Search

Background: National guidelines recommend that physicians discuss end-of-life (EOL) care planning with patients with cancer whose life expectancy is less than 1 year.Objective: To evaluate the incidence of EOL care discussions for patients with stage IV lung or colorectal cancer and where, when, and with whom these discussions take place.Design: Prospective cohort study of patients diagnosed with lung or colorectal cancer from 2003 to 2005.Setting: Participants lived in Northern California, Los Angeles County, North Carolina, Iowa, or Alabama or received care in 1 of 5 large HMOs or 1 of 15 Veterans Health Administration sites.Patients: 2155 patients with stage IV lung or colorectal cancer.Measurements: End-of-life care discussions reported in patient and surrogate interviews or documented in medical records through 15 months after diagnosis.Results: 73% of patients had EOL care discussions identified by at least 1 source. Among the 1470 patients who died during follow-up, 87% had EOL care discussions, compared with 41% of the 685 patients who were alive at the end of follow-up. Of the 1081 first EOL care discussions documented in records, 55% occurred in the hospital. Oncologists documented EOL care discussions with only 27% of their patients. Among 959 patients with documented EOL care discussions who died during follow-up, discussions took place a median of 33 days before death.Limitations: The depth and quality of EOL care discussions was not evaluated. Much of the information about discussions came from surrogates of patients who died before baseline interviews could be obtained.Conclusion: Although most patients with stage IV lung or colorectal cancer discuss EOL care planning with physicians before death, many discussions occur during acute hospital care, with providers other than oncologists, and late in the course of illness.Primary Funding Source: National Cancer Institute and Department of Veterans Affairs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) is the largest integrated health care system in the United States. Studies suggest that the VHA provides better preventive care and care for some chronic illnesses than does the private sector. Objective: To assess the quality of cancer care for older patients provided by the VHA versus fee-for-service Medicare. Design: Observational study of patients with cancer that was diagnosed between 2001 and 2004 who were followed through 2005. Setting: VHA and non-VHA hospitals and office-based practices. Patients: Men older than 65 years with incident colorectal, lung, or prostate cancer; lymphoma; or multiple myeloma. Measurements: Rates of processes of care for colorectal, lung, or prostate cancer; lymphoma; or multiple myeloma. Rates were adjusted by using propensity score weighting. Results: Compared with the fee-for-service Medicare population, the VHA population received diagnoses of colon (P < 0.001) and rectal (P = 0.007) cancer at earlier stages and had higher adjusted rates of curative surgery for colon cancer (92.7% vs. 90.5%; P < 0.010), standard chemotherapy for diffuse large B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (71.1% vs. 59.3%; P < 0.001), and bisphosphonate therapy for multiple myeloma (62.1% vs. 50.4%; P < 0.001). The VHA population had lower adjusted rates of 3-dimensional conformal or intensity-modulated radiation therapy for prostate cancer treated with external-beam radiation therapy (61.6% vs. 86.0%; P < 0.001). Adjusted rates were similar for 9 other measures. Sensitivity analyses suggest that if patients with cancer in the VHA system have more severe comorbid illness than other patients, rates for most indicators would be higher in the VHA population than in the fee-for-service Medicare population. Limitation: This study included only older men and did not include information about performance status, severity of comorbid illness, or patient preferences. Conclusion: Care for older men with cancer in the VHA system was generally similar to or better than care for fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries, although adoption of some expensive new technologies may be delayed in the VHA system. Primary Funding Source: Department of Veterans Affairs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Educational interventions increase diabetes patients' knowledge and self-care activities, but their impact on the use of health services to prevent diabetes complications is unclear. We sought to determine the relationship of patients' diabetes-specific knowledge with self-management behaviors, use of ambulatory preventive care, and metabolic outcomes. METHODS: We surveyed 670 adults with diabetes from three managed care plans to assess diabetes knowledge (using an eight-item scale) and self-management activities. With chart review, we assessed five processes of care--retinal and foot examinations, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) testing, hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) testing, and urine microalbumin testing--and three metabolic outcomes--HbA1c < or = 9.5%, LDL-C <130 mg/dL (3.36 mmol/L), and last blood pressure <140/90 mm Hg. RESULTS: In adjusted analyses, a one-point increase on the knowledge scale was associated with following a diabetes diet (OR 1.23, 95% CI 1.10-1.38), blood glucose self-measurement (OR 1.29, 95% CI 1.13-1.48), and regular exercise (OR 1.15, 95% CI 1.03-1.28) but not with processes of care or metabolic outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Knowledgeable patients were more likely to perform self-management activities but not to receive recommended ambulatory care or reach metabolic outcome goals. Providing patient education about diabetes care processes should be tested as a means of increasing ambulatory care to prevent diabetes complications. © 2004 The Institute For Cancer Prevention and Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: Health care organizations use many strategies to influence physician behavior and the care delivered, but the effect of such strategies on quality is not known.Objective: We sought to assess the influence of practice management strategies and financial arrangements on the quality of diabetes care.Design: This was a retrospective cohort study including medical record reviews and a physician survey.Participants: Patients with diabetes mellitus (n=652) enrolled in 3 health plans located in Minnesota and 399 physicians in 135 practices who cared for them participated in this study.Main Outcome Measure: Our main outcome measures was a quality score indicating receipt of care in accordance with 6 accepted quality indicators.Results: The mean quality score was 2.4 (SD 1.2) on a 6-point scale. Only a small proportion of the variation in quality was attributed to characteristics of physicians' practices (5%). Quality scores tended to be higher for patients whose physicians received quality performance reports or utilization profiles from more than 1 source (P=0.08), routinely enrolled diabetic patients in disease-management programs (P=0.06), or received diabetes-specific reports (P=0.06). Quality scores were lower for patients whose physicians were paid according to fee-for-service compared with salary (P=0.04) and served as gatekeepers for >50% of their patients (P=0.06). However, these findings were all of borderline statistical significance, and the absolute differences in quality were small.Conclusions: Current practice management strategies and financial arrangements have a limited impact on the quality of care for patients with diabetes. These findings suggest that other strategies may be necessary for health care organizations to improve care for patients with diabetes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Multiple treatment options exist for many medical conditions. The extent to which physicians should involve the patient in the choice the treatment to be delivered is not well understood.Objective: To test the impact of breast cancer treatment choice on patients' health state preferences.Design and Setting: A cohort from 29 hospitals (primarily referral centers) in Massachusetts, Texas, Washington DC, and New York. Subjects were surveyed at 5 months, 1 year, and 2 years following surgery and asked whether they had a choice in the type of treatment received.Subjects: Women age 67 or older treated in 1996 to 1997 for localized breast cancer (n = 683).Measures: Patient preferences for current health state, assessed with patient valuations using the visual analogue scale (VAS) from the EuroQol instrument and with general public valuations using the Health Utilities Index (HUI), and 1-year medical costs.Results: For the adjusted analysis at 5 months, the adjusted mean VAS score was 78.7 for women who reported a choice and 75.3 for women who reported no choice, a difference of 3.4 (P = 0.03). The difference in the HUI score was 3.6 (P= 0.10) and the difference in the 1-year medical costs was -4363 dollars (P = 0.01). There were no statistically significant differences at the 1-year and 2-year interviews.Conclusions: A woman's perception of choice of surgical treatment for breast cancer is associated with a short-term benefit on her preference of health state, suggesting choice helps with recovery, but does not provide long-term benefits. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the past two decades, relationships among health plans, medical groups, and providers have grown more complex and the number of clinical management strategies has increased. In this context, determining the independent effect of a particular organizational strategy on quality of care has become more difficult. The authors review some of the issues a researcher must address when studying the relationship between organizational characteristics and quality of care. They offer criteria for selecting a research question, list organizational characteristics that may influence quality, and suggest sampling and study design techniques to reduce confounding. Since this type of research often requires a health care organization as collaborator, the authors discuss strategies for developing research partnerships and collecting data from the partner organization. Finally, they offer suggestions for translating research into policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Clinical guidelines and quality improvement initiatives have identified reducing the use of end-of-life cancer therapies as an opportunity to improve care. We examined the extent to which oncologists differed in prescribing systemic therapies in the last 30 days of life., Methods: Using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare data, we identified patients who died of cancer from 2012 to 2017 (N = 17,609), their treating oncologists (N = 960), and the corresponding physician practice (N = 388). We used multilevel models to estimate oncologists' rates of providing cancer therapy for patients in their last 30 days of life, adjusted for patient characteristics and practice variation., Results: Patients' median age at the time of death was 74 years (interquartile range, 69-79); patients had lung (62%), colorectal (17%), breast (13%), and prostate (8%) cancers. We observed substantial variation across oncologists in their adjusted rate of treating patients in the last 30 days of life: oncologists in the 95th percentile exhibited a 45% adjusted rate of treatment, versus 17% among the 5th percentile. A patient treated by an oncologist with a high end-of-life prescribing behavior (top quartile), compared to an oncologist with a low prescribing behavior (bottom quartile), had more than four times greater odds of receiving end-of-life cancer therapy (OR, 4.42; 95% CI, 4.00-4.89)., Conclusions: Oncologists show substantial variation in end-of-life prescribing behavior. Future research should examine why some oncologists more often continue systemic therapy at the end of life than others, the consequences of this for patient and care outcomes, and whether interventions shaping oncologist decision-making can reduce overuse of end-of-life cancer therapies., (© 2024 The Author(s). Cancer published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Cancer Society.)

Objective: To assess the association between the Global Budget Revenue (GBR) payment model and shifts to the outpatient setting for surgical procedures among Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries in Maryland versus control states., Summary Background Data: The GBR model provides fixed global payments to hospitals to reduce spending growth and incentivize hospitals to reduce the costs of care while improving care quality. Since surgical care is a major contributor to hospital spending, the GBR model might accelerate the ongoing shift from the inpatient to the outpatient setting to generate additional savings., Methods: A difference-in-differences (DiD) design was used to compare changes in surgical care settings over time from pre-GBR (2011-2013) to post-GBR (2014-2018) for Maryland versus control states for common surgeries that could be performed in the outpatient setting. A cross-sectional approach was used to compare the difference in care settings in 2018 for total knee arthroplasty which was on Medicare's Inpatient-Only List before then., Results: We studied 47,542 surgical procedures from 44,410 beneficiaries in Maryland and control states. GBR's 2014 implementation was associated with an acceleration in the shift from inpatient to outpatient settings for surgical procedures in Maryland (DiD: 3.9 percentage points, 95% CI: 2.3, 5.4). Among patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty in 2018, the proportion of outpatient surgeries in Maryland was substantially higher than that in control states (difference: 27.6 percentage points, 95% CI: 25.6, 29.6)., Conclusions: Implementing Maryland's GBR payment model was associated with an acceleration in the shift from inpatient to outpatient hospital settings for surgical procedures., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest/Competing interests: Dr. Offodile reports grant funding from the National Cancer Institute (R37 CA276322) outside the submitted work. He also has previous research funding from Blue Cross Blue Shield, University Cancer Foundation, Andrew Sabin Foundation, Rising Tide Foundation for Clinical Cancer Research, and the National Academy of Medicine. He was previously an unpaid policy advisor to the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation on population-based payment models and the Maryland Health Services Cost Review Commission, the rate setting agency that administrates the Maryland global budget program. Dr Keating reported grants from the National Cancer Institute and funding from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services outside the submitted work. Dr. Melamed reports research funding from the National Cancer Institute, the Department of Defense, and the National Academy of Medicine outside the submitted work. Dr Herring, Dr. Petrillo, and Ms. Lin reports research funding from the National Cancer Institute (R37 CA276322) outside the submitted work. This research was funded in part by the National Institutes of Health through the Cancer Center Support Grant P30CA008748, which funds the research infrastructure at the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Prior authorization requirements are increasing but little is known about their effects on access to care. We examined the association of a new prior authorization policy with delayed or discontinued prescription fills for oral anticancer drugs among Medicare Part D beneficiaries., Methods: Using Medicare part D claims data from 2010 to 2020, we studied beneficiaries regularly filling one of 11 oral anticancer drugs, defined as three 30-day fills in 120 days preceding the plan's prior authorization policy change on that drug and continuously enrolled in the same plan for 120 days before and after the policy change at the start of a new year. The control group consisted of beneficiaries meeting the same utilization criteria, but who were enrolled in plans at the same time that did not implement a prior authorization policy change. The outcomes of interest were discontinuation of the drug within 120 days (analyzed with regression analyses) and time (in days) to next fill after a prior authorization policy change (analyzed using a quasi-experimental difference-in-differences event study)., Results: The introduction of a new prior authorization on an established drug increased the odds of discontinuation within 120 days (adjusted odds ratio, 7.1 [95% CI, 6.0 to 8.5]; P < .001) and increased time to next fill by 9.7 days (95% CI, 8.2 to 11.2; P < .001), relative to patients whose plans did not have a prior authorization policy change., Conclusion: Introduction of a new prior authorization policy on an established drug regimen is associated with increased probability of discontinued and delayed care. For some conditions, this may represent a clinically consequential barrier to access. Waiving prior authorization for patients already established on a drug may improve adherence.

Importance: Increasing integration across medical services may have important implications for health care quality and spending. One major but poorly understood dimension of integration is between physician organizations and pharmacies for self-administered drugs or in-house pharmacies., Objective: To describe trends in the use of in-house pharmacies, associated physician organization characteristics, and associated drug prices., Design, Setting, and Participants: A cross-sectional study was conducted from calendar years 2011 to 2019. Participants included 20% of beneficiaries enrolled in fee-for-service Medicare Parts A, B, and D. Data analysis was performed from September 15, 2020, to December 20, 2023., Exposures: Prescriptions filled by in-house pharmacies., Main Outcomes and Measures: The share of Medicare Part D spending filled by in-house pharmacies by drug class, costliness, and specialty was evaluated. Growth in the number of physician organizations and physicians in organizations with in-house pharmacies was measured in 5 specialties: medical oncology, urology, infectious disease, gastroenterology, and rheumatology. Characteristics of physician organizations with in-house pharmacies and drug prices at in-house vs other pharmacies are described., Results: Among 8 020 652 patients (median age, 72 [IQR, 66-81] years; 4 570 114 [57.0%] women), there was substantial growth in the share of Medicare Part D spending on high-cost drugs filled at in-house pharmacies from 2011 to 2019, including oral anticancer treatments (from 10% to 34%), antivirals (from 12% to 20%), and immunosuppressants (from 2% to 9%). By 2019, 63% of medical oncologists, 20% of urologists, 29% of infectious disease specialists, 21% of gastroenterologists, and 22% of rheumatologists were in organizations with specialty-relevant in-house pharmacies. Larger organizations had a greater likelihood of having an in-house pharmacy (0.75 percentage point increase [95% CI, 0.56-0.94] per each additional physician), as did organizations owning hospitals enrolled in the 340B Drug Discount Program (10.91 percentage point increased likelihood [95% CI, 6.33-15.48]). Point-of-sale prices for high-cost drugs were 1.76% [95% CI, 1.66%-1.87%] lower at in-house vs other pharmacies., Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of physician organization-operated pharmacies, in-house pharmacies were increasingly used from 2011 to 2019, especially for high-cost drugs, potentially associated with organizations' financial incentives. In-house pharmacies offered high-cost drugs at lower prices, in contrast to findings of integration in other contexts, but their growth highlights a need to understand implications for patient care.

Background: Medication cost conversations occur less frequently than patients prefer, and it is unclear whether patients have positive experiences with them when they do occur., Objective: To describe patients' experiences discussing their medication costs with their health care team., Design: Cross-sectional survey., Setting: Nationally representative survey fielded in the United States in 2022 (response rate = 48.5%)., Patients: 1020 adults over age 65., Measurements: Primary measures were adapted from Clinician and Group Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers Survey visit survey v4.0 and captured patients' experiences of medication cost conversations. Additional measures captured patients' interest in future cost conversations, the type of clinicians with whom they would be comfortable discussing costs, and sociodemographic characteristics., Results: Among 1020 respondents who discussed medication prices with their health care team, 39.3% were 75 or older and 78.6% were non-Hispanic White. Forty-three percent of respondents indicated that their prior medication cost conversation was not easy to understand; 3% indicated their health care team was not respectful and 26% indicated their health care team was somewhat respectful during their last conversation; 48% indicated that there was not enough time. Those reporting that their prior discussion was not easy to understand or that their clinician was not definitely respectful were less likely to be interested in future discussions. Only 6% and 10% of respondents indicated being comfortable discussing medication prices with financial counselors or social workers, respectively. Few differences in responses were observed by survey participant characteristics., Limitations: This cross-sectional survey of prior experiences may be subject to recall bias., Conclusion: Among older adults who engaged in prior medication cost conversations, many report that these conversations are not easy to understand and that almost one-third of clinicians were somewhat or not respectful. Efforts to increase the frequency of medication cost conversations should consider parallel interventions to ensure the discussions are effective at informing prescribing decisions and reducing cost-related medication nonadherence., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Society of General Internal Medicine.)

Background: Step counts are increasingly used in public health and clinical research to assess well-being, lifestyle, and health status. However, estimating step counts using commercial activity trackers has several limitations, including a lack of reproducibility, generalizability, and scalability. Smartphones are a potentially promising alternative, but their step-counting algorithms require robust validation that accounts for temporal sensor body location, individual gait characteristics, and heterogeneous health states., Objective: Our goal was to evaluate an open-source, step-counting method for smartphones under various measurement conditions against step counts estimated from data collected simultaneously from different body locations ("cross-body" validation), manually ascertained ground truth ("visually assessed" validation), and step counts from a commercial activity tracker (Fitbit Charge 2) in patients with advanced cancer ("commercial wearable" validation)., Methods: We used 8 independent data sets collected in controlled, semicontrolled, and free-living environments with different devices (primarily Android smartphones and wearable accelerometers) carried at typical body locations. A total of 5 data sets (n=103) were used for cross-body validation, 2 data sets (n=107) for visually assessed validation, and 1 data set (n=45) was used for commercial wearable validation. In each scenario, step counts were estimated using a previously published step-counting method for smartphones that uses raw subsecond-level accelerometer data. We calculated the mean bias and limits of agreement (LoA) between step count estimates and validation criteria using Bland-Altman analysis., Results: In the cross-body validation data sets, participants performed 751.7 (SD 581.2) steps, and the mean bias was -7.2 (LoA -47.6, 33.3) steps, or -0.5%. In the visually assessed validation data sets, the ground truth step count was 367.4 (SD 359.4) steps, while the mean bias was -0.4 (LoA -75.2, 74.3) steps, or 0.1%. In the commercial wearable validation data set, Fitbit devices indicated mean step counts of 1931.2 (SD 2338.4), while the calculated bias was equal to -67.1 (LoA -603.8, 469.7) steps, or a difference of 3.4%., Conclusions: This study demonstrates that our open-source, step-counting method for smartphone data provides reliable step counts across sensor locations, measurement scenarios, and populations, including healthy adults and patients with cancer., (©Marcin Straczkiewicz, Nancy L Keating, Embree Thompson, Ursula A Matulonis, Susana M Campos, Alexi A Wright, Jukka-Pekka Onnela. Originally published in JMIR Cancer (https://cancer.jmir.org), 15.11.2023.)

Purpose: To describe the supply of cancer specialists, the organization of cancer care within versus outside of health systems, and the distance to multispecialty cancer centers., Methods: Using the 2018 Health Systems and Provider Database from the National Bureau of Economic Research and 2018 Medicare data, we identified 46,341 unique physicians providing cancer care. We stratified physicians by discipline (adult/pediatric medical oncologists, radiation oncologists, surgical/gynecologic oncologists, other surgeons performing cancer surgeries, or palliative care physicians), system type (National Cancer Institute [NCI] Cancer Center system, non-NCI academic system, nonacademic system, or nonsystem/independent practice), practice size, and composition (single disciplinary oncology, multidisciplinary oncology, or multispecialty). We computed the density of cancer specialists by county and calculated distances to the nearest NCI Cancer Center., Results: More than half of all cancer specialists (57.8%) practiced in health systems, but 55.0% of cancer-related visits occurred in independent practices. Most system-based physicians were in large practices with more than 100 physicians, while those in independent practices were in smaller practices. Practices in NCI Cancer Center systems (95.2%), non-NCI academic systems (95.0%), and nonacademic systems (94.3%) were primarily multispecialty, while fewer independent practices (44.8%) were. Cancer specialist density was sparse in many rural areas, where the median travel distance to an NCI Cancer Center was 98.7 miles. Distances to NCI Cancer Centers were shorter for individuals living in high-income areas than in low-income areas, even for individuals in suburban and urban areas., Conclusion: Although many cancer specialists practiced in multispecialty health systems, many also worked in smaller-sized independent practices where most patients were treated. Access to cancer specialists and cancer centers was limited in many areas, particularly in rural and low-income areas.

Importance: As the US accelerates adoption of alternative payment through global payment models such as Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs) or Medicare Advantage (MA), high spending for cancer care is a potential target for savings., Objective: To quantify the extent to which ACOs and other risk-bearing organizations operating in a specific geographic area (hospital referral region [HRR]) could achieve savings by steering patients to efficient medical oncology practices., Design, Setting, and Participants: This observational study included serial cross-sections of Medicare beneficiaries with cancer from 2010 to 2018. Data were analyzed from August 2021 to March 2023., Main Outcomes and Measures: Total spending and spending by category in the 1-year period following an index visit for a patient with newly diagnosed (incident) or poor-prognosis cancer., Results: The incident cohort included 1 309 825 patients with a mean age of 74.0 years; the most common cancer types were breast (21.4%), lung (16.7%), and colorectal cancer (10.0%). The poor prognosis cohort included 1 429 973 (mean age, 72.7 years); the most common cancer types were lung (26.6%), lymphoma (11.7%), and leukemia (7.3%). Options for steering varied across markets; the top quartile market had 10 or more oncology practices, but the bottom quartile had 3 or fewer oncology practices. Total spending (including Medicare Part D) in the incident cohort increased from a mean of $57 314 in 2009 to 2010 to $66 028 in 2016 to 2017. Within markets, total spending for practices in the highest spending quartile was 19% higher than in the lowest quartile. Hospital spending was the single largest component of spending in both time periods ($20 390 and $19 718, respectively) followed by Part B (infused) chemotherapy ($8022 and $11 699). Correlations in practice-level spending between the first-year (2009) and second-year (2010) spending were high (>0.90 in all categories with most >0.98), but these attenuated over time., Conclusions and Relevance: These results suggest there may be opportunities for ACOs and other risk-bearing organizations to select or drive referrals to lower-spending oncology practices in many local markets.

Objective: To evaluate whether integrating breast and cervical cancer screening in Rwanda's Women's Cancer Early Detection Program led to early breast cancer diagnoses in asymptomatic women., Methods: Launched in three districts in 2018-2019, the early detection programme offered clinical breast examination screening for all women receiving cervical cancer screening, and diagnostic breast examination for women with breast cancer symptoms. Women with abnormal breast examinations were referred to district hospitals and then to referral hospitals if needed. We examined how often clinics were held, patient volumes and number of referrals. We also examined intervals between referrals and visits to the next care level and, among women diagnosed with cancer, their initial reasons for seeking care., Findings: Health centres held clinics > 68% of the weeks. Overall, 9763 women received cervical cancer screening and clinical breast examination and 7616 received breast examination alone. Of 585 women referred from health centres, 436 (74.5%) visited the district hospital after a median of 9 days (interquartile range, IQR: 3-19). Of 200 women referred to referral hospitals, 179 (89.5%) attended after a median of 11 days (IQR: 4-18). Of 29 women diagnosed with breast cancer, 19 were ≥ 50 years and 23 had stage III or stage IV disease. All women with breast cancer whose reasons for seeking care were known (23 women) had experienced breast cancer symptoms., Conclusion: In the short-term, integrating clinical breast examination with cervical cancer screening was not associated with detection of early-stage breast cancer among asymptomatic women. Priority should be given to encouraging women to seek timely care for symptoms., ((c) 2023 The authors; licensee World Health Organization.)

Purpose: Disparities in breast cancer treatment for low-income and minority women are well documented. We examined economic hardship, health literacy, and numeracy and whether these factors were associated with differences in receipt of recommended treatment among breast cancer survivors., Methods: During 2018-2020, we surveyed adult women diagnosed with stage I-III breast cancer between 2013 and 2017 and received care at three centers in Boston and New York. We inquired about treatment receipt and treatment decision-making. We used Chi-squared and Fisher's exact tests to examine associations between financial strain, health literacy, numeracy (using validated measures), and treatment receipt by race and ethnicity., Results: The 296 participants studied were 60.1% Non-Hispanic (NH) White, 25.0% NH Black, and 14.9% Hispanic; NH Black and Hispanic women had lower health literacy and numeracy and reported more financial concerns. Overall, 21 (7.1%) women declined at least one component of recommended therapy, without differences by race and ethnicity. Those not initiating recommended treatment(s) reported more worry about paying large medical bills (52.4% vs. 27.1%), worse household finances since diagnosis (42.9% vs. 22.2%), and more uninsurance before diagnosis (9.5% vs. 1.5%); all P < .05. No differences in treatment receipt by health literacy or numeracy were observed., Conclusion: In this diverse population of breast cancer survivors, rates of treatment initiation were high. Worry about paying medical bills and financial strain were frequent, especially among non-White participants. Although we observed associations of financial strain with treatment initiation, because few women declined treatments, understanding the scope of impact is limited. Our results highlight the importance of assessments of resource needs and allocation of support for breast cancer survivors. Novelty of this work includes the granular measures of financial strain and inclusion of health literacy and numeracy., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Purpose: To characterize racial and ethnic disparities and trends in opioid access and urine drug screening (UDS) among patients dying of cancer, and to explore potential mechanisms., Methods: Among 318,549 non-Hispanic White (White), Black, and Hispanic Medicare decedents older than 65 years with poor-prognosis cancers, we examined 2007-2019 trends in opioid prescription fills and potency (morphine milligram equivalents [MMEs] per day [MMEDs]) near the end of life (EOL), defined as 30 days before death or hospice enrollment. We estimated the effects of race and ethnicity on opioid access, controlling for demographic and clinical factors. Models were further adjusted for socioeconomic factors including dual-eligibility status, community-level deprivation, and rurality. We similarly explored disparities in UDS., Results: Between 2007 and 2019, White, Black, and Hispanic decedents experienced steady declines in EOL opioid access and rapid expansion of UDS. Compared with White patients, Black and Hispanic patients were less likely to receive any opioid (Black, -4.3 percentage points, 95% CI, -4.8 to -3.6; Hispanic, -3.6 percentage points, 95% CI, -4.4 to -2.9) and long-acting opioids (Black, -3.1 percentage points, 95% CI, -3.6 to -2.8; Hispanic, -2.2 percentage points, 95% CI, -2.7 to -1.7). They also received lower daily doses (Black, -10.5 MMED, 95% CI, -12.8 to -8.2; Hispanic, -9.1 MMED, 95% CI, -12.1 to -6.1) and lower total doses (Black, -210 MMEs, 95% CI, -293 to -207; Hispanic, -179 MMEs, 95% CI, -217 to -142); Black patients were also more likely to undergo UDS (0.5 percentage points; 95% CI, 0.3 to 0.8). Disparities in EOL opioid access and UDS disproportionately affected Black men. Adjustment for socioeconomic factors did not attenuate the EOL opioid access disparities., Conclusion: There are substantial and persistent racial and ethnic inequities in opioid access among older patients dying of cancer, which are not mediated by socioeconomic variables.

Importance: Rising prescription drug costs and increasing prices for consumer goods may increase cost-related medication nonadherence. Cost-conscious prescribing can be supported by real-time benefit tools, but patient views on real-time benefit tool use and their potential benefits and harms are largely unexplored., Objective: To assess older adults' cost-related medication nonadherence, cost-coping strategies, and views on the use of real-time benefit tools in clinical practice., Design, Setting, and Participants: A weighted, nationally representative survey of adults aged 65 years and older administered via the internet and telephone from June 2022 to September 2022., Main Outcomes and Measures: Cost-related medication nonadherence; cost coping strategies; desire for cost conversations; potential benefits and harms from real-time benefit tool use., Results: Among 2005 respondents, most were female (54.7%) and partnered (59.7%); 40.4% were 75 years or older. Cost-related medication nonadherence was reported by 20.2% of participants. Some respondents used extreme forms of cost-coping, including foregoing basic needs (8.5%) or going into debt (4.8%) to afford medications. Of respondents, 89.0% reported being comfortable or neutral about being screened before a physician's visit for wanting to have medication cost conversations and 89.5% indicated a desire for their physician to use a real-time benefit tool. Respondents expressed concern if prices were inaccurate, with 49.9% of those with cost-related nonadherence and 39.3% of those without reporting they would be extremely upset if their actual medication price was more than what their physician estimated with a real-time benefit tool. If the actual price was much more than the estimated real-time benefit tool price, nearly 80% of respondents with cost-related nonadherence reported that it would affect their decision to start or keep taking a medication. Furthermore, 54.2% of those with any cost-related nonadherence and 30% of those without reported they would be moderately or extremely upset if their physicians used a medication price tool but chose not to discuss prices with them., Conclusions and Relevance: In 2022, approximately 1 in 5 older adults reported cost-related nonadherence. Real-time benefit tools may support medication cost conversations and cost-conscious prescribing, and patients are enthusiastic about their use. However, if disclosed prices are inaccurate, there is potential for harm through loss of confidence in the physician and nonadherence to prescribed medications.

Importance: All patients with newly diagnosed non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and colorectal cancer (CRC) should receive molecular testing to identify those who can benefit from targeted therapies. However, many patients do not receive recommended testing and targeted therapies., Objective: To compare rates of molecular testing and targeted therapy use by practice type and across practices., Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used 100% Medicare fee-for-service data from 2015 through 2019 to identify beneficiaries with new metastatic NSCLC or CRC diagnoses receiving systemic therapy and to assign patients to oncology practices. Hierarchical linear models were used to characterize variation by practice type and across practices. Data analysis was conducted from June 2019 to October 2022., Exposures: Oncology practice providing care., Outcomes: Primary outcomes were rates of molecular testing and targeted therapy use for patients with NSCLC and CRC. Secondary outcomes were rates of multigene testing for NSCLC and CRC., Results: There were 106 228 Medicare beneficiaries with incident NSCLC (31 521 [29.7%] aged 65-69 years; 50 348 [47.4%] female patients; 2269 [2.1%] Asian, 8282 [7.8%] Black, and 91 215 [85.9%] White patients) and 39 512 beneficiaries with incident CRC (14 045 [35.5%] aged 65-69 years; 17 518 [44.3%] female patients; 896 [2.3%] Asian, 3521 [8.9%] Black, and 32 753 [82.9%] White patients) between 2015 and 2019. Among these beneficiaries, 18 435 (12.9%) were treated at National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated centers, 8187 (5.6%) were treated at other academic centers, and 94 329 (64.7%) were treated at independent oncology practices. Molecular testing rates increased from 74% to 85% for NSCLC and 45% to 65% for CRC. First-line targeted therapy use decreased from 12% to 8% among patients with NSCLC and was constant at 5% for patients with CRC. For NSCLC, molecular testing rates were similar across practice types while rates of multigene panel use (13.2%) and targeted therapy use (16.6%) were highest at NCI-designated cancer centers. For CRC, molecular testing rates were 3.8 (95% CI: 1.2-6.5), 3.3 (95% CI, 0.4-6.1), and 12.2 (95% CI, 9.1-15.3) percentage points lower at hospital-owned practices, large independent practices, and small independent practices, respectively. Rates of targeted therapy use for CRC were similar across practice types. After adjusting for patient characteristics, there was moderate variation in molecular testing and targeted therapy use across oncology practices., Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of Medicare beneficiaries, molecular testing rates for NSCLC and CRC increased in recent years but remained lower than recommended levels. Rates of targeted therapy use decreased for NSCLC and remained stable for CRC. Variation across practices suggests that where a patient was treated may have affected access to recommended testing and efficacious treatments.

Importance: Immunotherapies reflect an important breakthrough in cancer treatment, substantially improving outcomes for patients with a variety of cancer types, yet little is known about which practices have adopted this novel therapy or the pace of adoption., Objective: To assess adoption of immunotherapies across US oncology practices and examine variation in adoption by practice type., Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used data from Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries undergoing 6-month chemotherapy episodes between 2010 and 2017. Data were analyzed January 19, 2021, to September 28, 2022, for patients with cancer types for which immunotherapy was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) during the study period: melanoma, kidney cancer, lung cancer, and head and neck cancer., Exposures: Oncology practice location (rural vs urban), affiliation type (academic system, nonacademic system, independent), and size (1 to 5 physicians vs 6 or more physicians)., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was whether a practice adopted immunotherapy. Adoption rates for each practice type were estimated using multivariate linear models that adjusted for patient characteristics (age, sex, race and ethnicity, cancer type, Charlson Comorbidity Index, and median household income)., Results: Data included 71 659 episodes at 1732 oncology practices. Of these, 264 practices (15%) were rural, 900 (52%) were independent, and 492 (28%) had 1 to 5 physicians. Most practices adopted immunotherapy within 2 years of FDA approval, but there was substantial variation in adoption rates across practice types. After FDA approval, adoption of immunotherapy was 11 (95% CI, -16 to -6) percentage points lower at rural practices than urban practices and 27 (95% CI, -32 to -22) percentage points lower at practices with 1 to 5 physicians than practices with 6 or more physicians. Adoption rates were similar at independent practices and nonacademic systems; however, both practice types had lower adoption than academic systems (independent practice difference, -6 [95% CI, -9 to -3] percentage points; nonacademic systems difference, -9 [95% CI, -11 to -6] percentage points)., Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of Medicare claims, practice characteristics, especially practice size and rural location, were associated with adoption of immunotherapy. These findings suggest that there may be geographic disparities in access to important innovations for treating patients with cancer.