Search

Background: Previous studies of hospital-based patients with metastatic melanoma suggest sociodemographic factors, including insurance type, may be associated with the receipt of systemic treatments., Objectives: To examine whether insurance type is associated with the receipt of systemic treatment among patients with melanoma in a broad cohort of patients in North Carolina., Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study between 2011 and 2017 of patients with stages III-IV melanoma using data from the North Carolina Central Cancer Registry linked to Medicare, Medicaid, and private health insurance claims across the state. The primary outcome was the receipt of any systemic treatment, and the secondary outcome was the receipt of immunotherapy., Results: A total of 372 patients met the inclusion criteria. The average age was 68 years old (interquartile range: 56-76) and 61% were male. Within the cohort 48% had Medicare only, 29% had private insurance, 12% had both Medicare and Medicaid, and 11% had Medicaid only. A total of 186 (50%) patients received systemic treatment for melanoma, 125 (67%) of whom received immunotherapy. The use of systemic therapy, including immunotherapy, increased significantly over time. Having Medicaid-only insurance was independently associated with a 45% lower likelihood of receiving any systemic treatment [0.55 (95% CI: 0.35, 0.85)] and a 43% lower likelihood of receipt of immunotherapy [0.57 (95% CI: 0.34, 0.95)] compared with private insurance., Conclusions: Stage III-IV melanoma patients with Medicaid-only insurance were less likely to receive systemic therapy or immunotherapy than patients with private insurance or Medicare insurance. This finding raises concerns about insurance-based disparities in treatment access., Competing Interests: A.S.A. is supported by the Dermatology Foundation Public Health Career Development Award, by the National Institutes of Health under grant NIH UL1 TR002645, and by the American Cancer Society. The remaining authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Surgical excision is important for melanoma treatment. Delays in surgical excision after diagnosis of melanoma have been linked to decreased survival in hospital-based cohorts. This study was aimed at quantifying the association between the timeliness of surgical excision and overall survival in patients diagnosed with melanoma in hospital- and non-hospital-based settings, using a retrospective cohort study of patients with stage 0-III melanoma and using data linked between the North Carolina Central Cancer Registry to Medicare, Medicaid, and private health insurance plan claims across the state. We identified 6,496 patients diagnosed between 2004 and 2012 with follow-up through 2017. We categorized the time from diagnostic biopsy to surgical excision as < 6 weeks after diagnosis, 6 weeks to 90 days after diagnosis, and > 90 days after melanoma diagnosis. Multivariable Cox regression was used to estimate differences in survival probabilities. Five-year overall survival was lower for those with time to surgery over 90 days (78.6%) compared with those with less than 6 weeks (86%). This difference appeared greater for patients with Stage 1 melanoma. This study was retrospective, included one state, and could not assess melanoma specific mortality. Surgical timeliness may have an effect on overall survival in patients with melanoma. Timely surgery should be encouraged., (© 2020. Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

Importance: Timely receipt of treatment for cancer is an important aspect of health care quality. It is unknown how delays of surgery for melanoma vary by insurance type., Objective: To analyze factors associated with delays between diagnosis and surgery for melanoma in patients with Medicare, Medicaid, or private insurance., Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective cohort study of patients who received a diagnosis of melanoma between 2004 and 2011 in North Carolina using data from the North Carolina Cancer Registry linked to administrative claims from Medicare, Medicaid, and private insurance. Inclusion criteria were incident patients with a diagnosis of melanoma stage 0 to III and with continuous insurance enrollment from at least 1 month prior to the month of diagnosis to 12 months after diagnosis of melanoma., Main Outcomes and Measures: Surgical delay, defined as definitive surgical excision occurring more than 6 weeks after melanoma diagnosis. Generalized linear models with log link, Poisson distributions, and robust standard errors were used to estimate adjusted risk ratios (RRs) to model risk of delay in definitive surgery., Results: A total of 7629 patients were included (4210 [55%] female; mean [SD] age, 64 [15] years), 48% (n = 3631) Medicare, 48% (n = 3667) privately insured, and 4% (n = 331) Medicaid patients. Privately insured patients were least likely to experience a delay in definitive surgery, followed by Medicare and Medicaid patients (519 [14%], 609 [17%], and 79 [24%], respectively; P < .001). After demographic adjustment, the risk of surgical delay was significantly increased in patients with Medicaid compared with private insurance (RR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.09-1.70). Delays were more likely in nonwhite patients (RR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.02-1.87). Surgical delays were less likely if the physician performing the surgery (RR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.72-0.93) or the diagnosing clinician (RR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.71-0.93) was a dermatologist as compared with a nondermatologist., Conclusion and Relevance: Surgical treatment delays were common but were less prevalent in patients diagnosed or surgically treated by a dermatologist. Medicaid patients experienced the most surgical delays. A reduction in delays in melanoma surgery could be achieved through better access to specialty care and cross-disciplinary coordination.

Background Many women diagnosed with cancer as adolescents and young adults (AYAs, age 15-39 years) want biological children after cancer but lack information on the potential impact of their cancer history on future reproductive outcomes. We investigated the risk of adverse birth outcomes among AYA cancer survivors. Methods We identified insured women diagnosed with AYA breast cancer, thyroid cancer, gynecologic cancers, lymphoma, or melanoma from 2003 to 2016 in the state of North Carolina or the Kaiser Permanente health care systems in northern and southern California. Post-diagnosis births to cancer survivors were each matched with up to 5 births to women without cancer. Risk ratios for preterm birth (<37 completed weeks), very preterm birth (<34 completed weeks), low birth weight (<2500 g), and small for gestational age (SGA, <10th percentile of weight for gestational age) were estimated using modified Poisson regression. Results Analyses included 1648 births to 1268 AYA cancer survivors and 7879 births to 6066 women without cancer. Overall, risk of preterm birth, very preterm birth, low birth weight, and SGA did not significantly differ between births to women with and without cancer. However, births to women with gynecologic cancers had a significantly increased risk of low birth weight (risk ratio = 1.82; 95% confidence interval: 1.03 to 3.21) and suggested increased risk of preterm birth (risk ratio = 1.59; 95% confidence interval: 0.99 to 2.54). Chemotherapy exposure was not associated with increased risk of adverse birth outcomes. Conclusions Women with gynecologic cancers, but not other cancers, had an increased risk of adverse birth outcomes compared to women without cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Clinical trial enrollment is low among adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with cancer and may contribute to inferior survival gains in recent years in this population compared with other age groups. We investigated clinical trial participation among AYA women with cancer, and examined whether patients discussed clinical trial participation with their doctor and reasons for nonparticipation. Methods: Women with a diagnosis of breast cancer, thyroid cancer, melanoma, lymphoma, or gynecologic cancer at ages 15–39 years during 2004–2016 were identified from the North Carolina Central Cancer Registry and the Kaiser Permanente Southern California health system. During 2018–2019, a total of 1264 eligible women completed an online survey (response = 13%), which examined survivorship issues among AYAs. Results: Overall, 5% of participants reported that they had participated in a clinical trial. Most women reported that they had not discussed clinical trial participation with a medical provider (76%) and that they did not know whether a relevant trial was available for their cancer (73%). Among those who knew that a trial was available but did not participate, the most commonly reported reasons for nonparticipation included concerns about side effects of the treatment in the trial and concerns that the treatment had not been sufficiently tested. Conclusion: Only a small proportion of AYA women with cancer in our cohort reported discussing a clinical trial with a provider or knowing whether a relevant trial was available. Our findings point to opportunities to improve patient/provider communication to increase clinical trial enrollment among AYAs with cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]