Search

Background The Affordable Care Act (ACA) increased private nonemployer health insurance options, expanded Medicaid eligibility, and provided preexisting health condition protections. We evaluated insurance coverage among long-term adult survivors of childhood cancer pre- and post-ACA implementation. Methods Using the multicenter Childhood Cancer Survivor Study, we included participants from 2 cross-sectional surveys: pre-ACA (2007-2009; survivors: n = 7505; siblings: n = 2175) and post-ACA (2017-2019; survivors: n = 4030; siblings: n = 987). A subset completed both surveys (1840 survivors; 646 siblings). Multivariable regression models compared post-ACA insurance coverage and type (private, public, uninsured) between survivors and siblings and identified associated demographic and clinical factors. Multinomial models compared gaining and losing insurance vs staying the same among survivors and siblings who participated in both surveys. Results The proportion with insurance was higher post-ACA (survivors pre-ACA 89.1% to post-ACA 92.0% [+2.9%]; siblings pre-ACA 90.9% to post-ACA 95.3% [+4.4%]). Post-ACA insurance increase in coverage was higher among those aged 18-25 years (survivors: +15.8% vs +2.3% or less ages 26 years and older; siblings +17.8% vs +4.2% or less ages 26 years and older). Survivors were more likely to have public insurance than siblings post-ACA (18.4% vs 6.9%; odds ratio [OR] = 1.7, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.1 to 2.6). Survivors with severe chronic conditions (OR = 4.7, 95% CI = 3.0 to 7.3) and those living in Medicaid expansion states (OR = 2.4, 95% CI = 1.7 to 3.4) had increased odds of public insurance coverage post-ACA. Among the subset completing both surveys, low- and mid-income survivors (<$40 000 and <$60 000, respectively) experienced insurance losses and gains in reference to highest household income survivors (≥$100 000), relative to odds of keeping the same insurance status. Conclusions Post-ACA, more childhood cancer survivors and siblings had health insurance, although disparities remain in coverage. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The American Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) of 2022 contains climate-related provisions that may have noteworthy implications for cancer control and prevention. This commentary assesses the potential co-benefits of the IRA for cancer control efforts, specifically policies and programs to reduce carcinogen exposure via air quality monitoring and air pollution reduction. Allocations through the IRA for air quality improvement, paired with its environmental justice provisions, hold promise for advancing cancer prevention by targeting resources to communities most susceptible to environmental hazards. Moreover, climate resilience measures dictated by the IRA are crucial for oncology professionals grappling with the dual challenges of climate change and cancer care. Climate-driven extreme weather events can exacerbate carcinogen exposure and disrupt access to cancer care, underscoring the need for resilient health-care infrastructure. The IRA's provisions for clean energy incentives and infrastructure upgrades offer oncology care institutions opportunities to mitigate emissions and bolster resilience against climate-related disruptions, ultimately improving cancer outcomes. Climate-related initiatives funded by the IRA present a unique and timely avenue to advance equitable cancer control efforts. This commentary underscores the critical intersection between climate resilience policy and oncology care, highlighting the potential to promote a healthier and more resilient future for all. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Lack of stable, affordable housing is an important social determinant of health. Federal housing assistance may buffer against housing vulnerabilities among low-income households, but research examining the association of housing assistance and cancer care has been limited. We introduce a new linkage of Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program-Medicare and US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) administrative data. Methods Individuals enrolled in HUD public and assisted housing programs between 2006 and 2021 were linked with cancer diagnoses between 2006 and 2019 identified in the SEER-Medicare data from 16 states using Match*Pro (National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD) probabilistic linkage software. HUD administrative data include timing and type of housing assistance as well as verified household income. Medicare administrative data are available through 2020. Results A total of 335 490 unique individuals who received housing assistance at any time point, including 156 794 who received housing assistance around the time of their diagnosis (at least 6 months before diagnosis until 6 months after diagnosis or death), were matched to SEER-Medicare data. A total of 63 251 individuals receiving housing assistance at the time of their diagnosis were aged 66 years and older and continuously enrolled in Medicare parts A and B fee for service; 12 035 had a diagnosis of lung cancer, 8866 of breast cancer, 7261 of colorectal cancer, and 4703 of prostate cancer. Conclusions This novel data linkage will be available through the National Cancer Institute and can be used to explore the ways in which housing assistance is associated with cancer diagnosis, care, and outcomes, including the role of housing assistance status in potentially reducing or contributing to inequities across racialized and ethnic groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The experiences of cancer survivors with the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States during 2021 and 2022, when vaccinations became widely available, are largely undocumented. Using nationally representative survey data in 2021 and 2022, we found that compared with adults without a cancer history, cancer survivors were more likely to have at least 2 COVID-19 vaccines (2021: 66.6% vs 62.3%, P  =  .003; 2022: 77.0% vs 72.4%, P  <  .001) and as likely to have a COVID-19 infection history (2021: 14.1% vs 14.2%, P  =  .93; 2022: 39.9% vs 39.3%, P  =  .55) but, once infected, were more likely to develop moderate to severe symptoms (2021: 62.5% vs 54.2%, P  =  .02; 54.5% vs 61.3%; P =.13). Among cancer survivors, younger age, lower educational attainment, lack of health insurance, and more comorbidities were statistically significantly associated with lower vaccination rates (P  <  .001). Among infected cancer survivors, being female and younger were associated with higher likelihood of developing moderate to severe symptoms (P  <  .001). Our findings suggest tailored efforts to prevent and control COVID-19 infections for cancer survivors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Long-term survivors of childhood cancer face elevated risk for financial hardship. We evaluate whether childhood cancer survivors live in areas of greater deprivation and the association with self-reported financial hardships. Methods We performed a cross-sectional analysis of data from the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study between 1970 and 1999 and self-reported financial information from 2017 to 2019. We measured neighborhood deprivation with the Area Deprivation Index (ADI) based on current zip code. Financial hardship was measured with validated surveys that captured behavioral, material and financial sacrifice, and psychological hardship. Bivariate analyses described neighborhood differences between survivors and siblings. Generalized linear models estimated effect sizes between ADI and financial hardship adjusting for clinical factors and personal socioeconomic status. Results Analysis was restricted to 3475 long-term childhood cancer survivors and 923 sibling controls. Median ages at time of evaluation was 39 years (interquartile range [IQR] = 33-46 years and 47 years (IQR = 39-59 years), respectively. Survivors resided in areas with greater deprivation (ADI ≥ 50: 38.7% survivors vs 31.8% siblings; P <.001). One quintile increases in deprivation were associated with small increases in behavioral (second quintile, P =.017) and psychological financial hardship (second quintile, P =.009; third quintile, P =.014). Lower psychological financial hardship was associated with individual factors including greater household income (≥$60 000 income, P <.001) and being single (P =.048). Conclusions Childhood cancer survivors were more likely to live in areas with socioeconomic deprivation. Neighborhood-level disadvantage and personal socioeconomic circumstances should be evaluated when trying to assist childhood cancer survivors with financial hardships. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the use of value frameworks in cost communications in the field of oncology. Value frameworks are tools that synthesize the benefits and harms of different treatment options to help compare and identify high-value treatments. The article focuses on three commonly used value frameworks: the Net Health Benefit (NHB) from the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), the Evidence Block from the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN), and the Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (MCBS) from the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO). The study also examines the application of the NHB framework to targeted oral anticancer medications (TOAMs) and their associated costs. The findings suggest that low-value TOAMs are prescribed less frequently, and the uptake of these medications is driven by those with medium and high NHB scores. However, there are concerns about the scoring criteria of the NHB framework and its ability to accurately represent "high value." The article also highlights the importance of incorporating patient out-of-pocket expenses and other financial burdens into value frameworks to facilitate cost communication between clinicians and patients. The study reveals that the median total spending for the first 28-day supply of TOAMs is over $10,000, with some patients spending more than $1,000 out-of-pocket. The article emphasizes the need to consider insurance benefit design and patient characteristics when analyzing the financial burden of TOAMs. It also discusses the differences in cost-sharing requirements between Medicare Part D and private [Extracted from the article]

A study published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute examines the impact of clinic-based interventions on reducing treatment inequities between Black and White women diagnosed with breast cancer. The interventions, including patient navigation, provider bias training, and real-time tracking dashboards, aim to improve equitable treatment. While the interventions successfully addressed treatment inequities, they did not eliminate survival differences between the two groups. The study suggests that additional efforts are needed to eliminate racial disparities in breast cancer outcomes, including addressing factors such as screening, social determinants of health, and systemic racism. [Extracted from the article]

Despite advances in cancer control—prevention, screening, diagnosis, treatment, and survivorship—racial disparities in cancer incidence and survival persist and, in some cases, are widening in the United States. Since 2020, there's been growing recognition of the role of structural racism, including structurally racist policies and practices, as the main factor contributing to historical and contemporary disparities. Structurally racist policies and practices have been present since the genesis of the United States and are also at the root of environmental injustices, which result in disproportionately high exposure to environmental hazards among communities targeted for marginalization, increased cancer risk, disruptions in access to care, and worsening health outcomes. In addition to widening cancer disparities, environmental injustices enable the development of polluting infrastructure, which contribute to detrimental health outcomes in the entire population, and to climate change, the most pressing public health challenge of our time. In this commentary, we describe the connections between climate change and cancer through an Environmental Justice perspective (defined as the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of people of all racialized groups, nationalities, or income, in all aspects, including development, implementation, and enforcement, of policies and practices that affect the environment and public health), highlighting how the expertise developed in communities targeted for marginalization is crucial for addressing health disparities, tackling climate change, and advancing cancer control efforts for the entire population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cancer research has led to remarkable advances in our understanding of cancer biology and strategies for prevention, screening and early detection, treatment, and survivorship care, resulting in declines in cancer mortality rates ([1]). Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 65 Richman I, Tessier-Sherman B, Galusha D, Oladele CR, Wang K. Breast cancer screening during the COVID-19 pandemic: moving from disparities to health equity. Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 32 Haghighat S, Jiang C, El-Rifai W, Zaika A, Goldberg DS, Kumar S. Urgent need to mitigate disparities in federal funding for cancer research. [Extracted from the article]

- Evaluate timing and receipt of guideline-concordant cancer care during incarceration and after release.- Examine patient outcomes, including morbidity, survival, and mortality ht Table 1. We have little understanding of the quality of cancer prevention and screening delivery among incarcerated people ([18]); if cancer is diagnosed, we lack information necessary for assessing and improving cancer care delivery. Even if such identification is achieved, with substantial improvement in the capture of incarceration information in cancer registries, another challenge is determining cancer-related service utilization because more than 50% of correctional health care is outsourced to private companies ([20]). [Extracted from the article]

Female breast cancer is a common cancer in young adults, an age group with the highest uninsured rate. Among 51 675 young adult women (ages 18-39 years) diagnosed with breast cancer between 2011 and 2018 in the National Cancer Database, we estimated changes in guideline-concordant treatment receipt, treatment timeliness, and survival associated with the Affordable Care Act Medicaid expansion. Of young adults with stage I-III estrogen receptor–positive or progesterone receptor–positive breast cancer, Medicaid expansion was associated with a net increase of 2.42 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.56 to 4.28 percentage points) in the percentage receiving endocrine therapy. Among all young adults with stage I-III breast cancer, Medicaid expansion was associated with a net reduction of 1.65 percentage points (95% CI = 0.08 to 3.22 percentage points) in treatment delays defined as treatment initiation of at least 60 days after diagnosis and a net increase of 1.00 percentage points (95% CI = 0.21 to 1.79 percentage points) in 2-year overall survival. Our study provides evidence of benefit in cancer care and outcomes from Medicaid expansion among the young adult population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Short-term limited duration insurance plans, which proliferated following 2018 federal regulations, may not provide adequate protections for patients with suspected or newly diagnosed cancer and can destabilize insurance markets for comprehensive insurance plan enrollees. Individuals aged 18-64 years with newly diagnosed cancer from 11 states during 2016-2017 and 2019 were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program. Difference-in-differences analyses were used to compare changes in early-stage cancer diagnoses from 2016-2017 to 2019 in states that prohibited vs did not regulate short-term limited duration insurance plans. In adjusted difference-in-differences analyses, early-stage diagnoses increased 0.95 percentage points (95% confidence interval = 0.53 to 1.38, P  < .001) in states that prohibited short-term limited duration insurance plans vs did not regulate short-term limited duration insurance plans. State policies resulting in unavailability of short-term limited duration insurance plans were associated with an increased percentage of early-stage diagnoses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Medicaid expansion is associated with improved survival following cancer diagnosis. However, little research has assessed how changes in cancer stage may mediate improved cancer mortality or how expansion may have decreased population-level cancer mortality rates. Methods Nationwide state-level cancer data from 2001 to 2019 for individuals ages 20-64 years were obtained from the combined Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results National Program of Cancer Registries (incidence) and the National Center for Health Statistics (mortality) databases. We estimated changes in distant stage cancer incidence and cancer mortality rates from pre- to post-2014 in expansion vs nonexpansion states using generalized estimating equations with robust standard errors. Mediation analyses were used to assess whether distant stage cancer incidence mediated changes in cancer mortality. Results There were 17 370 state-level observations. For all cancers combined, there were Medicaid expansion–associated decreases in distant stage cancer incidence (adjusted odds ratio = 0.967, 95% confidence interval  = 0.943 to 0.992; P  = .01) and cancer mortality (adjusted odds ratio = 0.965, 95% confidence interval = 0.936 to 0.995; P  = .022). This translates to 2591 averted distant stage cancer diagnoses and 1616 averted cancer deaths in the Medicaid expansion states. Distant stage cancer incidence mediated 58.4% of expansion-associated changes in cancer mortality overall (P  = .008). By cancer site subgroups, there were expansion-associated decreases in breast, cervix, and liver cancer mortality. Conclusions Medicaid expansion was associated with decreased distant stage cancer incidence and cancer mortality. Approximately 60% of the expansion-associated changes in cancer mortality overall were mediated by distant stage diagnoses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A cancer diagnosis during adolescence or young adulthood can have a negative impact on long-term physical and mental health. However, little is known about the financial outcomes for survivors of adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancers. A recent study in the Netherlands found that AYA cancer survivors experienced an average decrease of 8.5% in their annual earnings and a decrease in employment levels after diagnosis compared to a control group. The study also highlighted the potential economic consequences for family members who provide informal care and the broader impact on household financial security. While these findings may not be directly applicable to countries like the United States, where access to healthcare and worker protections are different, it is likely that young adult cancer survivors in the US face greater economic challenges. The oncology community is working to identify interventions to reduce the financial burden on AYA cancer survivors, including assessing financial hardship throughout the cancer journey, implementing screening tools, providing financial navigators, and advocating for improved access to affordable cancer care and social safety nets. [Extracted from the article]

Background Lack of safe, reliable, and affordable transportation is a barrier to medical care, but little is known about its association with clinical outcomes. Methods We identified 28 640 adults with and 470 024 adults without a cancer history from a nationally representative cohort (2000-2018 US National Health Interview Survey) and its linked mortality files with vital status through December 31, 2019. Transportation barriers were defined as delays in care because of lack of transportation. Multivariable logistic and Cox proportional hazards models estimated the associations of transportation barriers with emergency room (ER) use and mortality risk, respectively, adjusted for age, sex, race and ethnicity, education, health insurance, comorbidities, functional limitations, and region. Results Of the adults, 2.8% (n = 988) and 1.7% (n = 9685) with and without a cancer history, respectively, reported transportation barriers; 7324 and 40 793 deaths occurred in adults with and without cancer history, respectively. Adults with a cancer history and transportation barriers, as compared with adults without a cancer history or transportation barriers, had the highest likelihood of ER use (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 2.77, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.34 to 3.27) and all-cause mortality risk (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] = 2.28, 95% CI = 1.94 to 2.68), followed by adults without a cancer history with transportation barriers (ER use aOR = 1.98, 95% CI =1.87 to 2.10; all-cause mortality aHR = 1.57, 95% CI = 1.46 to 1.70) and adults with a cancer history but without transportation barriers (ER use aOR = 1.39, 95% CI = 1.34 to 1.44; all-cause mortality aHR = 1.59, 95% CI = 1.54 to 1.65). Conclusion Delayed care because of lack of transportation was associated with increased ER use and mortality risk among adults with and without cancer history. Cancer survivors with transportation barriers had the highest risk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This information can then be used to test hypotheses to explain the pathway from income inequality and health, such as absolute income, relative income, deprivation, or relative position hypothesis ([13]). Ecological fallacy, defined by Robinson in 1950 as incorrect inferences about individuals based on characteristics and associations observed among groups ([1]), is a well-recognized concept in epidemiology and statistics. The income variable, quantified as neighborhood or individual income, can be used to construct income inequality measures, such as Gini index ([10]), decile ratios ([11]), or Robin Hood index ([12]). Figure 1 uses income-related measures to exemplify 3 plausible pathways that explain the relationship between income and health, highlighting the importance of understanding the implications of adopting measures at various levels. [Extracted from the article]

Health-care–related transportation insecurity is common in the United States. Patients with cancer are especially vulnerable because cancer care is episodic in nature, occurs over a prolonged period, is marked by frequent clinical encounters, requires intense treatments, and results in substantial financial hardship. As a result of transportation insecurity, patients with cancer may forego, miss, delay, alter, and/or prematurely terminate necessary care. Limited data suggest that these alterations in care have the potential to increase the rates of cancer recurrence and mortality and exacerbate disparities in cancer incidence, severity, and outcomes. Transportation insecurity also negatively impacts at the informal caregiver, provider, health system, and societal levels. Recognizing that transportation is a critical determinant of outcomes for patients with cancer, there are ongoing efforts to develop evidence-based protocols to identify at-risk patients and address transportation insecurity at federal policy, health system, not-for-profit, and industry levels. In 2021, the National Cancer Policy Forum of the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine sponsored a series of webinars addressing key social determinants of health including food, housing, and transportation among patients with cancer. This commentary summarizes the formal presentations and discussions related to transportation insecurity and will 1) discuss the heterogeneous nature of transportation insecurity among patients with cancer; 2) characterize its prevalence along the cancer continuum; 3) examine its multilevel consequences; 4) discuss measurement and screening tools; 5) highlight ongoing efforts to address transportation insecurity; 6) suggest policy levers; and 7) outline a research agenda to address critical knowledge gaps. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Access to stable and affordable housing is an important social determinant of health in the United States. However, research addressing housing and cancer care, diagnosis, and outcomes has not been synthesized. Methods We conducted a systematic review of studies examining associations of housing and cancer care and outcomes using PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and CINAHL. Included studies were conducted in the United States and published in English between 1980 and 2021. Study characteristics and key findings were abstracted and qualitatively synthesized. Results A total of 31 studies were identified. Housing-related measures were reported at the individual level in 20 studies (65%) and area level in 11 studies (35%). Study populations and housing measures were heterogeneous. The most common housing measures were area-level housing discrimination (8 studies, 26%), individual-level housing status (8 studies, 26%), and individual-level housing concerns (7 studies, 23%). The most common cancer outcomes were screening (12 studies, 39%) and mortality (9 studies, 29%). Few studies assessed multiple dimensions of housing. Most studies found that exposure to housing insecurity was statistically significantly associated with worse cancer care (11 studies) or outcomes (10 studies). Conclusions Housing insecurity is adversely associated with cancer care and outcomes, underscoring the importance of screening for housing needs and supporting systemic changes to advance equitable access to care. Additional research is needed to develop and test provider- and policy-level housing interventions that can effectively address the needs of individuals throughout the cancer care continuum. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Social determinants of health are the economic and environmental conditions under which people are born, live, work, and age that affect health. These structural factors underlie many of the long-standing inequities in cancer care and outcomes that vary by geography, socioeconomic status, and race and ethnicity in the United States. Housing insecurity, including lack of safe, affordable, and stable housing, is a key social determinant of health that can influence—and be influenced by—cancer care across the continuum, from prevention to screening, diagnosis, treatment, and survivorship. During 2021, the National Cancer Policy Forum of the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine sponsored a series of webinars addressing social determinants of health, including food, housing, and transportation insecurity, and their associations with cancer care and patient outcomes. This dissemination commentary summarizes the formal presentations and panel discussions from the webinar devoted to housing insecurity. It provides an overview of housing insecurity and health care across the cancer control continuum, describes health system interventions to minimize the impact of housing insecurity on patients with cancer, and identifies challenges and opportunities for addressing housing insecurity and improving health equity. Systematically identifying and addressing housing insecurity to ensure equitable access to cancer care and reduce health disparities will require ongoing investment at the practice, systems, and broader policy levels. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: We estimated trends in total and out-of-pocket (OOP) costs around the first year of diagnosis for privately insured nonelderly adult cancer patients.Methods: We constructed incident cohorts of breast, colorectal, lung, and prostate cancer patients diagnosed between 2009 and 2016 using claims data from the Health Care Cost Institute. We identified cancer-related surgery, intravenous (IV) systemic therapy, and radiation and calculated associated total and OOP costs (in 2020 US dollars). We assessed trends in health-care utilization and cost by cancer site with logistic regressions and generalized linear models, respectively.Results: The cohorts included 105 255 breast, 23 571 colorectal, 11 321 lung, and 59 197 prostate cancer patients. For patients diagnosed between 2009 and 2016, total mean costs per patient increased from $109 544 to $140 732 for breast (29%), $151 751 to $168 730 for lung (11%) or $53 300 to $55 497 for prostate (4%) cancer were statistically significant. Increase for colorectal cancer (1%, $136 652 to $137 663) was not statistically significant (P = .09). OOP costs increased to more than 15% for all cancers, including colorectal, to more than $6000 by 2016. Use of IV systemic therapy and radiation statistically significantly increased, except for lung cancer. Cancer surgeries statistically significantly increased for breast and colorectal cancer but decreased for prostate cancer (P < .001). Total costs increased statistically significantly for nearly all treatment modalities, except for IV systemic therapy in colorectal and radiation in prostate cancer.Conclusions: Rising costs of cancer treatments, compounded with greater cost sharing, increased OOP costs for privately insured, nonelderly cancer patients. Policy initiatives to mitigate financial hardship should consider cost containment as well as insurance reform. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A comprehensive examination of the incidence and mortality of subsequent primary cancers (SPCs) among adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer survivors in the United States is lacking.Methods: Cancer incidence and mortality among 170 404 cancer survivors of 5 or more years who were aged 15-39 years at first primary cancer diagnosis during 1975-2013 in 9 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries were compared with those in the general population using standardized incidence ratio (SIR), absolute excess incidence (AEI), standardized mortality ratio (SMR), and absolute excess mortality (AEM).Results: During a mean follow-up of 14.6 years, 13 420 SPC cases and 5008 SPC deaths occurred among survivors (excluding the same site as index cancer), corresponding to 25% higher incidence (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.23 to 1.27, AEI = 10.8 per 10 000) and 84% higher mortality (95% CI = 1.79 to 1.89, AEM = 9.2 per 10 000) than that in the general population. Overall, SPC risk was statistically significantly higher for 20 of 29 index cancers for incidence and 26 for mortality, with the highest SIR among female Hodgkin lymphoma survivors (SIR = 3.05, 95% CI = 2.88 to 3.24, AEI = 73.0 per 10 000) and the highest SMR among small intestine cancer survivors (SMR = 6.97, 95% CI = 4.80 to 9.79, AEM = 64.1 per 10 000). Type-specific SPC risks varied substantially by index cancers; however, SPCs of the female breast, lung, and colorectum combined constituted 36% of all SPC cases and 39% of all SPC deaths, with lung cancer alone representing 11% and 24% of all cases and deaths, respectively.Conclusion: AYA cancer survivors are almost twice as likely to die from a new primary cancer as the general population, highlighting the need for primary care clinicians to prioritize cancer prevention and targeted surveillance strategies in these individuals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Medicaid expansion under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) is associated with increased insurance coverage among patients with cancer. Whether these gains translate to improved survival is largely unknown. This study examines changes in 2-year survival among patients newly diagnosed with cancer following the ACA Medicaid expansion.Methods: Patients aged 18-62 years from 42 states' population-based cancer registries diagnosed pre (2010-2012) and post (2014-2016) ACA Medicaid expansion were followed through September 30, 2013, and December 31, 2017, respectively. Difference-in-differences (DD) analysis of 2-year overall survival was stratified by sex, race and ethnicity, census tract-level poverty, and rurality.Results: A total of 2 555 302 patients diagnosed with cancer were included from Medicaid expansion (n = 1 523 585) and nonexpansion (n = 1 031 717) states. The 2-year overall survival increased from 80.58% pre-ACA to 82.23% post-ACA in expansion states and from 78.71% to 80.04% in nonexpansion states, resulting in a net increase of 0.44 percentage points (ppt) (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.24ppt to 0.64ppt) in expansion states after adjusting for sociodemographic factors. By cancer site, the net increase was greater for colorectal cancer (DD = 0.90ppt, 95% CI = 0.19ppt to 1.60ppt), lung cancer (DD = 1.29ppt, 95% CI = 0.50ppt to 2.08ppt), non-Hodgkin lymphoma (DD = 1.07ppt, 95% CI = 0.14ppt to 1.99ppt), pancreatic cancer (DD = 1.80ppt, 95% CI = 0.40ppt to 3.21ppt), and liver cancer (DD = 2.57ppt, 95% CI = 1.00ppt to 4.15ppt). The improvement in 2-year overall survival was larger among non-Hispanic Black patients (DD = 0.72ppt, 95% CI = 0.12ppt to 1.31ppt) and patients residing in rural areas (DD = 1.48ppt, 95% CI= -0.26ppt to 3.23ppt), leading to narrowing survival disparities by race and rurality.Conclusions: Medicaid expansion was associated with greater increase in 2-year overall survival, and the increase was prominent among non-Hispanic Blacks and in rural areas, highlighting the role of Medicaid expansion in reducing health disparities. Future studies should monitor changes in longer-term health outcomes following the ACA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The purpose of this study was to conduct a longitudinal analysis of out-of-pocket expenditure (OOPE) trajectories for the assessment of cancer's lasting financial impact.Methods: We identified newly diagnosed cancer patients and constructed matched control group of noncancer participants from the 2002-2018 Health and Retirement Study. Outcomes included monthly OOPE for prescription drugs (RX-OOPE_MONTHLY) and OOPE for medical services other than drugs in the past 2 years (non-RX-OOPE_2YR), consumer debt, and new individual retirement account (IRA) withdrawals. Generalized linear models were used to compare OOPEs between cancer and matched control groups. Logistic regressions were used to compare household-level consumer debt or early IRA withdrawal. Subgroup analysis stratified patients by age, health status, and household income, with the low-income group stratified by Medicaid coverage. All statistical tests were 2-sided.Results: The study cohort included 2022 cancer patients and 10 110 participants in the matched noncancer control group. Mean non-RX-OOPE_2YR of cancer patients was similar to that of participants in the matched control group before diagnosis but statistically significantly higher at diagnosis ($1157, P < .001), 2 ($511, P < .001) years, 4 ($360, P = .006) years, and 6  ($430, P = .01) years after diagnosis. A similar pattern was observed in RX-OOPE_MONTHLY. A statistically significantly higher proportion of cancer patients incurred consumer debt at diagnosis (34.5% vs 29.9%; P < .001) and 2 years after (32.5% vs 28.2%; P = .002). There was no statistically significant difference in new IRA withdrawals. Patients experienced lasting financial consequences following cancer diagnosis that were most pronounced among patients aged 65 years and older, in good-to-excellent health at baseline, and with low income, but without Medicaid coverage.Conclusions: Policies to reduce costs and expand insurance coverage options while reducing cost-sharing are needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Cancer survivors frequently experience medical financial hardship in the United States. Little is known, however, about long-term health consequences. This study examines the associations of financial hardship and mortality in a large nationally representative sample of cancer survivors. Methods We identified cancer survivors aged 18-64 years (n = 14 917) and 65-79 years (n = 10 391) from the 1997-2014 National Health Interview Survey and its linked mortality files with vital status through December 31, 2015. Medical financial hardship was measured as problems affording care or delaying or forgoing any care because of cost in the past 12 months. Risk of mortality was estimated with separate weighted Cox proportional hazards models by age group with age as the timescale, controlling for the effects of sociodemographic characteristics. Health insurance coverage was added sequentially to multivariable models. Results Among cancer survivors aged 18-64 years and 65-79 years, 29.6% and 11.0%, respectively, reported financial hardship in the past 12 months. Survivors with hardship had higher adjusted mortality risk than their counterparts in both age groups: 18-64 years (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.17, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.04 to 1.30) and 65-79 years (HR = 1.14, 95% CI = 1.02 to 1.28). Further adjustment for health insurance reduced the magnitude of association of hardship and mortality among survivors aged 18-64 years (HR = 1.09, 95% CI = 0.97 to 1.24). Adjustment for supplemental Medicare coverage had little effect among survivors aged 65-79 years (HR = 1.15, 95% CI = 1.02 to 1.29). Conclusion Medical financial hardship was associated with mortality risk among cancer survivors in the United States. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This study aims to quantify the extent and diversity of the cancer care workforce, beyond medical oncologists, to inform future demand because the number of cancer survivors is expected to grow in the United States.Methods: Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare data were used to evaluate health-care use of cancer survivors diagnosed between 2000 and 2014, enrolled in fee-for-service Medicare Parts A and B, and 65 years or older in 2008-2015. We calculated percentage of cancer survivors who saw each clinician specialty and their average annual number of visits in each phase of care. We projected the national number of individuals receiving care and number of annual visits by clinician specialty and phase of care through 2040.Results: Cancer survivors had higher care use in the first year after diagnosis and last year of life phases. During the initial year after cancer diagnosis, most survivors were seen for cancer-related care by a medical oncologist (59.1%), primary care provider (55.9%), and/or other cancer-treating physicians (42.2%). The percentage of survivors with cancer-related visits to each specialty declined after the first year after diagnosis, plateauing after year 6-7. However, at 10 or more years after diagnosis, approximately 20% of cancer survivors had visits to medical oncologists and an average of 4 visits a year.Conclusions: Cancer survivors had higher care use in the first year after diagnosis and last year of life. High levels of care use across specialties in all phases of care have important implications for models of survivorship care coordination and workforce planning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite advances toward universal health insurance coverage for children, coverage gaps remain. Using a nationwide sample of pediatric and adolescent cancer patients from the National Cancer Database, we examined effects of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) implementation in 2014 with multinomial logistic regressions to evaluate insurance changes between 2010-2013 (pre-ACA) and 2014-2017 (post-ACA) in patients aged younger than 18 years (n = 63 377). All statistical tests were 2-sided. Following the ACA, the overall percentage of Medicaid and Children's Health Insurance Program–covered patients increased (from 35.1% to 36.9%; adjusted absolute percentage change [APC] = 2.01 percentage points [ppt], 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.31 to 2.71; P <.001), partly offset by declined percentage of privately insured (from 62.7% to 61.2%; adjusted APC = −1.67 ppt, 95% CI = −2.37 to −0.97; P <.001), leading to a reduction by 15% in uninsured status (from 2.2% to 1.9%; adjusted APC = −0.34 ppt, 95% CI = −0.56   to −0.12 ppt; P =.003). The largest declines in uninsured status were observed among Hispanic patients (by 23%; adjusted APC = −0.95 ppt, 95% CI = −1.67   to   −0.23 ppt; P =.009) and patients residing in low-income areas (by 35%; adjusted APC = −1.22 ppt, 95% CI = −2.22   to   −0.21 ppt; P =.02). We showed nationwide insurance gains among pediatric and adolescent cancer patients following ACA implementation, with greater gains in racial and ethnic minorities and those living in low-income areas. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Because the mental and physical health of caregivers can be interdependent with that of the patient, patients may experience worse health outcomes when a caregiver is distressed ([17]). The mean caregiver age was 53 years, and their patients were, on average, aged 63.8 years; both caregivers and patients were aged younger than 65 years, when they would become age eligible for Medicare benefits. Additional supports include integration of caregivers in treatment plans via a separate electronic health record to screen, document, and address caregiver physical and mental health needs. If only 63% of cancer survivors discuss their employment situation with the oncology care team ([26]), it is likely that even fewer caregivers discuss their employment situations with the oncology care team, leaving the caregiver and care team unaware of available supports. [Extracted from the article]

Cancer, and other underlying medical conditions including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, heart diseases, diabetes, chronic kidney disease, and obesity, are associated with increased risk of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) illness. We identified 6411 cancer survivors and 77 748 adults without a cancer history from the 2016-2018 National Health Interview Survey and examined the prevalence and sociodemographic factors associated with these conditions in the United States. Most survivors reported having 1 or more of the conditions (56.4%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 54.8% to 57.9%, vs 41.6%, 95% CI = 40.9% to 42.2%, in adults without a cancer history), and nearly one-quarter (22.9%, 95% CI = 21.6% to 24.3%) reported 2 or more, representing 8.7 million and 3.5 million cancer survivors, respectively. These conditions were more prevalent in survivors of kidney, liver, and uterine cancers as well as Black survivors and those with low socioeconomic status and public insurance. Findings highlight the need to protect survivors against COVID-19 transmission in health-care facilities and to prioritize cancer patients, survivors, caregivers, and their health-care providers in vaccine allocation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The American Cancer Society, National Cancer Institute, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and North American Association of Central Cancer Registries provide annual information about cancer occurrence and trends in the United States. Part 1 of this annual report focuses on national cancer statistics. This study is part 2, which quantifies patient economic burden associated with cancer care.Methods: We used complementary data sources, linked Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare, and the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey to develop comprehensive estimates of patient economic burden, including out-of-pocket and patient time costs, associated with cancer care. The 2000-2013 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare data were used to estimate net patient out-of-pocket costs among adults aged 65 years and older for the initial, continuing, and end-of-life phases of care for all cancer sites combined and separately for the 21 most common cancer sites. The 2008-2017 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey data were used to calculate out-of-pocket costs and time costs associated with cancer among adults aged 18-64 years and 65 years and older.Results: Across all cancer sites, annualized net out-of-pocket costs for medical services and prescriptions drugs covered through a pharmacy benefit among adults aged 65 years and older were highest in the initial ($2200 and $243, respectively) and end-of-life phases ($3823 and $448, respectively) and lowest in the continuing phase ($466 and $127, respectively), with substantial variation by cancer site. Out-of-pocket costs were generally higher for patients diagnosed with later-stage disease. Net annual time costs associated with cancer were $304.3 (95% confidence interval = $257.9 to $350.9) and $279.1 (95% confidence interval = $215.1 to $343.3) for adults aged 18-64 years and ≥65 years, respectively, with higher time costs among more recently diagnosed survivors. National patient economic burden, including out-of-pocket and time costs, associated with cancer care was projected to be $21.1 billion in 2019.Conclusions: This comprehensive study found that the patient economic burden associated with cancer care is substantial in the United States at the national and patient levels. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The American Cancer Society, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Cancer Institute, and North American Association of Central Cancer Registries collaborate to provide annual updates on cancer incidence and mortality and trends by cancer type, sex, age group, and racial/ethnic group in the United States. In this report, we also examine trends in stage-specific survival for melanoma of the skin (melanoma).Methods: Incidence data for all cancers from 2001 through 2017 and survival data for melanoma cases diagnosed during 2001-2014 and followed-up through 2016 were obtained from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention- and National Cancer Institute-funded population-based cancer registry programs compiled by the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries. Data on cancer deaths from 2001 to 2018 were obtained from the National Center for Health Statistics' National Vital Statistics System. Trends in age-standardized incidence and death rates and 2-year relative survival were estimated by joinpoint analysis, and trends in incidence and mortality were expressed as average annual percent change (AAPC) during the most recent 5 years (2013-2017 for incidence and 2014-2018 for mortality).Results: Overall cancer incidence rates (per 100 000 population) for all ages during 2013-2017 were 487.4 among males and 422.4 among females. During this period, incidence rates remained stable among males but slightly increased in females (AAPC = 0.2%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.1% to 0.2%). Overall cancer death rates (per 100 000 population) during 2014-2018 were 185.5 among males and 133.5 among females. During this period, overall death rates decreased in both males (AAPC = -2.2%, 95% CI = -2.5% to -1.9%) and females (AAPC = -1.7%, 95% CI = -2.1% to -1.4%); death rates decreased for 11 of the 19 most common cancers among males and for 14 of the 20 most common cancers among females, but increased for 5 cancers in each sex. During 2014-2018, the declines in death rates accelerated for lung cancer and melanoma, slowed down for colorectal and female breast cancers, and leveled off for prostate cancer. Among children younger than age 15 years and adolescents and young adults aged 15-39 years, cancer death rates continued to decrease in contrast to the increasing incidence rates. Two-year relative survival for distant-stage skin melanoma was stable for those diagnosed during 2001-2009 but increased by 3.1% (95% CI = 2.8% to 3.5%) per year for those diagnosed during 2009-2014, with comparable trends among males and females.Conclusions: Cancer death rates in the United States continue to decline overall and for many cancer types, with the decline accelerated for lung cancer and melanoma. For several other major cancers, however, death rates continue to increase or previous declines in rates have slowed or ceased. Moreover, overall incidence rates continue to increase among females, children, and adolescents and young adults. These findings inform efforts related to prevention, early detection, and treatment and for broad and equitable implementation of effective interventions, especially among under resourced populations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Young adults (YAs) experience higher uninsurance rates and more advanced stage at cancer diagnosis than older counterparts. We examined the association of the Affordable Care Act Medicaid expansion with insurance coverage and stage at diagnosis among YAs newly diagnosed with cancer.Methods: Using the National Cancer Database, we identified 309 413 YAs aged 18-39 years who received a first cancer diagnosis in 2011-2016. Outcomes included percentages of YAs without health insurance at diagnosis, with stage I (early-stage) diagnoses, and with stage IV (advanced-stage) diagnoses. We conducted difference-in-difference (DD) analyses to examine outcomes before and after states implemented Medicaid expansion compared with nonexpansion states. All statistical tests were 2-sided.Results: The percentage of uninsured YAs decreased more in expansion than nonexpansion states (adjusted DD = -1.0 percentage points [ppt], 95% confidence interval [CI] = -1.4 to -0.7 ppt, P < .001). The overall percentage of stage I diagnoses increased (adjusted DD = 1.4 ppt, 95% CI = 0.6 to 2.2 ppt, P < .001) in expansion compared with nonexpansion states, with greater improvement among YAs in rural areas (adjusted DD = 7.2 ppt, 95% CI = 0.2 to 14.3 ppt, P = .045) than metropolitan areas (adjusted DD = 1.3 ppt, 95% CI = 0.4 to 2.2 ppt, P = .004) and among non-Hispanic Black patients (adjusted DD = 2.2 ppt, 95% CI = -0.03 to 4.4 ppt, P = .05) than non-Hispanic White patients (adjusted DD = 1.4 ppt, 95% CI = 0.4 to 2.3 ppt, P = .008). Despite the non-statistically significant change in stage IV diagnoses overall, the percentage declined more (adjusted DD = -1.2 ppt, 95% CI = -2.2 to -0.2 ppt, P = .02) among melanoma patients in expansion relative to nonexpansion states.Conclusions: We provide the first evidence, to our knowledge, on the association of Medicaid expansion with shifts to early-stage cancer at diagnosis and a narrowing of rural-urban and Black-White disparities in YA cancer patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article is a response to a commentary on a study titled "Transportation barriers, emergency room use, and mortality risk among U.S. adults by cancer history." The study used data from the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) and found that transportation barriers were associated with emergency room use and mortality risk among adults with and without a history of cancer, with cancer survivors facing the highest risk. The authors agree with the suggestions made in the commentary regarding the importance of considering rural-urban classifications and walking and bicycling environments in future studies. They also acknowledge the relevance of telehealth in addressing transportation barriers, especially for rural populations. The authors express their commitment to incorporating these considerations into their future research to improve access to care for cancer patients and survivors. [Extracted from the article]

The suicide rate has steadily increased in the United States during the past 2 decades. Cancer patients have elevated suicide risk because of prevalent psychological distress, treatment side effects, and potentially uncontrolled pain. Efforts to promote psychosocial and palliative care may reduce this risk. Using the 1999-2018 Multiple Cause of Death database, we found a decreasing trend of cancer-related suicide during the past 2 decades with an average annual percentage change (AAPC) of age-adjusted suicide rates of -2.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] = -3.5% to -2.1%) in contrast to an increasing trend of overall suicide rate (AAPC = 1.7%, 95% CI = 1.5% to 1.8%). We also observed the largest declines in cancer-related suicide rates among high-risk populations including male, older age, and certain cancer types, suggesting an evolving role of psycho-oncology and palliative and hospice care during this period. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Cancer and its treatment can result in lifelong medical financial hardship, which we aimed to describe among adult survivors of adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancers in the United States.Methods: We identified adult (aged ≥18 years) survivors of AYA cancers (diagnosed ages 15-39 years) and adults without a cancer history from the 2010-2018 National Health Interview Surveys. Proportions of respondents reporting measures in different hardship domains (material [eg, problems paying bills], psychological [eg, distress], and behavioral [eg, forgoing care due to cost]) were compared between groups using multivariable logistic regression models and hardship intensity (cooccurrence of hardship domains) using ordinal logistic regression. Cost-related changes in prescription medication use were assessed separately.Results: A total of 2588 AYA cancer survivors (median = 31 [interquartile range = 26-35] years at diagnosis; 75.0% more than 6 years and 50.0% more than 16 years since diagnosis) and 256 964 adults without a cancer history were identified. Survivors were more likely to report at least 1 hardship measure in material (36.7% vs 27.7%, P < .001) and behavioral (28.4% vs 21.2%, P < .001) domains, hardship in all 3 domains (13.1% vs 8.7%, P < .001), and at least 1 cost-related prescription medication nonadherence (13.7% vs 10.3%, P = .001) behavior.Conclusions: Adult survivors of AYA cancers are more likely to experience medical financial hardship across multiple domains compared with adults without a cancer history. Health-care providers must recognize this inequity and its impact on survivors' health, and multifaceted interventions are necessary to address underlying causes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The national prevalence of employment changes after a cancer diagnosis has not been fully documented. Cancer survivors who worked for pay at or since diagnosis (n = 1490) were identified from the 2011, 2016, and 2017 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey and Experiences with Cancer supplement. Analyses characterized employment changes due to cancer and identified correlates of those employment changes. Employment changes were made by 41.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 38.0% to 44.6%) of cancer survivors, representing more than 3.5 million adults in the United States. Of these, 75.4% (95% CI = 71.3% to 79.2%) took extended paid time off and 46.1% (95% CI = 41.6% to 50.7%) made other changes, including switching to part-time or to a less demanding job. Cancer survivors who were younger, female, non-White, or multiple races and ethnicities, and younger than age 20 years since last cancer treatment were more likely to make employment changes. Findings highlight the need for patient-provider communication about the effects of cancer and its treatment on employment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic led to delayed medical care in the United States. We examined changes in patterns of cancer diagnosis and surgical treatment between January 1 and December 31 in 2020 and 2019 with real-time electronic pathology report data from population-based Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results cancer registries from Georgia and Louisiana. During 2020, there were 29 905 fewer pathology reports than in 2019, representing a 10.2% decline. Declines were observed in all age groups, including children and adolescents younger than 18 years. The nadir was early April 2020, with 42.8% fewer reports than in April 2019. Numbers of reports through December 2020 never consistently exceeded those in 2019 after first declines. Patterns were similar by age group and cancer site. Findings suggest substantial delays in diagnosis and treatment services for cancers during the pandemic. Ongoing evaluation can inform public health efforts to minimize any lasting adverse effects of the pandemic on cancer diagnosis, stage, treatment, and survival. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Development of personalized, stratified follow-up care pathways where care intensity and setting vary with needs could improve cancer survivor outcomes and efficiency of health-care delivery. Advancing such an approach in the United States requires identification and prioritization of the most pressing research and data needed to create and implement personalized care pathway models. Cancer survivorship research and care experts (n = 39) participated in an in-person workshop on this topic in 2018. Using a modified Delphi technique-a structured, validated system for identifying consensus-an expert panel identified critical research questions related to operationalizing personalized, stratified follow-up care pathways for individuals diagnosed with cancer. Consensus for the top priority research questions was achieved iteratively through 3 rounds: item generation, item consolidation, and selection of the final list of priority research questions. From the 28 research questions that were generated, 11 research priority questions were identified. The questions were categorized into 4 priority themes: determining outcome measures for new care pathways, developing and evaluating new care pathways, incentivizing new care pathway delivery, and providing technology and infrastructure to support self-management. Existing data sources to begin answering questions were also identified. Although existing data sources, including cancer registry, electronic medical record, and health insurance claims data, can be enhanced to begin addressing some questions, additional research resources are needed to address these priority questions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The effect of the Dependent Coverage Expansion (DCE) under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) on receipt of colorectal cancer treatment has yet to be determined. We identified newly diagnosed DCE-eligible (aged 19-25 years, n = 1924) and DCE-ineligible (aged 27-34 years, n = 8313) colorectal cancer patients from the National Cancer Database from 2007 to 2013. All statistical tests were two-sided. Post-ACA, there was a statistically significant increase in early-stage diagnosis among DCE-eligible (15 percentage point increase, confidence interval = 9.8, 20.2; P < .001), but not DCE-ineligible (P = .09), patients. DCE-eligible patients resected for IIB-IIIC colorectal cancer were more likely to receive timely adjuvant chemotherapy (hazard ratio = 1.34, 95% confidence interval = 1.05 to 1.71; 7.0 days' decrease in restricted mean time from surgery to chemotherapy, P = .01), with no differences in DCE-ineligible patients (hazard ratio = 1.10, 95% confidence interval = 0.98 to 1.24; 2.1 days' decrease, P = .41) post-ACA. Our findings highlight the role of the ACA in improving access to potentially lifesaving cancer care, including a shift to early-stage diagnosis and more timely receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Little is known about changes in socioeconomic disparities in noninsurance and care unaffordability among nonelderly cancer survivors following the Affordable Care Act (ACA).Methods: Cancer survivors aged 18-64 years nationwide were identified from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. Trend and difference-in-differences analyses were conducted to examine changes in percent uninsured and percent reporting care unaffordability pre-(2011 to 2013) and post-(2014 to 2017) ACA Medicaid expansion, by sociodemographic factors.Results: A total of 118 631 cancer survivors were identified from Medicaid expansion (n = 72 124) and nonexpansion (n = 46 507) states. Following the ACA, percent uninsured and percent reporting care unaffordability decreased nationwide. Medicaid expansion was associated with a 1.8 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.1 to 3.5) percentage points (ppt) net decrease in noninsurance and a 2.9 (95% CI = 0.7 to 5.1) ppt net decrease in care unaffordability. In stratified analyses by sociodemographic factors, substantial decreases were observed in female survivors, those with low or medium household incomes, the unemployed, and survivors with multiple comorbidities. However, we observed slightly increased percentages in reporting noninsurance (ppt = 1.7; 95% CI = -1.2 to 4.5) and care unaffordability (ppt = 3.1, 95% CI = -0.4 to 6.5) in nonexpansion states between 2016 and 2017, translating to 67 163 and 124 160 survivors, respectively.Conclusion: We observed reductions in disparities by sociodemographic factors in noninsurance and care unaffordability among nonelderly cancer survivors following the ACA, with largest decreases in women, those with low or medium income, multiple comorbid conditions, the unemployed, and those residing in Medicaid expansion states. However, the uptick of 82 750 uninsured survivors in 2017, mainly from nonexpansion states, is concerning. Ongoing monitoring of the effects of the ACA is warranted, especially in evaluating health outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Use of genomic testing is increasing in the United States. Testing can be expensive, and not all tests and related treatments are covered by health insurance. Little is known about how often oncologists discuss costs of testing and treatment or about the factors associated with those discussions.Methods: We identified 1220 oncologists who reported discussing genomic testing with their cancer patients from the 2017 National Survey of Precision Medicine in Cancer Treatment. Multivariable polytomous logistic regression analyses were used to assess associations between oncologist and practice characteristics and the frequency of cost discussions. All statistical tests were two-sided.Results: Among oncologists who discussed genomic testing with patients, 50.0% reported often discussing the likely costs of testing and related treatments, 26.3% reported sometimes discussing costs, and 23.7% reported never or rarely discussing costs. In adjusted analyses, oncologists with training in genomic testing or working in practices with electronic medical record alerts for genomic tests were more likely to have cost discussions sometimes (odds ratio [OR] = 2.09, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.19 to 3.69) or often (OR = 2.22, 95% CI = 1.30 to 3.79), respectively, compared to rarely or never. Other factors statistically significantly associated with more frequent cost discussions included treating solid tumors (rather than only hematological cancers), using next-generation sequencing gene panel tests, having higher patient volume, and working in practices with higher percentages of patients insured by Medicaid, or self-paid or uninsured.Conclusions: Interventions targeting modifiable oncologist and practice factors, such as training in genomic testing and use of electronic medical record alerts, may help improve cost discussions about genomic testing and related treatments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) reported substantial reduction in lung cancer mortality among high-risk individuals screened annually with low-dose helical computed tomography (LDCT). As a result, the US Preventive Services Task Force issued a B recommendation for annual LDCT in high-risk individuals, which requires private insurers to cover it without cost-sharing. The Medicare program also covers LDCT for high-risk beneficiaries without cost-sharing. However, the NLST findings may not be generalizable to the community setting because of differences in patients, providers, and practices participating in the NLST. Thus, examining uptake of LDCT screening in community practice is critical, as is evaluating the immediate and downstream outcomes of screening, including false-positive scans, follow-up examinations and adverse events, costs, stage of disease at diagnosis, and survival. This commentary presents an overview of the landscape of the data resources currently available to evaluate the uptake, outcomes, and costs of LDCT screening in the United States. We describe the strengths and limitations of existing data sources, including administrative databases, surveys, and registries. Thereafter, we provide recommendations for improving the data infrastructure pertaining to three overarching research areas: receipt of guideline-consistent screening and follow-up, weighing benefits and harms of screening, and costs of screening. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Little is known about the competing effects of increasing prescription drug costs and expansions in insurance coverage on prescription drug access and whether trends vary for adults with and without a cancer history. Using the 2010-2015 National Health Interview Survey, we examined trends in limited prescription drug access, operationalized as forgoing needed prescription drugs because of cost. The percentages of adults age 18 to 64 years with limited prescription drug access decreased over time: predicted margins from multivariable logistic regression models were 13.8% in 2010 vs 8.6% in 2015 for cancer survivors and 11.0% vs 6.8% for adults without a cancer history (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] for trend = 0.89, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.88 to 0.90). Access changed little for adults age 65 years and older. Among adults age 18 to 64 years, cancer survivors were more likely than those without a cancer history to report limited access to any prescription drug in all years (aOR from multivariable logistic regression model = 1.45, 95% CI = 1.31 to 1.61). However, trends did not differ by cancer history. Our findings suggest that expansions in health insurance coverage mitigated the effects of growing prescription drug costs to some extent for many individuals with and without a history of cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]