Search

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.

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.

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.

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.

PURPOSE: We investigated the association of out-of-pocket (OOP) costs for tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) with overall survival (OS) in epidermal growth factor receptor ( EGFR)- and anaplastic lymphoma kinase ( ALK)-positive advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We secondarily investigated associations of TKI OOP costs with TKI adherence, duration of therapy (DOT), and TKI discontinuation. METHODS: We used the Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research registry-claims database to identify patients with stage IV EGFR- or ALK-positive NSCLC; ≥ 1 claims for EGFR or ALK TKIs; and ≥ 3-month survival from TKI initiation. We estimated the average monthly TKI OOP costs per patient up to 3 months from TKI initiation, categorizing patients into quartiles of TKI OOP costs (Q1 < Q2 < Q3 < Q4). We conducted landmark analysis at 3 months from TKI initiation to compare Q1-3 v Q4 TKI OOP costs with respect to OS, TKI DOT, TKI adherence, and TKI discontinuation. RESULTS: Seventy-eight and twenty-seven patients comprised the Q1-3 and Q4 groups, respectively. Median monthly TKI OOP costs were $1,431 (Q1-3) v $2,888 (Q4). Compared with Q1-3, Q4 patients had inferior OS (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.85; [95% CI, 1.11 to 3.10], similar TKI DOT (adjusted HR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.53 to 2.15), decreased TKI adherence (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.28; 95% CI, 0.10 to 0.76), and higher TKI discontinuation rate (adjusted OR, 8.75; 95% CI, 2.59 to 29.52). CONCLUSION: Among patients with advanced EGFR- and ALK-positive NSCLC, higher TKI OOP costs are associated with decreased TKI adherence, a higher likelihood of TKI discontinuation, and inferior survival.

PURPOSE: Aggressive care at the end of life (EOL) can lead to unnecessary suffering and health care costs for patients with cancer. Despite geographic proximity and cultural similarities, we hypothesize that EOL care is more intense in the United States multipayer system versus the Canadian single-payer system. We compared health care utilization at EOL among patients with cancer in Alberta, Canada, with those in Washington state in the United States. METHODS: Adult patients with American Joint Committee on Cancer stage II to IV solid tumors who died between 2014 and 2016 in Alberta and between 2015 and 2017 in Washington were identified from regional population-based cancer registries linked to treatment and hospitalization records (Alberta) and health claims from major regional insurance plans (Washington). The proportion of patients receiving chemotherapy and having multiple emergency department (ED) visits, or intensive care unit (ICU) admissions in the last 30, 60, and 90 days of life (DOL) in Alberta and Washington were determined and compared using two-sample z-test and multivariable logistic regression (α = .006 after Bonferroni correction). RESULTS: Of patients, 11,177 in Alberta and 12,807 in Washington were included. Patients were similar in age (median, 71 v 72 year), with more patients in Washington with no comorbidities. More patients in Washington were treated with chemotherapy (12.6% v 6.6%; adjusted OR [aOR], 2.74), had multiple ED visits (16.2% v 12.1%; aOR, 1.40), and ICU admissions (23.7% v 3.9%; aOR, 14.27) in the last 30 DOL. Utilization was also higher in Washington in the last 60 and 90 DOL and among those with stage IV disease and those age 65 years and older. CONCLUSION: Utilization of chemotherapy, ED visits, and ICU admissions near EOL was higher in Washington versus Alberta. Future studies to characterize drivers of aggressive EOL care may help improve cancer care for patients in the United States and Canada.

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.

e13640 Background: Evidence-based, national guidelines for the diagnosis of recurrent metastatic breast cancer (MBC) recommend confirmation of recurrence with biopsy and reassessment of biomarker status. Real world practice patterns may demonstrate disparities in adherence to guidelines with implications for patients and health systems. Methods: We utilized the Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research (HICOR) data repository that links Washington State cancer registry data to enrollment and claims from the major insurance payers in the state. We identified women > 18 years old diagnosed with recurrent MBC between 2008 and 2017 with evidence of enrollment in a commercial plan (Premera or Regence), Medicare, or Medicaid. Recurrence in Stage I-III patients was detected through identification of ICD 9/10 codes for metastatic disease or resumption of breast cancer systemic therapy (after minimum of 4 months from completion of early breast cancer therapy). Using claims, we identified receipt of and factors associated with biopsy, biomarker re-assessment, and treatment administered at recurrence. Results: We identified 715 patients with recurrent MBC (any ER or HER2 status) with median age of 62 (range 52-73). The majority of the cohort were Caucasian (89%) with the rest comprising of Asian, Black, American Indian, and Hispanic patients. Based on the Rural Urban Commuting Area (RUCA) classification, patients predominantly lived in metropolitan neighborhoods (97%). Approximately 13% of patients lived in areas of high deprivation (area of deprivation index, ADI, 8-10). Patients had either Commercial (53.1%), Medicaid (4.2%), Medicare (29.7%) or multiple (13.0%) insurance. Patients were primarily treated at high volume centers (70.9%), though 23% of patients were seen at low volume centers (2) were more likely to undergo biopsy confirmation (20.3% vs 13.0%, p = 0.02). Biopsy was more often performed in patients receiving care at a high-volume center compared to low-volume center (74.3% vs 18.6%, p = 0.03). First line treatment selection was directly associated with receipt of biopsy and biomarker testing. Hormone therapy only was more common in patients who did not undergo biopsy (62.3% vs 37.7%, p

We investigated the association of out-of-pocket (OOP) costs for tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) with overall survival (OS) in epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)- and anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We secondarily investigated associations of TKI OOP costs with TKI adherence, duration of therapy (DOT), and TKI discontinuation. METHODS: We used the Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research registry-claims database to identify patients with stage IV EGFR- or ALK-positive NSCLC; ≥ 1 claims for EGFR or ALK TKIs; and ≥ 3-month survival from TKI initiation. We estimated the average monthly TKI OOP costs per patient up to 3 months from TKI initiation, categorizing patients into quartiles of TKI OOP costs (Q1 < Q2 < Q3 < Q4). We conducted landmark analysis at 3 months from TKI initiation to compare Q1-3 v Q4 TKI OOP costs with respect to OS, TKI DOT, TKI adherence, and TKI discontinuation. RESULTS: Seventy-eight and twenty-seven patients comprised the Q1-3 and Q4 groups, respectively. Median monthly TKI OOP costs were $1,431 (Q1-3) v $2,888 (Q4). Compared with Q1-3, Q4 patients had inferior OS (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.85; [95% CI, 1.11 to 3.10], similar TKI DOT (adjusted HR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.53 to 2.15), decreased TKI adherence (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.28; 95% CI, 0.10 to 0.76), and higher TKI discontinuation rate (adjusted OR, 8.75; 95% CI, 2.59 to 29.52). CONCLUSION: Among patients with advanced EGFR- and ALK-positive NSCLC, higher TKI OOP costs are associated with decreased TKI adherence, a higher likelihood of TKI discontinuation, and inferior survival.

Background There is a need for automated approaches to incorporate information on cancer recurrence events into population-based cancer registries. Objective The aim of this study is to determine the accuracy of a novel data mining algorithm to extract information from linked registry and medical claims data on the occurrence and timing of second breast cancer events (SBCE). Methods We used supervised data from 3092 stage I and II breast cancer cases (with 394 recurrences), diagnosed between 1993 and 2006 inclusive, of patients at Kaiser Permanente Washington and cases in the Puget Sound Cancer Surveillance System. Our goal was to classify each month after primary treatment as pre- versus post-SBCE. The prediction feature set for a given month consisted of registry variables on disease and patient characteristics related to the primary breast cancer event, as well as features based on monthly counts of diagnosis and procedure codes for the current, prior, and future months. A month was classified as post-SBCE if the predicted probability exceeded a probability threshold (PT); the predicted time of the SBCE was taken to be the month of maximum increase in the predicted probability between adjacent months. Results The Kaplan-Meier net probability of SBCE was 0.25 at 14 years. The month-level receiver operating characteristic curve on test data (20% of the data set) had an area under the curve of 0.986. The person-level predictions (at a monthly PT of 0.5) had a sensitivity of 0.89, a specificity of 0.98, a positive predictive value of 0.85, and a negative predictive value of 0.98. The corresponding median difference between the observed and predicted months of recurrence was 0 and the mean difference was 0.04 months. Conclusions Data mining of medical claims holds promise for the streamlining of cancer registry operations to feasibly collect information about second breast cancer events.

Objectives Studies of local stage prostate cancer survivors suggest that treatments carry risk of persistent impotence, incontinence, and bowel dysfunction. To examine impacts of cancer type and side effects on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in long-term cancer survivorship, we evaluated 5-year follow-up of patients with prostate cancer and compared results with a matched group of male long-term survivors of other local-stage cancers. Materials and Methods We examined genitourinary, bowel and sexual symptoms, and general quality of life. Matched survivors of colorectal, lung, and bladder cancers were recruited via registries in 3 different regions in the United States. Patients were surveyed 3–5 years after diagnosis with the SF-12 and EPIC to evaluate general mental and physical health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and patient function and bother. Results We analyzed responses from long-term prostate (n = 77) and bladder, colorectal, and lung cancer (n = 124) patients. In multivariate analysis, long-term local stage prostate cancer survivors had significantly higher SF-12 physical component scores but did not differ from long-term survivors of other cancers in terms of their SF-12 mental summary scores. Prostate survivors had similar mental, urinary, bowel, and sexual HRQoL compared to long-term survivors of other local stage cancers. Conclusion Long-term general and prostate-specific HRQoL was similar between local stage prostate and bladder, colorectal, and lung patients with cancer. Future research focusing on factors other than initial treatment and the cancer type per se may provide more meaningful information regarding factors that predict disparities on HRQoL among longer-term survivors of early stage male cancers.

Regional public reporting of performance measures in oncology can facilitate local decision making across stakeholders, but small numbers of patients and clinics pose a challenge to creating statistically robust measures. In this article, we describe our development of the Community Cancer Care in Washington State: Quality and Cost Report, the first publicly available report showing clinic-level quality and cost measures at the regional level. We learned key lessons in how to adapt national performance reporting to our regional setting using a registry-linked multipayer claims database. In short, limited numbers of eligible patients for some nationally recognized metrics led us to group metrics and use a 3-year performance window. After completing clinic attribution and other requirements of metric construction, the final metrics included between 62.9% and 88.4% of the eligible patients. To link total costs to some quality measures, we had to define a treatment and surveillance episode of care. Risk adjustment was challenged by the ability to include a limited number of risk adjustors and their potential concentration in a few clinics. We used a different quality score than national performance reporting to account for variation in the range of risk-standardized rates. Current methodology does not permit us to determine whether clinically meaningful differences in quality or costs exist, which inhibits value comparisons. Stakeholder engagement was critical for providing methodologic feedback. In conclusion, we found that refining national metrics was necessary to facilitate public reporting in a regional setting. Further methodologic development can strengthen public reporting and future applications.

BACKGROUND The American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) issued a Choosing Wisely recommendation (CWr) against use of intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) as part of breast conservation therapy in 2013, noting that “its routine use has not been demonstrated to provide significant clinical advantage”. Also, as IMRT is more expensive vs conventional radiotherapy (cRT), use in this setting may represent wasteful spending. The aims of this study were to characterize: 1) IMRT use immediately preceding the ASTRO CWr, 2) the cost-consequences of IMRT vs. cRT in the year after breast cancer diagnosis, and 3) excess annual U.S. national expenditure on IMRT in this setting. METHODS Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) records for women age ≥66 years with a first primary diagnosis of Stage I/II breast cancer (2007-2012) were linked with Medicare claims (2007-2013). All cases had coverage for ≥12-months before/after diagnosis (or until death), and to be consistent with the CWr, had lumpectomy 1 month before to 6 months after diagnosis, and radiation therapy within 6 months of lumpectomy. We evaluated receipt of IMRT vs cRT within 1 year of diagnosis in 12 SEER registries. We also calculated mean direct medical expenditure in the year after diagnosis by summing all allowable charges from Medicare claims. Costs were inflated to 2017 USD. We evaluated differences in means by registry using ANOVA and compared mean costs for cases treated with IMRT vs cRT using t-test. We projected excess annual U.S. national expenditure on IMRT (vs. cRT) using the findings from aims 1 & 2 and assuming 209000 incident Stage I/II cases and that 55% receive lumpectomy. RESULTS Among 13037 women meeting all inclusion criteria, mean age was 74, 89.0% were white, and 19.8% received IMRT. Table 1 shows the proportions receiving IMRT by SEER registry and mean cost for cases treated with IMRT vs cRT. The proportion with IMRT varied significantly between registries (p Table 1: Results for Selected RegistriesRegistry% with IMRTMean Cost in Year After Dx ($) IMRTcRTpAll 12 Registries19.84314533501 DISCUSSION From 2007-2013, use of IMRT in Stage I/II breast cancer was substantial (19.8%) and varied significantly across SEER registries. Cases treated with IMRT incurred significantly higher cost ($9644) in the year following diagnosis vs. those treated with cRT. If patterns of care remain similar today, there is potentially as much as $219 million in annual U.S. national expenditure on low-value radiotherapy following lumpectomy. Our findings suggest an opportunity to improve quality in cancer care while reducing expenditure by curbing use of IMRT. Future studies should develop interventions to align practice with ASTRO CW recommendations and reduce variation in practice between regions. Citation Format: Roth JA, McDougall J, Halasz L, Fedorenko C, Sun Q, Patel S. IMRT use after lumpectomy in early-Stage breast cancer: Patterns of care and cost-consequences [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2017 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2017 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P2-11-14.

145 Background: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted medical care, including routine cancer screening for breast, colorectal, lung and cervical cancers. We aimed to investigate the impact of the pandemic on stage at diagnosis for cancer patients. Methods: Using data from the Washington State SEER records we compared AJCC stage for patients diagnosed with cancer in 2017-2019 to 2020 for two time periods, March to June (initial pandemic months) and July to December (later pandemic months). Patients were included if they were age 18+, diagnosed with a solid tumor, and not diagnosed at autopsy. Results: In the early phase of the pandemic, March – June 2020, there was a shift to cancers being diagnosed at a later stage compared to the same time period in 2017-2019 (Stage III: 13.5% to 14.9%, Stage IV: 16.2% to 19.7%). There was also a decrease in cancer diagnoses for cancers that are often detected through routine screening. As a percentage of all cancer diagnoses, both melanoma (13.2% to 9.8%) and colon cancer diagnoses (7.2% to. 6.7%) decreased during the early pandemic. In the later phase of the pandemic, July to December 2020, the stage at diagnosis showed an indication of returning to pre-pandemic levels with an increase in the proportion of early stage cancers (In situ: 16.6% to 19.3%, Stage I: 38.8% to 41.1%). Stage at diagnosis trends varied by tumor type. For colorectal cancer, the overall number of diagnoses decreased during the initial pandemic months. Stage I diagnoses decreased and Stage IV cancer diagnoses increased in both early and late stages of the pandemic. Conclusions: In Washington State, the COVID-19 pandemic had an impact on stage at diagnosis potentially caused by delays or interruptions in medical care. Additional studies are needed to understand how this shift in stage at diagnosis impacted treatment and outcomes for patients.

Purpose: Despite guidelines emphasizing symptom management over aggressive treatment, end-of-life care for persons with cancer in the United States is highly variable. In consultation with a regional collaboration of patients, providers, and payers, we investigated indicators of high-quality end-of-life care to describe patterns of care, identify areas for improvement, and inform future interventions to enhance end-of-life care for patients with cancer. Methods: We linked insurance claims to clinical information from the western Washington SEER database. We included persons ≥ 18 years of age who had been diagnosed with an invasive solid tumor between January 1, 2007, and December 31, 2015, and who had a recorded death date, were enrolled in a commercial plan for the last month of life, and made at least one insurance claim in the last 90 days of life. Results: In the last month of life, among 6,568 commercially insured patients, 56.3% were hospitalized and 48.6% underwent at least one imaging scan. Among patients younger than 65 years of age, 31.4% were enrolled in hospice; of those younger than 65 years of age who were not enrolled in hospice, 40.5% had received an opioid prescription. Over time, opioid use in the last 30 days of life among young adults not enrolled in hospice dropped from 44.7% in the period 2007 to 2009 to 42.5% in the period 2010 to 2012 and to 36.7% in the period 2013 to 2015. Conclusion: Hospitalization and high-cost imaging scans are burdensome to patients and caregivers at the end of life. Our findings suggest that policies that facilitate appropriate imaging, opioid, and hospice use and that encourage supportive care may improve end-of-life care and quality of life.

Information sources about prostate cancer treatment and outcomes are typically designed for patients. Little is known about the availability and utility of information for partners. The objectives of our study were to evaluate information sources used by partners to understand prostate cancer management options, their perceived usefulness, and the relationship between sources used and satisfaction with treatment experience. A longitudinal survey of female partners of men newly diagnosed with local-stage prostate cancer was conducted in three different geographic regions. Partners and associated patients were surveyed at baseline (after patient diagnosis but prior to receiving therapy) and at 12 months following diagnosis. Information sources included provider, literature, friends or family members, Internet websites, books, traditional media, and support groups. Utility of an information source was defined as whether the partner would recommend it to caregivers of other patients with local-stage prostate cancer. Our study cohort included 179 partner-patient pairs. At diagnosis, partners consulted an average of 4.6 information sources. Non-Hispanic white partners were more likely than others to use friends and family as an information source (OR = 2.44, 95% CI (1.04, 5.56)). More educated partners were less likely to use support groups (OR = 0.31, 95% CI (0.14, 0.71)). At 12-month follow-up, partners were less likely to recommend books (OR = 0.23, 95% CI (0.11, 0.49)) compared to baseline. Partners consulted a large number of information sources in researching treatment options for local-stage prostate cancer and the types of sources accessed varied by race/ethnicity and educational attainment. Additional resources to promote selection of high-quality non-provider information sources are warranted to enable partners to better aid patients in their treatment decision-making process.

Background: Multiple myeloma (MM) is a common global hematologic malignancy, contributing to substantial morbidity and mortality amongst diagnosed patients. Novel agents - bortezomib (Btz) and lenalidomide (Len) have changed dramatically over the past 20 years and have contributed to improvements in survival and long term outcomes for MM patients. Research has shown that there are differences in how MM is treated globally. We sought to evaluate the differences in outcomes and therapies received amongst patients treated in Alberta (AB), Canada, and in the United States (USA). Methods: Adult patients with multiple myeloma over the age of 65, diagnosed between 2007 and 2013, were identified. Data sources used for AB was the CA National Ambulatory Care Reporting System (NACRS), Discharge Abstracts Database (DAD), and CT records from AB Health Services. For the USA we used the SEER-Medicare database; MM diagnosis was extracted using a previously published algorithm. We extracted demographic data, novel agent utilization in the first year, comorbidities, and survival. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to determine survival. Results: Patients meeting study criteria included 4,330 MM patients in the USA and 793 patients with MM in AB. The median age at diagnosis in the USA and AB was 76.6 and 75 years, respectively. Median Charlson Comorbidity index in the USA and AB was 1, and 0, respectively. With respect to frontline therapies, both AB and USA had increasing utilization of Btz and Len from 2007-2013 (Figure), with Btz use more common in AB, while Len use was more common in the US. The proportion of all patients who did not receive any therapy in the first year of diagnosis fell dramatically from 2007 to 2013 in both AB (from 86% to 25%) and the USA (from 56% to 40%). Receipt of autologous stem cell transplant was uncommon in this older cohort, in only 3.2% of MM patients in AB and 4% of patients in the US. Similar proportions of patients in the USA and AB received radiotherapy in the first year (19% US, 25% AB). Median overall survival was improved in AB at 2.8 years, (95% CI 2.6-3.2 yrs), compared with the USA, 2.2 yrs (95% CI 2.1 - 2.30, as was 5 year survival - 30% in the USA, compared with 34% in AB. Conclusions: In this cross-country comparison of MM patients in the USA and AB both treated in a single-payer health care system - AB Health Services and Medicare - novel agents are a common treatment in the first year of diagnosis. We demonstrate similar uptake of novel agents Btz and Len over 2007-2013, however, Btz utilization was higher in AB from 2011-2013, while Len was more often used in the USA from 2011-2013. Median overall survival was better in AB (2.8 years) compared with USA (2.3 years), as was long term survival at 5 years. The differences in utilization of therapy and survival are possibly related to variability in healthcare delivery systems, burden of comorbidities in these populations, and approval of anti-MM therapy over time, and require further study to better understand reasons for differential outcomes. Figure Disclosures Cowan: Sanofi: Consultancy; Cellectar: Consultancy; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding. Ramsey:AstraZeneca: Other: Personal Fees.

INTRODUCTION: In Western Washington (WA), colorectal cancer (CRC) mortality between 2012–2016, was highest in American Indian/Alaska Natives (AI/AN) and African-Americans (AA) at 20.7 and 18.7 respectively compared to non-Hispanic Whites at 14.1/100,000 people. We hypothesized that time from billed encounters for CRC-associated symptoms to endoscopy completion or CRC stage at diagnosis contributed to observed differences. METHODS: Using administrative insurance claims linked to WA cancer registry data, we performed a retrospective cohort study of patients diagnosed with CRC between 2011–2017, with continuous insurance for 15-months prior to diagnosis and a billed encounter for CRC-associated symptoms. We determined the wait-time (days) and stage at diagnosis and conducted logistic regression analysis to identify the factors associated with endoscopy completion. RESULTS: Of the 3,461 CRC patients identified, 57% had stage 2 or 3 disease with no differences in stage by race and 84% completed an endoscopy after a billed encounter for CRC-associated symptoms. The median wait-time to endoscopy was 52 days (IQR 14–218) without differences by race. Compared to patients diagnosed with stage 1 CRC, patients with stage 4 CRC were more likely to complete an endoscopy within the first quartile of time (22.2% vs. 17.4%, p

Purpose In 2013, the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) issued a Choosing Wisely recommendation against the routine use of intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for whole breast irradiation. We evaluated IMRT use and subsequent impact on Medicare expenditure in the period immediately preceding this recommendation to provide a baseline measure of IMRT use and associated cost consequences. Methods and materials SEER records for women ≥66 years with first primary diagnosis of Stage I/II breast cancer (2008–2011) were linked with Medicare claims (2007–2012). Eligibility criteria included lumpectomy within 6 months of diagnosis and radiotherapy within 6 months of lumpectomy. We evaluated IMRT versus conventional radiotherapy (cRT) use overall and by SEER registry (12 sites). We used generalized estimating equations logit models to explore adjusted odds ratios (OR) for associations between clinical, sociodemographic, and health services characteristics and IMRT use. Mean costs were calculated from Medicare allowable costs in the year after diagnosis. Results Among 13,037 women, mean age was 74.4, 50.5% had left-sided breast cancer, and 19.8% received IMRT. IMRT use varied from 0% to 52% across SEER registries. In multivariable analysis, left-sided breast cancer (OR 1.75), living in a big metropolitan area (OR 2.39), living in a census tract with ≤$90,000 median income (OR 1.75), neutral or favorable local coverage determination (OR 3.86, 1.72, respectively), and free-standing treatment facility (OR 3.49) were associated with receipt of IMRT (p

Background: The purpose of this study was to assess advanced imaging (bone scan, CT, or PET/CT) and serum tumor biomarker use in asymptomatic breast cancer survivors during the surveillance period. Patients and Methods: Cancer registry records for 2,923 women diagnosed with primary breast cancer in Washington State between January 1, 2007, and December 31, 2014, were linked with claims data from 2 regional commercial insurance plans. Clinical data including demographic and tumor characteristics were collected. Evaluation and management codes from claims data were used to determine advanced imaging and serum tumor biomarker testing during the peridiagnostic and surveillance phases of care. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to identify clinical factors and patterns of peridiagnostic imaging and biomarker testing associated with surveillance advanced imaging. Results: Of 2,923 eligible women, 16.5% (n=480) underwent surveillance advanced imaging and 31.8% (n=930) received surveillance serum tumor biomarker testing. Compared with women diagnosed before the launch of the Choosing Wisely campaign in 2012, later diagnosis was associated with lower use of surveillance advanced imaging (odds ratio [OR], 0.68; 95% CI, 0.52–0.89). Factors significantly associated with use of surveillance advanced imaging included increasing disease stage (stage III: OR, 3.65; 95% CI, 2.48–5.38), peridiagnostic advanced imaging use (OR, 1.76; 95% CI, 1.33–2.31), and peridiagnostic serum tumor biomarker testing (OR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.01–1.80). Conclusions: Although use of surveillance advanced imaging in asymptomatic breast cancer survivors has declined since the launch of the Choosing Wisely campaign, frequent use of surveillance serum tumor biomarker testing remains prevalent, representing a potential target for further efforts to reduce low-value practices.

Working groups have called for linkages of existing and diverse databases to improve quality measurement in palliative and end-of-life (EOL) care, but limited data are available on the challenges of using different data sources to measure such care.To assess concordance of data obtained from different sources in a novel linkage of death certificates, electronic health records (EHRs), cancer registry data, and insurance claims for patients who died with cancer.We joined a database of Washington State death certificates and EHR to a data repository of commercial health plan enrollment and claims files linked to registry records from Puget Sound Cancer Surveillance System. We assessed care in the last month including hospitalizations, intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, emergency department visits, imaging scans, radiation, and hospice, plus chemotherapy in the last 14 days. We used a Chi-squared test to compare differences between health care in EHR and claims.Records of hospitalization, ICU use, and emergency department use were 33%, 15%, and 33% lower in EHR versus claims, respectively. Radiation, hospice, and imaging were 6%, 14%, and 28% lower, respectively, in EHR, but chemotherapy was 4% higher than that in claims. These differences were statistically different for hospice (P 0.02), hospitalization, ICU, ER, and imaging (all P 0.01) but not radiation (P = 0.12) or chemotherapy (P = 0.29).We found substantial variation between EHR and claims for EOL health-care use. Reliance on EHR will miss some health-care use, while claims will not capture the complex clinical details in EHR that can help define the quality of palliative care and EOL health-care utilization.

e13038 Background: Evidence-based, national guidelines for the management of metastatic breast cancer (MBC) recommend numerous treatment options that do not capture the nuances of real-world practice. Disparities may exist across Washington State with financial implications for patients and health systems. The objective of this study was to assess practice patterns around treatment of ER+/HER2- MBC in actual clinical practice. Methods: We collaborated with Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research (HICOR) to link enrollment and insurance claims records with Washington State cancer registries from 2008-2017. Our cohort comprised of women >18 years old with de novo ER+/HER2- MBC who met enrollment criteria in one of four payors (Premera, Regence, Medicare, or Medicaid). We identified receipt of first line treatment, categorized as CDK4/6 inhibitors plus endocrine therapy (CDKi+ET), chemotherapy (CT), or endocrine therapy alone (ET). We examined factors influencing treatment selection using Fisher's and Kruskal-Wallis tests. Total costs (defined as costs from inpatient and outpatient claims one year after diagnosis) was estimated for patients and payors. Results: We identified 140 patients with de novo ER+/HER2- MBC with median age of 64 (range 28-95). The majority of the cohort were Caucasian (90%) with the rest comprising of Asian, Black, American Indian, and Hispanic patients. Based on the Rural Urban Commuting Area (RUCA) classification, patients predominantly lived in metropolitan neighborhoods (96%). Over 20% of patients lived in areas of high deprivation (area of deprivation index, ADI, 8-10). Patients had either Commercial (40.7%), Medicaid/Medicare (43.6%) or multiple (15.7%) insurance. Our data show that 17 patients (12%) received first line therapy with CDKi + ET, 64 patients (46%) with CT, and 59 patients (42%) with ET alone. Factors influencing treatment selection include age, co-morbidity score, and payor type. Older patients (>65 years old) were more likely to receive ET alone compared to younger patients (56% vs 44%, p value

e18590 Background: The use of platinum agents (PT) in neoadjuvant chemotherapy (CTX) for triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) has been debated in research and practice guidelines. In high risk patients, the addition of PT to standard anthracycline and taxane regimens improves pathological complete response without definitive evidence of survival benefit (Korde JCO 2021). Due to PT’s toxicities and unclear benefit in early stage breast cancer, this study aimed to elucidate the real world practice patterns of PT use and overuse in breast cancer patients. Methods: The cohort was defined as women with stage I-III TNBC (ER, PR, and Her2 negative) who received curative intent surgery between 2011-2018. We utilized the Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research (HICOR) database, which links enrollment and claims records from commercial and public health insurance plans with clinical information from Washington state cancer registries (Manohar JACR 2020). We hypothesized there was overuse of PT CTX in this cohort. Overuse was defined as PT use in stage I, in the adjuvant period (NCCN 2020), and in nonstandard CTX regimens (PT use without taxane and anthracycline (NCCN 2020)). Results: Of the 910 women in the cohort, average age was 63, 90% were white, 682 (75%) received CTX, and 36% had commercial insurance, versus 53% with public insurance (Medicare 45%, Medicaid 8%). Of those receiving CTX, 39% received neoadjuvant and 67% adjuvant. Of those receiving CTX, 85 (13%) received PT, and 28 (4%) received PT without anthracycline. Of those receiving PT, 20% had stage I disease, and of those receiving adjuvant CTX, 43 (9%) received PT in the adjuvant period. Conclusions: We found there was overuse and nonstandard use of PT in this real world data. This overuse was demonstrated by the fact that 20% of women receiving PT had low risk stage I disease, and 9% of women receiving adjuvant CTX received PT in the adjuvant period. Additionally, there was nonstandard use, with 4% of women getting CTX receiving PT without anthracycline. Next steps in this research are to evaluate factors influencing overuse and nonstandard use, as well as complication rates with PT use and overuse.[Table: see text]

6546 Background: Washington was the first US state to experience the COVID-19 pandemic. Transmission risks and patient fears of visiting oncology practices during its onset resulted in rapid adoption of telehealth services. We hypothesized that the pandemic would widen disparities in oncology practice visits between Medicaid and commercially insured patients, resulting higher rates of emergency department (ED) visits during initial treatment. Methods: Linking Washington State SEER records with Medicaid and commercial insurance enrollment and claims records, we compared adults age

6504 Background: Increasing evidence shows that cancer patients (pts) experience financial hardships after diagnosis. Few studies, however, have used objective financial data to estimate the relative risk of adverse financial events (AFEs) in cancer pts versus individuals without cancer. Using a retrospective case-control design, we investigated whether cancer pts are at increased risk of new AFEs, as measured by their credit reports. Methods: Western Washington Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) cancer registry (cases) and voter registry (controls) records from 2013 to 2018 were linked to quarterly credit records from TransUnion (2012-2020), one of the 3 largest national credit agencies. Controls were age and sex matched to cases and assigned an index date corresponding to the diagnosis (dx) date of the matched case. Individuals with evidence of any AFE in the credit report closest to index/dx date or did not survive to 24 months were excluded. Cases and controls experiencing any of the following AFEs within 24 months were compared, using two-sample z tests: severe (3rd party collections, charge-offs), more severe (tax liens, delinquent mortgage payments), and most severe (foreclosures, repossessions). Multivariate logistic regression models were used to evaluate the association between cancer dx and AFE, adjusting for age, sex, dx year, and available credit 6 months before the index/dx date. Results: A total of 332,825 individuals (84,185 cases and 248,640 controls, mean age 66 (SD 13), 52.7% female) were included. The mean available line of credit in the year before index/dx date was $12,303. AFEs were more common in cases versus controls (Table). After adjusting for age, sex, available credit above or below $12,303, and dx year, cancer dx was significantly associated with any AFE (OR 1.77, 95% CI 1.7-1.85, p65 and higher available baseline credit were associated with decreased risk of any and each category of AFE. Conclusions: Within 24 months from dx, significantly higher proportions of cancer pts experienced AFEs relative to controls. Such events on credit reports have serious and long-lasting consequences on financial status. Studies that link clinical and financial data to investigate the impacts of these events on treatment decisions, quality of life, and clinical outcomes are needed.[Table: see text]

6502 Background: The COVID-19 pandemic dramatically reduced family access to hospitals and created new barriers to home hospice care, raising concerns about how the pandemic has impacted cancer patients’ place of death and end of life home hospice support. Hypothesizing that Medicaid-enrolled cancer patients may be at greater risk of disruptions in end-of-life care compared to commercially insured patients, we examined changes in place of death and home hospice support for Medicaid and Commercial enrollees following the pandemic. Methods: We linked WA State cancer registry records with claims from Medicaid and approximately 75% of commercially insured cancer patients in the state. Patients ages 18-64 with solid-tumor malignancies who died March-June 2020 (COVID) were compared to those who died March-June 2017-2019 (Pre-COVID). Place of death was categorized as hospital, home with hospice, and home without hospice; nursing home deaths were excluded. Given our sample size, we examined differences in the likelihood of place of death with Fisher’s exact tests and multinomial logistic regressions stratified by payer and by COVID period, controlling for age, gender, race, stage, cancer type, and census tract-level neighborhood deprivation. We report marginal effects. Results: In Fisher’s exact analyses, Medicaid but not commercial patients were significantly less like to die in hospital and more likely to die at home without hospice during COVID (Table). In pre-post adjusted analysis of Medicaid patients, the probability of dying in the hospital was 12.3% (p=0.03) percentage points lower during the pandemic versus before, while the probability of dying at home without hospice was 11.1% (p=0.04) greater. Place of death did not change significantly pre-post for commercial patients. In addition, Pre-COVID, the probability of dying in the hospital was 10.7% (p=0.03) greater for Medicaid than commercial patients. During COVID, the probability of dying at home without hospice was 15.8% (p=0.04) greater for Medicaid versus commercial patients but lower for women (ME=20.2%; p=0.01) and colorectal versus breast cancer patients (ME=39.2%; p=0.01). Conclusions: Following COVID, Medicaid patients place of death shifted from hospital to homes, but without an increase in the use of home hospice services. In contrast, place of death and hospice use among commercial patients did not significantly change. This widening disparity in home deaths without hospice services raises concerns that the pandemic disproportionately worsened end of life experience for low income patients with cancer.[Table: see text]

Background: Aggressive care at the end of life (EOL) leads to unnecessary suffering and healthcare costs for patients with cancer. We have previously shown that among patients with solid tumor malignancies, EOL utilization of chemotherapy, intensive care unit (ICU) admissions and >1 emergency department (ED) visits are higher in Washington State vs Alberta (AB). In this study, we use cancer registry and claims data to compare EOL care among patients with hematological malignancies between western Washington (WW) and AB. Methods: Adult patients with hematological malignancies diagnosed between 2007 and 2017 who died before December 31, 2018 were identified from regional population-based cancer registries in WW and AB. Data sources were 1) WW Cancer Surveillance System (a regional SEER registry) with data from 13 counties linked to enrollment files and claims from four regional insurers and 2) Canada National Ambulatory Care Reporting System, Discharge Abstracts Database, and chemotherapy records from AB Health Services. Proportions of patients receiving chemotherapy, ICU admission, or >1 ED visit in the last 30 days of life (DOL) in WW and AB were determined among all patients and those ≥65 years and compared using two sample z-test with two-tailed hypothesis (α=0.006 after Bonferroni correction). Results: 7859 AB and 3767 WW patients met study inclusion criteria. Median age was 76 (IQR 66-83) and 79 (IQR 71-86) for AB and WW, respectively; 78% and 85% were over age 65, 33% and 59% with ≥2 Charlson Comorbidity Score. Cancer distribution was 33% (AB) and 54% (WW) non-Hodgkin lymphoma, 14% (AB) and 20% (WW) myeloma and 27% (AB) and 19% (AB) leukemia. Table 1 shows utilization of chemotherapy, >1 ED visits and ICU admissions in AB and WW for all patients and Table 2 in those ≥65 years. More patients in WW vs AB were treated with chemotherapy (21% WW vs 7% AB) and admitted to ICU (34% WW vs 9% AB) in the last 30 DOL, whereas multiple ED visits were more similar between WW and AB (17% vs 19%, respectively). Similarly, among patients ≥65 years, chemotherapy use and ICU admissions were higher in WW. The same was true for patients in the last 60 and 90 DOL. Conclusions: Similar to what was noted in solid tumor patients, intensity of healthcare use at EOL is greater in WW vs AB for patients with hematological malignancies. However, ≥1 ED visits were similar between populations. Further work is needed to understand drivers of high intensity healthcare use and identify interventions to minimize low value care at EOL. Disclosures Khaki: Merck: Other: share/stockholder; Pfizer: Other: share/stockholder. Ramsey:AstraZeneca: Other: Personal Fees. Cowan:Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Cellectar: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding.

There is a need for automated approaches to incorporate information on cancer recurrence events into population-based cancer registries.The aim of this study is to determine the accuracy of a novel data mining algorithm to extract information from linked registry and medical claims data on the occurrence and timing of second breast cancer events (SBCE).We used supervised data from 3092 stage I and II breast cancer cases (with 394 recurrences), diagnosed between 1993 and 2006 inclusive, of patients at Kaiser Permanente Washington and cases in the Puget Sound Cancer Surveillance System. Our goal was to classify each month after primary treatment as pre- versus post-SBCE. The prediction feature set for a given month consisted of registry variables on disease and patient characteristics related to the primary breast cancer event, as well as features based on monthly counts of diagnosis and procedure codes for the current, prior, and future months. A month was classified as post-SBCE if the predicted probability exceeded a probability threshold (PT); the predicted time of the SBCE was taken to be the month of maximum increase in the predicted probability between adjacent months.The Kaplan-Meier net probability of SBCE was 0.25 at 14 years. The month-level receiver operating characteristic curve on test data (20% of the data set) had an area under the curve of 0.986. The person-level predictions (at a monthly PT of 0.5) had a sensitivity of 0.89, a specificity of 0.98, a positive predictive value of 0.85, and a negative predictive value of 0.98. The corresponding median difference between the observed and predicted months of recurrence was 0 and the mean difference was 0.04 months.Data mining of medical claims holds promise for the streamlining of cancer registry operations to feasibly collect information about second breast cancer events.

Purpose: As new quality metrics and interventions for potentially preventable emergency department (ED) visits are implemented, we sought to compare methods for evaluating the prevalence and costs of potentially preventable ED visits that were related to cancer and chronic disease among a commercially insured oncology population in the year after treatment initiation. Methods: We linked SEER records in western Washington from 2011 to 2016 with claims from two commercial insurers. The study included patients who were diagnosed with a solid tumor and tracked ED utilization for 1 year after the start of chemotherapy or radiation. Cancer symptoms from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services metric and a patient-reported outcome intervention were labeled potentially preventable (PpCancer). Prevention Quality Indicators of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality were labeled potentially preventable–chronic disease (PpChronic). We reported the primary diagnosis, all diagnosis field coding (1 to 10), and 2016 adjusted reimbursements. Results: Of 5,853 eligible patients, 27% had at least one ED visit, which yielded 2,400 total visits. Using primary diagnosis coding, 49.8% of ED visits had a PpCancer diagnosis, whereas 3.2% had a PpChronic diagnosis. Considering all diagnosis fields, 45.0%, 9.4%, and 18.5% included a PpCancer only, a PpChronic only, and both a PpCancer and a PpChronic diagnosis, respectively. The median reimbursement per visit was $735 (interquartile ratio, $194 to $1,549). Conclusion: The prevalence of potentially preventable ED visits was generally high, but varied depending on the diagnosis code fields and the group of codes considered. Future research is needed to understand the complex landscape of potentially preventable ED visits and measures to improve value in cancer care delivery.

The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)/American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM) Choosing Wisely (CW) measures aim to reduce the use of interventions that lack evidence of benefit in cancer care. The study presented here characterized adherence to the 2012 ASCO/ABIM CW recommendations by linking health plan claims data with a regional cancer registry and sought to identify areas for research interventions to improve adherence.SEER records for patients diagnosed with cancer in Western Washington State between 2007 and 2014 were linked with enrollment and claims from a large regional commercial insurance plan. Using claims and SEER records, algorithms were developed to characterize adherence to each CW measure. In addition, we calculated differences in total reimbursements and procedure-specific reimbursements for patients receiving adherent and nonadherent care.A total of 22,359 unique individuals with cancer were linked with insurance enrollment records and met basic eligibility criteria. Overall adherence varied from 53% (breast surveillance) to 78% (breast staging). Within each measure, adherence varied substantially by stage at diagnosis and by cancer site in situations in which the CW measure affected multiple types of cancer. The difference in reimbursements between adherent and nonadherent populations across all five measures was approximately $29 million.Adherence to the ASCO/ABIM CW measures varies widely, as does the cost implication of nonadherence. A structured approach to evaluating adherence and cost impact is needed before developing programs aimed at improving adherence to the ASCO/ABIM CW measures.

3 Background: Patients with EGFR+ or ALK+ NSCLC benefit from oral TKIs, but high patient OOP TKI costs could negatively impact survival by reducing likelihood of continuing TKI therapy. We assessed the association of high OOP TKI costs with overall survival (OS), medication possession ratio (MPR) and duration of TKI therapy (DOT) in patients with metastatic EGFR+ and ALK+ NSCLC. Methods: We identified patients with EGFR+ and ALK+ NSCLC diagnosed between 01/01/2010 and 12/31/2016 in the Washington State SEER registry using natural language processing, followed by manual confirmation of molecular tests. We linked registry records to commercial and Medicare (including part D) claims. Eligible patients had stage IV NSCLC, sensitizing EGFR mutations or ALK+ by FISH, ≥1 pharmacy claims for EGFR or ALK TKIs, ≥3 months survival from TKI start, and ≥12 months of insurance enrollment post diagnosis. We estimated OOP TKI costs by subtracting the amount paid from the amount allowed in pharmacy claims. We categorized patients by quartiles of monthly OOP costs calculated for the first 3 months of TKI therapy (Q1 < Q2 < Q3 < Q4). We used landmark survival analysis with multivariate Cox regression to test the association of monthly OOP costs in the first 3 months of TKIs and OS starting at 3 months of TKI therapy between Q1-Q3 vs Q4. We used t-tests to compare MPR and DOT for the 1st TKI between Q1-3 and Q4. Results: For 106 eligible patients (median age 69; 67% female; 73% White; 35% Medicare, 85% EGFR+), the median monthly OOP TKI costs at 3 months were $0 (Q1); $1,432 (Q2); $1,798 (Q3); $2,888 (Q4). Mean MPR was 1.20 vs. 1.06 (P = 0.02), and median DOT was 8 vs. 4 months (P < 0.01) for Q1-3 vs. Q4. Median OS was 22 vs. 9 months for Q1-3 vs 4. Compared with Q1-3, Q4 patients had a hazard ratio for death of 1.76 (95% CI = 1.05; 2.94; P = 0.03), adjusted for age, sex, insurance, mutation, income, chemotherapy use, and time to TKI start. There were no statistically significant associations comparing Q1 to Q2-4, or Q1-2 to Q3-4. Conclusions: Higher patient OOP TKI costs are associated with lower number of TKI prescriptions, shorter duration of TKI therapy and inferior survival in advanced EGFR+ and ALK+ NSCLC.

270 Background: Approximately half of cancer patients undergoing outpatient chemotherapy experience unplanned Emergency Department (ED) visits and Inpatient (IP) stays. Current machine learning algorithms that identify high-risk patients are based on pre-treatment variables which can not detect changes in risk over time. Deep learning recurrent neural networks can model complex longitudinal patient histories. This study tests the feasibility of using an interpretable recurrent neural network to predict a patient’s daily likelihood of ED and unplanned IP stays in the six months following chemotherapy initiation. Methods: Medicare and commercial claims data were linked with cancer registry records for patients in Washington State from 2011 to 2017. The study included patients diagnosed with any primary tumor site, excluding leukemia, and treated with chemotherapy. We used the Reverse Time Attention model (RETAIN) with a 1:10 case-control match and included registry elements; diagnoses, procedures, medication, and utilization pre-and post-chemotherapy initiation. Patients were randomly divided into internal training, validation, and test sets (75%, 10%, 15%). Model accuracy was measured by the areas under the receiver operating curve (ROC) and precision-recall curve (PRC), and the Youden sensitivity and specificity. Results: Of the 15,400 eligible patients; 4,037 (26.2%) visited the ED a median of 1 time (6,080 total visits); 5,116 (33.2%) had a median of 1 IP stay (7,839 total stays). Both models had good predictive accuracy: The top 20 predictors for ED visits included 5 chemotherapy regimes, 12 procedures, and 2 tumor characteristics; IP stays included all chemotherapy regimes. Conclusions: The promising performance of RETAIN supports the possibility of building a tool capable of estimating daily hospitalization risk. However, future research, particularly with alternative data sources, may be required to predict hospitalization in a real time clinical setting. [Table: see text]

134 Background: Molecular testing practices and cost-sharing policies may result in delayed initiation of TKI therapy. We assessed predictors of delayed initiation of TKIs in metastatic EGFR+ or ALK+ NSCLC. Methods: We identified patients with EGFR+ and ALK+ NSCLC diagnosed between 01/01/2010 and 12/31/2016 in the Washington State SEER registry using validated natural language processing methods. We linked registry records to commercial and Medicare (including part D) claims. Eligible patients had stage IV NSCLC, sensitizing EGFR mutations or ALK+ by FISH, ≥ 1 pharmacy claims for EGFR or ALK TKIs, and ≥12 months of insurance enrollment post-diagnosis. Potential predictors included age, sex, race, Census-level median household income, urban status, insurance type, comorbidity, histology, mutation type, and receipt of chemotherapy prior to first TKI claim (pre-TKI chemo). We defined time to TKI initiation as the interval from diagnosis to first pharmacy claim for EGFR or ALK TKIs. We fitted Cox regression models to identify predictors of delays in TKI initiation, defining covariates with a P < 0.05 in a final multivariate model as independently associated with delays. Results: For 122 patients (median age 70; 65% female; 74% White; median income $66,580; 98% metropolitan; 35% Medicare; 80% EGFR+; 12% using pre-TKI chemo), the median time to TKI initiation was 6.7 weeks (IQR = 3.9 to 14.0). Independent predictors of TKI delays included male sex (HR = 0.51; 95%CI = 0.34; 0.76); Medicare insurance (HR = 0.32; 95% CI = 0.20; 0.53) and pre-TKI chemo (HR = 0.37; 95% CI = 0.20; 0.66). Median time to TKI initiation was 9.7 vs. 5.8; 7.8 vs. 4.1; and 16.0 vs. 6.3 weeks in male vs. female, Medicare vs. commercial insurance, and pre-TKI chemo (yes vs no), respectively. Conclusions: Male sex, Medicare insurance, and chemotherapy prior to TKI are associated with delays in TKI initiation for EGFR+ and ALK+ stage IV NSCLC patients. Possible explanations include higher prevalence of smoking in males resulting in lower priority for molecular testing, high cost-sharing policies for TKIs in Medicare patients, and prolonged time to obtain molecular test results leading patients to start chemotherapy first.

166 Background: Rural residents are diagnosed at later stages of cancer compared to urban residents, have poorer survival, and face distinct barriers to receiving quality cancer care. ASCO has developed policy initiatives to address rural cancer care; however, little is known about quality of cancer care among patients residing in rural areas. This study examined the impact of rurality on performance metrics, controlling for socioeconomic status and insurance type. Methods: We linked Washington state cancer registry records from 2015-2017 with claims records for two large commercial insurers, Medicare, and Medicaid. Using claims from this database, we generated eight nationally recognized quality measures. Rurality was measured by the Rural-Urban Commuting Area Codes (RUCAs) categorized into 4 levels (Metro, Metro with commute, Micropolitan, Small Town/Rural). Process and outcome measures were adjusted for age, sex, race, comorbidity score, stage, cancer type, marital status, the Area Deprivation Index, and treatment factors where appropriate. Results were stratified by payer type. Results: The table below lists the effect of a patient’s rurality on the quality metric where significant (p

158 Background: Evidence that rural residents compared to urban residents are more likely to be diagnosed at later stages and have worse survival outcomes has prompted recent policy initiatives by ASCO to address the rural cancer care gap. However, rural residents are generally poorer, potentially confounding the cause of these disparities. This study examined the impact of rurality, travel time to oncologist (TTO), and neighborhood deprivation (ND) on stage of diagnosis and 3-year survival in a regional setting. Methods: Cancer registry records for patients in Western Washington were linked with claims from regional commercial insurers, Medicare, and Medicaid at time of diagnosis. The study included adult patients with solid tumors diagnosed between 2012-2014. Rurality was sourced from the Rural-Urban Commuting Area Codes (RUCAs): Metro, Metro with Commute, Micropolitan, Small Town/Rural. ND was measured by the census block Area Deprivation Index from 1 (least) to 10 (most) deprived; TTO from Google Maps (minutes). Multinomial logistic regression measured stage at diagnosis (local, regional, distant). Cox survival models were stratified by insurance type. We adjusted all models for age, gender, race, marital status, cancer type and grade, and hierarchical condition categories. Results: The table below lists the effect size of rurality, TTO, and ND on the outcomes where significant (p

Little is known about how referrals to different cancer specialists influence cancer care for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Among Medicare enrollees, we identified factors of patients and their primary care physician that were associated with referrals to cancer specialists, and how the types of cancer specialists seen correlated with delivery of guideline-based therapies (GBTs).Data from patients with stages III and IV NSCLC included in the SEER-Medicare database were linked to their physicians in the American Medical Association Masterfile database. Using logistic regression, we (1) identified patient and physician factors that were associated with referrals to cancer specialists (medical oncologists, radiation oncologists, and surgeons); (2) identified the types of referral to cancer specialists that predicted greater likelihood of receiving GBT (per National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines).A total of 28,977 patients with NSCLC diagnosed from January 1, 2000 to December 31, 2005 met eligibility criteria. Younger age, white race, higher income, and primary physician specialty other than family practice predicted higher likelihood of referrals to medical oncologists (P.01 for all predictors). Seeing the three types of cancer specialists predicted higher likelihood of GBT (stage IIIA: odds ratio [OR] = 20.6; P.001; IIIB: OR = 77.2; P.001; and IV: OR = 1.2; P = .011), compared with seeing a medical oncologist only. Use of GBTs increased over the study period (42% to 48% from 2000 to 2005; P.001).Referrals to all types of cancer specialists increased the likelihood of treatment with standard therapies, particularly in stage III patients. However, racial and income disparities still prevent optimal referrals to cancer specialists.

Low-income populations bear a relatively high burden of travel to primary care providers (PCP) because they often reside in remote, rural areas and have limited means of transportation.1,2 In addition, American Indians/Alaska Natives (AI/ANs), many of whom live on remote reservations, have been shown to be a particularly vulnerable group with respect to late diagnosis and are of special interest here.3–7 The burden of travel from a patient’s residence to his or her health care provider can be an important issue influencing access to preventive and treatment services for cancer. Adverse outcomes associated with greater distance and/or greater travel time to provider may include delay in treatment and discontinuity in follow-up care.8 Cancer patients may be at particular risk, because delays in initiating treatment may result in more advanced and difficult-to-treat disease or in increased risk of relapse after treatment. Longer distances to treatment facilities have been associated with decreased likelihood of receiving treatment for breast cancer,9–11 undergoing breast-conserving surgery, and with greater likelihood of later stage of diagnosis for melanoma and colorectal cancer (CRC).12–15 Most studies that have found associations between distance to provider and cancer diagnosis or treatment have measured distance by using either straight-line distance or driving distance based on Geographic Information System (GIS) software.9–15 The results of one study were based on distances derived from patient surveys.16 Because travel distances do not necessarily correlate with travel time, we used software tools to test the hypothesis that for Medicaid populations, including AI/ANs and other vulnerable groups, longer travel times to PCPs were associated with (1) later stage at cancer diagnosis, (2) less frequent receipt of recommended surgery for initial cancer treatment, and (3) for those who received recommended surgery, greater number of days between the date of cancer diagnosis and the date of surgery. We further explored whether driving time or driving distance better predicted access to care. We hypothesized that driving time would be more important than driving distance.

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text, The aim of the study was to examine how multimorbidity influences the prevalence of financial burden among older adults with heart disease, diabetes, or cancer. The study was a cross-sectional analysis of prospective observational cohort survey study. Older adults (age 65 or older) who did not report 1/6 major chronic illnesses (n = 2773; reference group), reported 1/3 major chronic illnesses without comorbidity (heart disease n = 206; diabetes n = 460; cancer n = 417), and reported 1/3 major chronic illnesses with comorbidity (heart disease n = 232; diabetes n = 202; cancer n = 109). The measures were presence of chronic diseases (heart disease, diabetes, cancer), comorbid chronic diseases (stroke, lung disease, dementia), medical-related financial burden (credit card debt due to medical costs, paying medical bills over time), and overall financial burden (financial help from family, credit card debt, help with food, utilities, and other necessities). The proportion reporting financial burden ranged from 15% to 27% across samples. Heart disease was unrelated to medical or overall financial burden, regardless of comorbidity. Diabetes was unrelated to financial burden except diabetes without comorbidity was associated with lower odds of overall financial burden compared to healthy older adults (odds ratio [OR] = 0.655, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.468–0.917). Cancer with comorbidity, but not cancer without comorbidity, was associated with greater odds of medical related (OR = 1.678, 95% CI: 1.057–2.664) and overall financial burden (OR = 1.748, 95% CI: 1.064–2.872). The association of multimorbidity with financial burden likely varies based on specific diseases. Future research on financial burden should focus on specific disease combinations such as cancer with comorbidity.

65 Background: Polypharmacy, or the concurrent use of multiple medications, may expose patients to drug-drug interactions and excessive costs. There are limited data on polypharmacy for commercially insured older adults, primarily Medicare Advantage patients, that may have better access to medication management services than Medicare fee-for-service patients. We characterized medication use and out-of-pocket (OOP) medication costs in the last month of life among patients age 65+ who did not enroll in hospice to examine medication use in this population. Methods: We linked enrollment and claims records from two regional commercial insurers to Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Cancer Surveillance System and Washington State Cancer Registry records for patients diagnosed with a stage IV malignancy in Washington State between January 1, 2007-December 31, 2016. We calculated OOP costs as the difference between allowed and paid claim amounts and adjusted OOP costs (aOOP) for inflation to 2017 dollars. Results: Among 345 patients with medication claims in their last month, 156 (45%) had a chemotherapy claim. Average age was 74 years (range 65-95), 55% (n = 190) were male, and 150 had lung cancer (44%). Patients averaged 7.7 medication claims (range 1-50); 151 (44%) had 1-4, 99 (29%) had 5-9, and 95 (27%) had 10+. Common symptom-related medications were opioids, benzodiazepines, anti-emetics. Chemotherapy was associated with higher odds of 10+ prescriptions (OR 1.38, 95% CI 1.26-1.51). Excluding four patients with aOOP chemotherapy costs > $14,000, average aOOP costs were $101 for chemotherapy claims (range $0-$8957) and $33 for non-chemotherapy claims ($0-$1993). Costs for those in the highest quartile ranged from $320-$8957 for chemotherapy claims and $100-1993 for non-chemotherapy claims. Conclusions: Most subjects had at least five medication claims in their last 30 days. One-quarter had 10+ claims, which was associated with chemotherapy receipt. Hospice enrollment could reduce OOP costs, as hospice provides symptom-related medications. Interventions facilitating hospice enrollment and reducing chemotherapy use may minimize polypharmacy and cost burden for patients and families.

We surveyed prostate cancer patients about complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use and evaluated patient factors that correlated with CAM use 6 months following diagnosis. The Prostate CAncer Therapy Selection study was a prospective, observational multi-site study of men’s treatment decision-making process after a diagnosis of local stage prostate cancer. Recruitment occurred in community urology practices in Washington State, hospital-based urology clinics affiliated with the University of Southern California, and Kaiser Permanente in Northern California. Eligible study participants included men over age 21 diagnosed with local stage prostate cancer between May 1, 2005 and December 31, 2006. Fifty-two percent of survey respondents (379) reported using one or more types of CAM. Of the patients, 51% used one CAM method, 26% used two methods, and 23% used three or more methods. The most commonly reported category was mind–body therapies (65%). Only 43% of patients discussed their CAM use with a health professional; of those, 20% informed their primary care physician and 30% told the doctor managing their prostate cancer care. Less than half thought the CAM they used was “very helpful”, but a majority thought it was somewhat helpful for their condition. Further research is needed to characterize the goals prostate cancer patients have for CAM, whether the treatments met those goals, and how this translates into the perceived helpfulness of these therapies. The implications of patients not discussing CAM use with health professionals at the time of prostate cancer treatment need further studies.

105 Background: While many quality metrics are generated and reported at a national level, regionally reported metrics may be more meaningful to stakeholders and more amenable to locally-generated interventions aimed at improving quality. We present the lessons learned from adapting national performance reporting standards to our regional setting. Methods: We linked 2014-2016 Washington State cancer registry records with Medicare and commercial insurance claims, capturing about 70% of the state’s cancer patients. A consortium of payers, oncology providers, and patients selected metrics from national initiatives (QOPI, MACRA, OCM, and the Choosing Wisely Campaign). We then searched the National Quality Forum and the National Quality Measures Clearinghouse for published specifications on those metrics. If none were available or there was a lack of consensus, we constructed algorithms with clinical and technical expert review. We calculated clinic-level risk standardized rates (RSRs) using hierarchical regression modeling to adjust for variation in clinic size and constructed quality composites. Results: We generated 13 quality metrics for 36,900 cancer patients cared for at 27 clinics. Our adaptation of national performance measures and implications include: 1) Many treatment process measures had too few numbers to individually report annually requiring us to group quality metrics and cancer types, and report over a three year period. 2) Although we were able to include tumor characteristics (e.g. AJCC stage) from registry records, risk adjustment was challenged by limitations in the number of risk adjustors due to the smaller number of patients. 3) After applying the hierarchical models, risk adjustment had minimal effect on clinic rankings. 4) The small number of clinics and limited range of clinic RSRs were more accurately captured by a quality composite that reflected clinic level differences to the regional average rather than national quintile groupings. Conclusions: Refinement of national metrics is necessary for public reporting in a regional setting. Further methodological development is critical for robust reporting and applications to value based purchasing.

31 Background: Although many quality measures exist in oncology, there have been few efforts to prioritize, measure, and report quality and costs for an entire region. Here, we report the results of a multi-year, multi-stakeholder effort aimed at public reporting of nationally recognized quality metrics for oncology practices in Washington State. Methods: Quality metrics were selected from nationally-recognized measures through a structured process involving oncology providers, health insurance leaders, patient advocates, and policy experts. Cancer registry records from 2014 to 2016 were linked with claims data from two commercial insurers and Medicare, representing approximately 70% of cancer patients in the state. Patients were assigned to oncology clinics using claims data; 27 clinics were large enough for inclusion in at least one measure in the report. Thirteen metrics were combined to produce one clinic-level quality score per measure. Each quality score was mapped to total episode cost per patient. Results were adjusted to account for clinic size, cancer characteristics (e.g. stage), demographics, and comorbidity where appropriate. Results: Conclusions: The Community Cancer Care in Washington State: Quality and Cost Report 2018 is the first publicly accessible report showing clinic-level quality measures linked to cost in oncology. Its ultimate goal is to improve care and lower costs by spurring collaboration, research and innovation.[Table: see text]

104 Background: As quality reports are released for regions and individual clinics, an important question is whether those reports can be used for value based purchasing, particularly for community oncology clinics. We evaluated the reliability of select quality measures and estimated the likelihood that a clinic’s performance would be incorrectly categorized (misclassified) in the top quartile. Methods: We linked 2014-2016 cancer registry records for patients with enrollment and claims from Medicare and two major commercial insurers in Washington State. We calculated risk standardized rates (RSRs) for ED and hospital use during treatment and 3 quality measures for end of life care. Reliability (0-1 scale: 0-unreliabile, > 0.7 good reliability, 1 perfectly reliable) was calculated as signal/(signal + statistical noise) from hierarchical logistic regression modeling for each metric. Misclassification was characterized as the probability of false negative and false positive assignment of clinics to the top quartile of performers in the region. We generated results for 3 and 1 year performance periods. Results: Over the 3 year period, the hospitalization metrics included 7,373 patients, 25 clinics; end of life metrics included 8,165 patients; 24 clinics. Conclusions: Although these metrics had fairly high levels of reliability, approximately one-third of clinics could be incorrectly identified as a top quartile performer. Use of these metrics in value based purchasing should account for potential misclassification to minimize unintended consequences.[Table: see text]

75 Background: Uniformity in receipt of high quality cancer care is imperative to reduce health care disparities. In order to help prioritize efforts aimed at reducing disparities in care, we compared several quality metrics for Washington State cancer patients enrolled in Medicaid and commercial insurance plans. Methods: We linked 2014-2016 Washington state cancer registry records for cancer patients under the age of 65 with enrollment and claims records for the two largest commercial insurers in the state and Medicaid. We then generated thirteen nationally recognized quality measures. Outcome measures were adjusted for age, sex, comorbidity score, stage, cancer site, and treatment factors where appropriate. Process measures were not adjusted. Results: 6,868 commercially insured and 2,379 Medicaid patients are represented in the reported quality measures. Conclusions: Care of Washington state cancer patients enrolled in Medicaid is comparable or superior to commercially insured patients, except for significantly higher ED use during chemotherapy. Further research is needed to understand why Medicaid-enrolled cancer patients utilize the ED at more than double the rate of commercially insured patients.[Table: see text]

This study describes urologist recommendations for treatment among local-stage prostate cancer patients presenting for initial management consultations versus second opinions. We hypothesized that urologists present a wider range of management recommendations and are less likely to consider the patient preference during the initial consultation.Newly diagnosed local-stage prostate cancer patients and their urologists participated in a survey at urology practices in three states. The urologist's survey included questions about the patient's clinical status, treatments discussed and recommended, and factors that influenced the urologist's recommendations.Of the 238 eligible patients, 95 men presented for an initial consultation, and 143 men presented for a second opinion. In multivariate analysis, urologists recommended 0.52 more treatments (standard error 0.19, P0.001) during an initial consultation as opposed to a second opinion. The proportion recommending surgery increased from 71-91% (initial consultation versus second opinion setting). Among initial consultations, 59% had low-risk disease, and urologists' recommendations included surgery (80%), external radiation (38%), brachytherapy (seeds) (52%), and active surveillance (25%). Of the 54% with low-risk disease in a second opinion consultation, urologists' recommendations included surgery (90%), external radiation (16%), brachytherapy (14%), and active surveillance (16%).In second opinion settings urologists discussed fewer treatment options and recommended surgery more often. These findings also applied to men with low-risk prostate cancer.

Due to the complexity of factors that must be considered when choosing a therapy for prostate cancer, we hypothesized that many men will find that certain factors such as side effects gain or lose importance after therapy relative to their expectations before therapy.We conducted a prospective survey of men deciding on a therapy for local stage prostate cancer in 3 geographic regions. Men were asked to rate the importance of 11 personal factors before starting therapy and again 6 months after therapy.Among 448 eligible men completing the most common treatment options, overall satisfaction with treatment choice was high across all therapies. While most men changed rankings of importance in at least 1 of the 11 factors, the majority of pre-post evaluations were highly consistent. In adjusted analyses the 2 factors that emerged as significantly underappreciated for all major prostate cancer treatments were 1) the impact of treatment on usual daily activities, and 2) the recommendations of friends and relatives who were affected with prostate cancer.Initial patient expectations of the importance of the majority of factors related to prostate cancer treatment are generally accurate. Better counseling may improve the accuracy of patient expectations of the personal burden of treatment, and their evaluation of the advice of affected friends and relatives.