regimens, colony-stimulating factor use was low and did not differ between groups (29 of 457 patients [6.3%] in the intervention group vs 7 of 128 patients [5.5%] in the usual care group). Febrile neutropenia rates did not differ between usual care (1 of 127 patients [0.8%]) and the intervention (7 of 452 patients [1.5%]) groups.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this cluster randomized clinical trial, implementation of a guideline-informed standing order did not affect colony-stimulating factor use or febrile neutropenia rates in high-risk and low-risk patients. Overall, use was generally appropriate for the level of risk. Standing order interventions do not appear to be necessary or effective in the setting of prophylactic colony-stimulating factor prescribing.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02728596.

Medical and Non-medical Costs of Sickle Cell Disease and Treatments from a US Perspective: A Systematic Review and Landscape Analysis

BACKGROUND

Sickle cell disease (SCD) is a complex genetic disorder that manifests in infancy and progresses throughout life in the form of acute and chronic complications. As the upfront costs of potentially curative, genetic therapies will likely be high, an assessment and comprehensive characterization of the medical and non-medical cost burden will inform future decision making.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to systematically summarize the existing literature surrounding SCD medical and non-medical costs.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE (2008-2020) and identified US-based studies that detailed medical or non-medical costs. Eligible studies provided empirical estimates about any aspect of cost or SCD individuals of all ages and their caregivers. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, and costs were adjusted to 2019 US$.

RESULTS

Search queries returned 479 studies, with 342 from medical burden searches and 137 from non-medical burden searches, respectively. Herein, we report the results of the 40 studies that contained relevant cost information: 39 detailed medical costs and 1 detailed non-medical costs. Costs were higher for SCD patients when compared with non-SCD individuals (cost difference range: $6636-$63,436 annually). The highest medical cost component for SCD patients was inpatient ($11,978-$59,851 annually), followed by outpatient and then pharmacy. No studies characterized the cost burden throughout the lifetime disease trajectory of an SCD individual, and no studies captured caregiver or productivity costs.

CONCLUSION

Our results reveal an incomplete characterization of medical and non-medical costs within SCD. A deeper understanding of the medical and non-medical cost burden requires completion of additional studies that capture the burden across the patient's lifetime, in addition to expression of the impact of existing and emergent health technologies on disease trajectory.

Barriers Associated with Inadequate Follow-up of Abnormal Fecal Immunochemical Test Results in a Safety-Net System: A Mixed-Methods Analysis

•

Less than 50% of patients with an abnormal FIT result had a documented reason.

•

Patient-level (e.g., declined colonoscopy) reasons were most frequently documented.

•

Interviews revealed discordance in documented and patient-reported reasons.

•

Mixed-methods analyses are needed to improve colonoscopy after abnormal FIT results.

In safety-net healthcare systems, colonoscopy completion within 1-year of an abnormal fecal immunochemical test (FIT) result rarely exceeds 50%. Understanding how electronic health records (EHR) documented reasons for missed colonoscopy match or differ from patient-reported reasons, is critical to optimize effective interventions to address this challenge. We conducted a convergent mixed-methods study which included a retrospective analysis of EHR data and semi-structured interviews of adults 50–75 years old, with abnormal FIT results between 2014 and 2020 in a large safety-net healthcare system. Of the 299 patients identified, 59.2% (n = 177) did not complete a colonoscopy within one year of their abnormal result. EHR abstraction revealed a documented reason for lack of follow-up colonoscopy in 49.2% (n = 87/177); patient-level (e.g., declined colonoscopy; 51.5%) and multi-factorial reasons (e.g., lost to follow-up; 37.9%) were most common. In 18 patient interviews, patient (e.g., fear of colonoscopy), provider (e.g., lack of result awareness), and system-level reasons (e.g., scheduling challenges) were most common. Only three reasons for lack of colonoscopy overlapped between EHR data and patient interviews (competing health issues, lack of transportation, and abnormal FIT result attributed to another cause). In a cohort of safety-net patients with abnormal FIT results, the most common reasons for lack of follow-up were patient-related. Our analysis revealed a discordance between EHR documented and patient-reported reasons for lack of colonoscopy after an abnormal FIT result. Mixed-methods analyses, as in the present study, may give us the greatest insight into modifiable determinants to develop effective interventions beyond quantitative and qualitative data analysis alone.

Development of a conceptual model for evaluating new non-curative and curative therapies for sickle cell disease

BACKGROUND

Sickle cell disease (SCD) is a clinically heterogeneous disease with many acute and chronic complications driven by ongoing vaso-occlusion and hemolysis. It causes a disproportionate burden on Black and Hispanic communities. Our objective was to follow the SMDM/ISPOR Task Force recommendations for good practices and create a conceptual model of the progression of SCD under current clinical practice to inform cost-effectiveness analyses (CEA) of promising curative therapies in the pipeline over a lifetime horizon.

METHODS

We used consultations with experts, providers, and patients to identify acute events and chronic conditions in the conceptual model. We compared our model structure to previous CEA models of interventions for SCD, assessed the prevalence of the identified disease attributes in Medicaid and Medicare claims databases, and identified relevant outcomes following the 2nd Panel in CEA. We determined an appropriate modeling technique and relevant data sources for parameterizing the model.

RESULTS

The conceptual model structure included four dimensions of disease: chronic pain, acute events, chronic conditions, and treatment complications, spanning 26 disease attributes with significant impacts on health-related quality of life and resource. We modeled chronic pain separately to reflect its importance to patients and interaction with all other disease attributes. We identified additional data sources for health state utilities and non-medical costs and benefits of SCD. We will use a microsimulation model with age- and sex-specific transitions between health states predicted by patient demographic characteristics and disease history.

CONCLUSION

Developing the model structure through an explicit process of model conceptualization can increase the transparency and accuracy of results. We will populate the conceptual model with the data sources described and evaluate the cost-effectiveness of curative therapies.

Successes and challenges of implementing a cancer care delivery intervention in community oncology practices: lessons learned from SWOG S1415CD

Background

Cancer Care Delivery (CCD) research studies often require practice-level interventions that pose challenges in the clinical trial setting. The SWOG Cancer Research Network (SWOG) conducted S1415CD, one of the first pragmatic cluster-randomized CCD trials to be implemented through the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Community Oncology Program (NCORP), to compare outcomes of primary prophylactic colony stimulating factor (PP-CSF) use for an intervention of automated PP-CSF standing orders to usual care. The introduction of new methods for study implementation created challenges and opportunities for learning that can inform the design and approach of future CCD interventions.

Methods

The order entry system intervention was administered at the site level; sites were affiliated NCORP practices that shared the same chemotherapy order system. 32 sites without existing guideline-based PP-CSF standing orders were randomized to the intervention (n = 24) or to usual care (n = 8). Sites assigned to the intervention participated in tailored training, phone calls and onboarding activities administered by research team staff and were provided with additional funding and external IT support to help them make protocol required changes to their order entry systems.

Results

The average length of time for intervention sites to complete reconfiguration of their order sets following randomization was 7.2 months. 14 of 24 of intervention sites met their individual patient recruitment target of 99 patients enrolled per site.

Conclusions

In this paper we share seven recommendations based on lessons learned from implementation of the S1415CD intervention at NCORP community oncology practices representing diverse geographies and patient populations across the U. S. It is our hope these recommendations can be used to guide future implementation of CCD interventions in both research and community settings.

Trial Registration

NCT02728596, registered April 5, 2016.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-07835-4.

Abstract P3-03-05: The budget impact of the DiviTum®TKa assay in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor positive metastatic breast cancer

Background. Management of postmenopausal women with HR+ mBC includes monitoring with tumor markers, CT scans, and bone scans. DiviTum®TKa is a blood-based biomarker assay developed to monitor and predict treatment response in hormone receptor positive metastatic breast cancer (HR+ mBC). Uptake of DiviTum®TKa monitoring may decrease usage of traditional monitoring technologies and potentially avoid prolongation of futile treatments. Our objective was to estimate budget impacts of the assay on monitoring utilization and cancer treatment on a postmenopausal HR+ mBC population in a 1,000,000 member U.S. health plan. Methods. We developed a budget impact model comparing inclusion of DiviTum®TKa to standard monitoring practices vs. standard monitoring practices alone. The modeled population was post-menopausal women with HR+ mBC who receive 1st-line treatment with CDK4/6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i) + an aromatase inhibitor (AI). We explored two scenarios: (1) uptake of DiviTum®TKa reduces the frequency of traditional mBC monitoring tools, and 2) in addition to scenario 1, DiviTum®TKa predicts treatment futility 1 month in advance of radiological disease progression. We assumed patients were 100% adherent to DiviTum®TKa and traditional monitoring schedules, which were based on clinical guidelines and expert opinion. DiviTum®TKa’s impact on therapy utilization was based on published literature and expert opinion. Modeled costs included DiviTum®TKa, NCCN-recommended treatments, imaging, biomarker testing, and adverse events. Unit costs were based on CMS fee schedules and wholesale acquisition costs. Annual rates of incident and recurrent post-menopausal HR+ mBC were estimated from SEER and publicly available data. We calculated total and per-member per-month (PMPM) costs with a 3-year time horizon. Results. Each year, 17 women who progressed to mBC and 4 who developed de novo mBC were treated 1st-line with CDK4/6i+AI. In scenario 1 (monitoring only), addition of 404 DiviTum®TKa assays led to 203 fewer CT scans, 93 fewer bone scans, and 60 fewer biomarker tests over 3 years. In scenario 2 (impact on therapy), mean time on treatment with CDK 4/6i + AI therapy was 28 months without DiviTum®TKa testing; with DiviTum®TKa, 27 months; this led to treatment-related cost savings due to avoidance of time on futile therapy. Spend on DiviTum®TKa testing was $161,600. Accounting only for test costs (Scenario 1) resulted in incremental cost of $38,000 and a PMPM of $0.001. Accounting for time spent on futile therapy (Scenario 2) resulted in incremental cost savings of $465,600 and a PMPM cost-savings of $0.013. In one-way sensitivity analysis, results were most sensitive to DiviTum®TKa and CT scan costs, the proportion of mBC patients treated with CDK4/6i+AI, and CDK4/6i costs. Conclusions. In this analysis, use of DiviTum®TKa reduced use of a substantial proportion of traditional monitoring. If use of DiviTum®TKa can also predict lack of benefit from costly CDK4/6i therapy and clinicians act on that information in a timely fashion, this can result in substantial cost savings to patients and health plans. In this 2nd scenario, net savings on adding a new test to care were ~3X the spend on the test itself. Following approval and commercial introduction of DiviTum®TKa, future research on practice patterns will be necessary to validate our analysis.

Scenario 1WithoutDiviTum®TKaWithDiviTum®TKaDifferenceDifferencePMPMTotal Cost$14,518,998$14,556,984$37,986$0.001Monitoring$284,680$322,666$37,986$0.001Treatment$13,703,867$13,703,867$0$0.000Adverse Events$530,451$530,451$0$0.000Scenario 2WithoutDiviTum®TKaWithDiviTum®TKaDifferenceDifferencePMPMTotal Cost$14,518,998$14,053,431-$465,567-$0.013Monitoring$284,680$311,179$26,500$0.001Treatment$13,703,867$13,209,240-$494,627-$0.014Adverse Events$530,451$533,013$2,561$0.000

Citation Format: Gregory F. Guzauskas, Josh J. Carlson, Robert A. Dann, Scott D. Ramsey. The budget impact of the DiviTum®TKa assay in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor positive metastatic breast cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2021 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2021 Dec 7-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P3-03-05.

Trends in treatment patterns and costs of care among patients with advanced stage cervical cancer

BACKGROUND

Current treatments for recurrent or metastatic cervical cancer (r/mCC) do not offer satisfactory clinical benefits, with most patients progressing beyond first-line (1L) treatment. With new treatments under investigation, understanding current treatment patterns, the impact of newly approved therapies, and total costs of care for r/mCC are important.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of a US commercial insurance claims database to identify adult patients with r/mCC between 2015 and Q1-2020; defining 1L treatment as the first administration of systemic treatment without concomitant chemoradiation or surgery. Patient characteristics, treatment regimens, duration of therapy, and total costs of care were evaluated for each line of therapy.

RESULTS

1323 women initiated 1L treatment for r/mCC (mean age, 56.1 years; mean follow-up, 16.5 months). One-third (n = 438) had evidence of second-line (2L) treatment; of these, 129 (29%) had evidence of third-line (3L) treatment. No regimen represented a majority among 2L+ treatments. The 2018 approval of pembrolizumab led to increased 2L immunotherapy use (0% in 2015, 37% in 2019/Q1-2020). However, only a small proportion of patients stayed on immunotherapy for a prolonged period. Mean per-patient-per-month total costs of care during treatment were $47,387 (1L), $77,661 (2L), and $53,609 (3L), driven primarily by outpatient costs.

CONCLUSIONS

No clear standard of care was observed in 2L+. Although immunotherapy is increasingly used in 2L+, only a small subset of patients stayed on immunotherapy for a prolonged period, suggesting a need for more therapeutic options. Better understanding of disease biology and the introduction of new therapies may address these unmet needs.

S1417CD: A Prospective Multicenter Cooperative Group-Led Study of Financial Hardship in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Patients

BACKGROUND

Financial toxicity is a growing problem in oncology, but no prior studies have prospectively measured the financial impact of cancer treatment in a diverse national cohort of newly diagnosed cancer patients. S1417CD was the first cooperative group-led multicenter prospective cohort study to evaluate financial hardship in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients.

METHODS

Patients aged 18 years or older within 120 days of mCRC diagnosis completed quarterly questionnaires for 12 months. We estimated the cumulative incidence of major financial hardship (MFH), defined as 1 or more of increased debt, new loans from family and/or friends, selling or refinancing home, or 20% or more income decline. We evaluated the association between patient characteristics and MFH using multivariate cox regression and the association between MFH and quality of life using linear regression.

RESULTS

A total of 380 patients (median age = 59.9 years) were enrolled; 77.7% were White, 98.0% insured, and 56.5% had annual income of $50 000 or less. Cumulative incidence of MFH at 12 months was 71.3% (95% confidence interval = 65.7% to 76.1%). Age, race, marital status, and income (split at $50 000 per year) were not statistically significantly associated with MFH. However, income less than $100 000 and total assets less than $100 000 were both associated with greater MFH. MFH at 3 months was associated with decreased social functioning and quality of life at 6 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Nearly 3 out of 4 mCRC patients experienced MFH despite access to health insurance. These findings underscore the need for clinic and policy solutions that protect cancer patients from financial harm.

Operationalizing a Rideshare Intervention for Colonoscopy Completion: Barriers, Facilitators, and Process Recommendations

INTRODUCTION

Transportation is a common barrier to colonoscopy completion for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. The study aims to identify the barriers, facilitators, and process recommendations to implement a rideshare non-emergency medical transportation (NEMT) intervention following colonoscopy completion within a safety-net healthcare setting.

METHODS

We used informal stakeholder engagement, story boards - a novel user-centered design technique, listening sessions and the nominal group technique to identify the barriers, facilitators, and process to implementing a rideshare NEMT program following colonoscopy completion in a large safety-net healthcare system.

RESULTS

Barriers to implementing a rideshare NEMT intervention for colonoscopy completion included: inability to expand an existing NEMT program beyond Medicaid patients and lack of patient chaperones with rideshare NEMT programs. Facilitators included: commercially available rideshare NEMT platforms that were lower cost and had shorter wait times than the alternative of taxis. Operationalizing and implementing a rideshare NEMT intervention in our healthcare system required the following steps: 1) identifying key stakeholders, 2) engaging stakeholder groups in discussion to identify barriers and solutions, 3) obtaining institutional sign-off, 4) developing a process for reviewing and selecting a rideshare NEMT program, 5) executing contracts, 6) developing a standard operating procedure and 7) training clinic staff to use the rideshare platform.

DISCUSSION

Rideshare NEMT after procedural sedation is administered may improve colonoscopy completion rates and provide one solution to inadequate CRC screening. If successful, our rideshare model could be broadly applicable to other safety-net health systems, populations with high social needs, and settings where procedural sedation is administered.

Patient Knowledge and Expectations About Return of Genomic Results in a Biomarker-Driven Master Protocol Trial (SWOG S1400GEN)

PURPOSE

Biomarker-driven master protocols represent a new paradigm in oncology clinical trials, but their complex designs and wide-ranging genomic results returned can be difficult to communicate to participants. The objective of this pilot study was to evaluate patient knowledge and expectations related to return of genomic results in the Lung Cancer Master Protocol (Lung-MAP).

METHODS

Eligible participants with previously treated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer were recruited from patients enrolled in Lung-MAP. Participants completed a 38-item telephone survey ≤ 30 days from Lung-MAP consent. The survey assessed understanding about the benefits and risks of Lung-MAP participation and knowledge of the potential uses of somatic testing results returned. Descriptive statistics and odds ratios for associations between demographic factors and correct responses to survey items were assessed.

RESULTS

From August 1, 2017, to June 30, 2019, we recruited 207 participants with a median age of 67, 57.3% male, and 94.2% White. Most participants "strongly/somewhat agreed" with statements that they "received enough information to understand" Lung-MAP benefits (82.6%) and risks (69.5%). In items asking about potential uses of Lung-MAP genomic results, 87.0% correctly indicated that the results help to select cancer treatment, but < 20% correctly indicated that the results are not used to confirm cancer diagnosis, would not reveal risk of developing diseases besides cancer, and would not indicate if family members had increased cancer risk. There were no associations between sociodemographic factors and proportions providing correct responses.

CONCLUSION

In a large National Clinical Trials Network biomarker-driven master protocol, most participants demonstrated incorrect knowledge and expectations about the uses of genomic results provided in the study despite most indicating that they had enough information to understand benefits and risks.

Patient-Reported Outcomes and Long-Term Nonadherence to Aromatase Inhibitors

BACKGROUND

Nonadherence to aromatase inhibitors (AIs) is common and increases risk of breast cancer (BC) recurrence. We analyzed factors associated with nonadherence among patients enrolled in S1105, a randomized trial of text messaging.

METHODS

At enrollment, patients were required to have been on an adjuvant AI for at least 30 days and were asked about financial, medication, and demographic factors. They completed patient-reported outcomes (PROs) representing pain (Brief Pain Inventory), endocrine symptoms (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Endocrine Symptoms), and beliefs about medications (Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medicine; Brief Medication Questionnaire). Our primary endpoint was AI nonadherence at 36 months, defined as urine AI metabolite assay of less than 10 ng/mL or no submitted specimen. We evaluated the association between individual baseline characteristics and nonadherence with logistic regression. A composite risk score reflecting the number of statistically significant baseline characteristics was examined.

RESULTS

We analyzed data from 702 patients; median age was 60.9 years. Overall, 35.9% patients were nonadherent at 36 months. Younger patients (younger than age 65 years) were more nonadherent (38.8% vs 28.6%, odds ratio [OR] = 1.51, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.05 to 2.16; P = .02). Fourteen baseline PRO scales were each statistically significantly associated with nonadherence. In a composite risk model categorized into quartile levels, each increase in risk level was associated with a 46.5% increase in the odds of nonadherence (OR = 1.47, 95% CI =1.26 to 1.70; P < .001). The highest-risk patients were more than 3 times more likely to be nonadherent than the lowest-risk patients (OR = 3.14, 95% CI = 1.97 to 5.02; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

The presence of multiple baseline PRO-specified risk factors was statistically significantly associated with AI nonadherence. The use of these assessments can help identify patients for targeted interventions to improve adherence.

Perceptions on Barriers and Facilitators to Colonoscopy Completion After Abnormal Fecal Immunochemical Test Results in a Safety Net System

IMPORTANCE

The effectiveness of stool-based colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, including fecal immunochemical tests (FITs), relies on colonoscopy completion among patients with abnormal results, but in safety net systems and federally qualified health centers, in which FIT is frequently used, colonoscopy completion within 1 year of an abnormal result rarely exceeds 50%. Clinician-identified factors in follow-up of abnormal FIT results are understudied and could lead to more effective interventions to address this issue.

OBJECTIVE

To describe clinician-identified barriers and facilitators to colonoscopy completion among patients with abnormal FIT results in a safety net health care system.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This qualitative study was conducted using semistructured key informant interviews with primary care physicians (PCPs) and staff members in a large safety net health care system in Washington state. Eligible clinicians were recruited through all-staff meetings and clinic medical directors. Interviews were conducted from February to December 2020 through face-to-face interactions or digital meeting platforms. Interview transcripts were analyzed deductively and inductively using a content analysis approach. Data were analyzed from September through December 2020.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Barriers and facilitators to colonoscopy completion after an abnormal FIT result were identified by PCPs and staff members.

RESULTS

Among 21 participants, there were 10 PCPs and 11 staff members; 20 participants provided demographic information. The median (interquartile range) age was 38.5 (33.0-51.5) years, 17 (85.0%) were women, and 9 participants (45.0%) spent more than 75% of their working time engaging in patient care. All participants identified social determinants of health, organizational factors, and patient cognitive factors as barriers to colonoscopy completion. Participants suggested that existing resources that addressed these factors facilitated colonoscopy completion but were insufficient to meet national follow-up colonoscopy goals.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this qualitative study, responses of interviewed PCPs and staff members suggested that the barriers to colonoscopy completion in a safety net health system may be modifiable. These findings suggest that interventions to improve follow-up of abnormal FIT results should be informed by clinician-identified factors to address multilevel challenges to colonoscopy completion.

Effect of Clinical Trial Participation on Costs to Payers in Metastatic Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer

PURPOSE

The costs associated with clinical trial enrollment remain uncertain. We hypothesized that trial participation is associated with decreased total direct medical costs to health care payers in metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, we linked clinical data from electronic medical records to sociodemographic data from a cancer registry and claims data from Medicare and two private insurance plans. We used a difference-in-difference analysis to estimate mean per patient per month total direct medical costs for patients enrolled on a second-line (2L) trial versus patients receiving standard-of-care 2L systemic therapy.

RESULTS

Among 70 eligible patients, the difference-in-difference of mean per patient per month total direct medical costs between 2L trial participants and nonparticipants was -$6,663 (P = .01), for a mean savings of $45,308 per patient for the duration of 2L trial therapy. In a secondary analysis by primary insurance payer, this difference-in-difference was -$5,526 (P = .26) for patients with commercial insurance and -$7,432 (P = .01) for patients with Medicare.

CONCLUSION

Participation in a 2L trial was associated with a $6,663 per month cost savings to health care payers for the duration of trial participation. Further studies are necessary to elucidate differences in cost savings from trial participation for Medicare and commercial payers. If confirmed, these results support health care payer investment in programs to improve clinical trial access and enrollment.

Receipt of Screening Mammography by Insured Women Diagnosed With Breast Cancer and Impact on Outcomes

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to determine factors associated with receipt of screening mammography by insured women before breast cancer diagnosis, and subsequent outcomes.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Using claims data from commercial and federal payers linked to a regional SEER registry, we identified women diagnosed with breast cancer from 2007 to 2017 and determined receipt of screening mammography within 1 year before diagnosis. We obtained patient and tumor characteristics from the SEER registry and assigned each woman a socioeconomic deprivation score based on residential address. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to evaluate associations of patient and tumor characteristics with late-stage disease and nonreceipt of mammography. We used multivariable Cox proportional hazards models to identify predictors of subsequent mortality.

RESULTS

Among 7,047 women, 69% (n=4,853) received screening mammography before breast cancer diagnosis. Compared with women who received mammography, those with no mammography had a higher proportion of late-stage disease (34% vs 10%) and higher 5-year mortality (18% vs 6%). In multivariable modeling, late-stage disease was most associated with nonreceipt of mammography (odds ratio [OR], 4.35; 95% CI, 3.80-4.98). The Cox model indicated that nonreceipt of mammography predicted increased risk of mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 2.00; 95% CI, 1.64-2.43), independent of late-stage disease at diagnosis (HR, 5.00; 95% CI, 4.10-6.10), Charlson comorbidity index score ≥1 (HR, 2.75; 95% CI, 2.26-3.34), and negative estrogen receptor/progesterone receptor status (HR, 2.09; 95% CI, 1.67-2.61). Nonreceipt of mammography was associated with younger age (40-49 vs 50-59 years; OR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.45-1.96) and increased socioeconomic deprivation (OR, 1.05 per decile increase; 95% CI, 1.03-1.07).

CONCLUSIONS

In a cohort of insured women diagnosed with breast cancer, nonreceipt of screening mammography was significantly associated with late-stage disease and mortality, suggesting that interventions to further increase uptake of screening mammography may improve breast cancer outcomes.

Feasibility of Measuring Preferences for Chemotherapy Among Early-Stage Breast Cancer Survivors Using a Direct Rank Ordering Multicriteria Decision Analysis Versus a Time Trade-Off

OBJECTIVES

Chemotherapy is increasingly a preference-based choice among women diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer. Multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) is a promising but underutilized method to facilitate shared decision making. We explored the feasibility of conducting an MCDA using direct rank ordering versus a time trade-off (TTO) to assess chemotherapy choice in a large population-based sample.

METHODS

We surveyed 904 early-stage breast cancer survivors who were within 5 years of diagnosis and reported to the Western Washington State Cancer System and Kaiser Permanente Northern California registries. Direct rank ordering of 11 criteria and TTO surveys were conducted from September 2015 to July 2016; clinical data were obtained from registries or medical records. Multivariable regressions estimated post hoc associations between the MCDA, TTO, and self-reported chemotherapy receipt, considering covariates.

RESULTS

Survivors ranged in age from 25 to 74 years and 73.9% had stage I tumors. The response rate for the rank ordering was 81.0%; TTO score was 94.2%. A one-standard deviation increase in the difference between the chemotherapy and no chemotherapy MCDA scores was associated with a 75.1% (95% confidence interval 43.9-109.7%; p < 0.001) increase in the adjusted odds of having received chemotherapy; no association was found between the TTO score and chemotherapy receipt.

CONCLUSIONS

A rank-order-based MCDA was feasible and was associated with chemotherapy choice. Future research should consider developing and testing this MCDA for use in clinical encounters. Additional research is required to develop a TTO-based model and test its properties against a pragmatic MCDA to inform future shared decision-making tools.

Utilization of Systemic Therapy in Patients With Cancer Near the End of Life in the Pre- Versus Postimmune Checkpoint Inhibitor Eras

PURPOSE

Systemic therapy use in the last 30 days of life (DOL) for patients with advanced cancer is a low-value medical practice. We hypothesized that systemic therapy use in the last 30 DOL increased after approval of antiprogrammed cell death protein 1 immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and has contributed to increased health care utilization and spending.

METHODS

We investigated the change in prevalence of any systemic therapy use in the last 30 DOL among patients with advanced solid tumors in the 4 years before and after antiprogrammed cell death protein 1 ICI approval in 2014. We used cases from the Western Washington Cancer Surveillance System linked to commercial and Medicare insurance. We calculated the difference in prevalence between the pre- and post-ICI periods. We also calculated the annual prevalence of any systemic therapy and ICI use in the last 30 DOL and measured health care utilization (emergency department visits and hospitalizations) and costs during the last 30 DOL.

RESULTS

Eight thousand eight hundred seventy-one patients (median age 73 years) were included; 34% and 66% in the pre-and post-ICI period, respectively. Systemic therapy use in the last 30 DOL was lower in the post-ICI versus pre-ICI period (12.4% v 14.4%; difference -2.0% [95% CI, -3.5 to -0.5]). The annual prevalence of systemic therapy use in the last 30 DOL also declined, although ICI use rose. Patients treated with ICIs in last 30 DOL had more emergency department visits, hospitalizations, and higher costs.

CONCLUSION

Systemic therapy use in the last 30 DOL was lower in the period after ICI approval. However, ICI use rose over time and had higher utilization and costs in the last 30 DOL. Systemic therapy use in the last 30 DOL warrants monitoring, especially as more ICI indications are approved.

Impact of Clinical Trial Participation on Survival of Patients with Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

INTRODUCTION

The impact of clinical trial participation on overall survival is unclear. We hypothesized that enrollment in a therapeutic drug clinical trial is associated with longer overall survival in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We linked electronic medical record and Washington State cancer registry data to identify patients with metastatic NSCLC diagnosed between January 1, 2007, and December 31, 2015 who received treatment at a National Cancer Institute-designated cancer center. The exposure was trial enrollment. The primary outcome was overall survival, defined as the date of second-line treatment initiation to date of death or last follow-up. We used a conditional landmark analysis starting at the date of second-line treatment initiation and propensity scores with inverse probability of treatment weighting to estimate the association between trial enrollment and survival.

RESULTS

Of 215 patients, 40 (19%) participated in a second-line trial. Trial participants were more likely to be never smokers (45% vs 27%), have a good performance status (88% vs 77%) and have EGFR (48% vs 14%) and ALK mutations (8% vs 5%) than nonparticipants. Trial participants had similar overall survival to nonparticipants (HR 1.05; 95% CI, 0.72, 1.53; p = 0.81) after adjusting for sociodemographic and disease characteristics.

CONCLUSION

Accounting for the immortal time bias and selection bias, trial participation does not appear detrimental to survival. This finding may be reassuring to patients and supports programs and policies to improve clinical trial access.

Polypharmacy, chemotherapy receipt, and medication-related out-of-pocket costs at end of life among commercially insured adults with advanced cancer

BACKGROUND

Polypharmacy raises the risk of drug-drug interactions and adverse events among patients with cancer. Most polypharmacy research has focused on adults age 65 or older enrolled in Medicare insurance. To better inform pharmacy practice and cancer care delivery, data are needed on polypharmacy among commercially insured patients with cancer and those younger than 65.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of insurance enrollment and claims files linked to the Puget Sound Cancer Surveillance System for adults age 18 and older who were commercially insured, diagnosed with stage IV cancer, survived 30+ days after diagnosis, and did not enroll in hospice. We describe the prevalence of polypharmacy, chemotherapy use, and medication-related out-of-pocket (OOP) costs in the last month of life.

RESULTS

Of 606 patients, 390 (64%) experienced polypharmacy (i.e. 5+ medications) in the last 30 days of life. Almost half (n = 297, 49%) received chemotherapy or targeted agents; chemotherapy was associated with significantly higher odds of polypharmacy (odds ratio (OR) 2.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.04-4.20). The most commonly prescribed medications at end of life were opioids, benzodiazepines and anti-emetics. Among 484 patients (80%) incurring medication-related costs in the last month of life, median total OOP cost was $82 (interquartile range $30-$200). Seven patients (1%) had total costs above $5,000. The median chemotherapy-related OOP cost was $446 (IQR $150-$1896); 32 patients (7%) had chemotherapy-related OOP costs between $1,000 and $5,000.

CONCLUSION

Most patients with advanced cancer experienced polypharmacy at end of life, although most medications observed herein are commonly used for supportive care. Patients receiving chemotherapy had higher medication-related OOP costs, and chemotherapy was significantly associated with polypharmacy at end of life. Evaluation of polypharmacy at end of life may represent an important opportunity to improve quality of life and reduce costs for patients and families.

Model-Based Estimation of Colorectal Cancer Screening and Outcomes During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Importance

COVID-19 has decreased colorectal cancer screenings.

Objective

To estimate the degree to which expanding fecal immunochemical test-based colorectal cancer screening participation during the COVID-19 pandemic is associated with clinical outcomes.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A previously developed simulation model was adopted to estimate how much COVID-19 may have contributed to colorectal cancer outcomes. The model included the US population estimated to have completed colorectal cancer screening pre-COVID-19 according the American Cancer Society. The model was designed to estimate colorectal cancer outcomes between 2020 and 2023. This analysis was completed between July and December 2020.

Exposures

Adults screened for colorectal cancer and colorectal cancer cases detected by stage.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Estimates of colorectal cancer outcomes across 4 scenarios: (1) 9 months of 50% colorectal cancer screenings followed by 21 months of 75% colorectal cancer screenings; (2) 18 months of 50% screening followed by 12 months of 75% screening; (3) scenario 1 with increased use of fecal immunochemical tests; and (4) scenario 2 with increased use of fecal immunochemical tests.

Results

In our simulation model, COVID-19-related reductions in care utilization resulted in an estimated 1 176 942 to 2 014 164 fewer colorectal cancer screenings, 8346 to 12 894 fewer colorectal cancer diagnoses, and 6113 to 9301 fewer early-stage colorectal cancer diagnoses between 2020 and 2023. With an abbreviated period of reduced colorectal cancer screenings, increasing fecal immunochemical test use was associated with an estimated additional 588 844 colorectal cancer screenings and 2836 colorectal cancer diagnoses, of which 1953 (68.9%) were early stage. In the event of a prolonged period of reduced colorectal cancer screenings, increasing fecal immunochemical test use was associated with an estimated additional 655 825 colorectal cancer screenings and 2715 colorectal cancer diagnoses, of which 1944 (71.6%) were early stage.

Conclusions and Relevance

These results suggest that the increased use of fecal immunochemical tests during the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with increased colorectal cancer screening participation and more colorectal cancer diagnoses at earlier stages. If our estimates are borne out in real-world clinical practice, increasing fecal immunochemical test-based colorectal cancer screening participation during the COVID-19 pandemic could mitigate the consequences of reduced screening rates during the pandemic for colorectal cancer outcomes.

Persistent Disparity: Socioeconomic Deprivation and Cancer Outcomes in Patients Treated in Clinical Trials

Patients with cancer living in socioeconomically disadvantaged areas have worse cancer outcomes. The association between socioeconomic deprivation and outcomes among patients with cancer participating in clinical trials has not been systematically examined.

Access to Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors and Survival in Patients with Advanced EGFR+ and ALK+ Positive Non-small-cell Lung Cancer Treated in the Real-World

INTRODUCTION

We assessed the proportion of patients with advanced epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who receive tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in the real-world, predictors of TKI use, and impact of TKI therapy on overall survival (OS).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We identified patients diagnosed with stage IV EGFR⁺ and ALK⁺ positive NSCLC from January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2018, in the Cancer Surveillance System registry and linked their records to Medicare and commercial insurance claims. We reported the proportions of patients with 1 or more TKI claims versus no TKI claims and used logistic regression to identify predictors of TKI use. We evaluated the effect of TKI use on OS by applying extended Cox proportional hazard models with TKI use as a time-dependent exposure and landmark analysis in a subcohort (N = 105). We adjusted Cox models for confounding patient characteristics.

RESULTS

Of 117 eligible patients (median age = 69; 62% women; 88% EGFR⁺), 21 (17.9%) had no TKI claims. Diagnosis in 2015 to 2018 was independently associated with lower likelihood of TKI therapy compared with 2010 to 2014 (adjusted odds ratio, 0.29; P = .020). TKI use was associated with longer OS in a multivariate extended Cox model and in the landmark analysis (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.58; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.33; 0.99; P = .048; adjusted HR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.30; 1.00; P = .050).

CONCLUSION

Approximately 18% of patients with advanced EGFR⁺ and ALK⁺ positive NSCLC do not receive TKIs and have inferior survival. Further studies need to investigate barriers of access to TKIs in biomarker-selected patients.

A comparison of mixture cure fraction models to traditional parametric survival models in estimation of the cost-effectiveness of nivolumab for relapsed small cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

In August 2018, the US FDA granted accelerated approval for nivolumab in small cell lung cancer (SCLC) that has progressed after platinum-based chemotherapy and at least one other line of therapy. The objective of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of nivolumab vs. usual care as third-line (3 L) therapy for patients with recurrent SCLC (rSCLC) from the health payer perspective. Given the potential for a meaningful fraction of treated patients to achieve long-term response to nivolumab, we also assessed the impact of using mixture cure modeling (MCM) vs. parametric survival modeling on survival estimates and cost-effectiveness from the US Medicare payer perspective.

METHODS

We created a partitioned survival decision model to assess the cost-effectiveness of 3 L nivolumab vs. usual care in rSCLC, based on observed US treatment patterns. Using this approach, we assessed the impact of extrapolating long-term survival from the CheckMate 032 trial, using both MCM and standard parametric curve fits. Nivolumab survival, resource use, and Grade 3/4 adverse event rates were derived from CheckMate 032. Usual care survival, resource use, and costs were derived from an analysis of patients receiving 3 L treatment for rSCLC in the SEER-Medicare registry. We applied 2020 Wholesale Acquisition Cost for drugs and 2020 CMS reimbursement for procedures. Utilities were derived from the literature. We estimated life years (LY), quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and costs over a lifetime horizon.

RESULTS

MCM and parametric survival model extrapolations resulted in 0.43 versus 0.38 more LYs, 0.34 versus 0.30 more QALYs, and $69,308 versus $61,336 more expenditure for nivolumab vs. usual care, respectively. The costs per QALY gained using mixture cure versus parametric survival modeling were $204,386 and $207,431, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Mixture cure modeling was equivalent compared to parametric modeling in estimating the cost-effectiveness of nivolumab-based therapy due to the small fraction of patients achieving a long-term response with nivolumab (12.9%).