Search

PURPOSE: New therapies including oral anticancer agents (OAAs) have improved outcomes for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). However, little is known about the quality of end-of-life (EOL) care and systemic therapy use at EOL in patients receiving OAAs or with mRCC. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed EOL care for decedents with mRCC in two parallel cohorts: (1) patients (RCC diagnosed 2004-2015) from the University of North Carolina's Cancer Information and Population Health Resource (CIPHR) and (2) patients (diagnosed 2007-2015) from SEER-Medicare. We assessed hospice use in the last 30 days of life and existing measures of poor-quality EOL care: systemic therapy, hospital admission, intensive care unit admission, and > 1 ED visit in the last 30 days of life; hospice initiation in the last 3 days of life; and in-hospital death. Associations between OAA use, patient and provider characteristics, and EOL care were examined using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: We identified 410 decedents in the CIPHR cohort (53.4% received OAA) and 1,508 in SEER-Medicare (43.5% received OAA). Prior OAA use was associated with increased systemic therapy in the last 30 days of life in both cohorts (CIPHR: 26.5% v 11.0%; P < .001; SEER-Medicare: 23.4% v 11.7%; P < .001), increased in-hospital death in CIPHR, and increased hospice in the last 30 days in SEER-Medicare. Older patients were less likely to receive systemic therapy or be admitted in the last 30 days or die in hospital. CONCLUSION: Patients with mRCC who received OAAs and younger patients experienced more aggressive EOL care, suggesting opportunities to optimize high-quality EOL care in these groups.

To examine real-world adherence to oral anticancer agents (OAAs) and its association with outcomes among Medicare beneficiaries with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC).SEER-Medicare retrospective cohort study of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) who received an OAA between 2007 and 2015. We examined A) adherence and B) overall and disease-specific 2-year survival landmarked at 3 months after OAA initiation. Adherence was assessed by calculating the proportion of days covered (PDC) within 3 months of OAA initiation, with adherent use being defined as PDC80%.A total of 905 patients met study criteria, of whom 445 patients (49.2%) were categorized as adherent to initial OAA treatment. Adjusting for clinical and demographic factors revealed decreased odds of adherence associated with living within an impoverished neighborhood (OR 0.49, CI 0.0.33 - 0.74) and out-of-pocket costs$200 (OR 0.68, CI 0.47-.98). Adherence was associated with improved 2-year survival in univariate analysis (logrank test, P = .01) and a non-significant trend toward an association with decreased all-cause (HR 0.87, CI 0.72 - 1.05) and RCC-specific survival (HR 0.84, CI 0.69 - 1.03) in multivariable analysis.Local poverty levels and high out-of-pocket costs are associated with poor initial adherence to OAA therapy in Medicare beneficiaries with mRCC, which in turn, suggests a trend toward poor overall and disease-specific survival. Efforts to improve outcomes in the broader mRCC population should incorporate OAA adherence and economic factors.

Disparities in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) outcomes persist in the era of oral anticancer agents (OAAs) and immunotherapies (IOs). We examined variation in the utilization of mRCC systemic therapies among US Medicare beneficiaries from 2015-2019. Logistic regression models evaluated the association between therapy receipt and demographic covariates including patient race, ethnicity and sex. In total, 15,407 patients met study criteria. After multivariable adjustment, non-Hispanic Black race and ethnicity was associated with reduced IO (adjusted relative risk ratio (aRRR) = 0.76 [0.61-0.95]; P = 0.015) and OAA receipt (aRRR = 0.76 [0.64-0.90]; P = 0.002) compared to non-Hispanic White race and ethnicity. Female sex was associated with reduced IO (aRRR = 0.73 [0.66-0.81]; P

Context Recent years show a sharp increase in research on opioid use among cancer survivors, but evidence syntheses are lacking, leaving knowledge gaps. Corresponding research needs are unclear. Objectives To provide an evidence synthesis. Methods We searched PubMed and Embase, identifying articles related to cancer and opioid prescribing/use published through September 2020. We screened resulting titles/abstracts. Relevant studies underwent full-text review. Inclusion criteria were quantitative examination of and primary focus on opioid prescribing or use, and explicit inclusion of cancer survivors. Exclusion criteria included end-of-life opioid use and opioid use as a secondary or downstream outcome (for intervention studies). We extracted information on the opioid-related outcome(s) examined (including definitions and terminology used), study design, and methods. Results Research returned 16,591 articles; 296 were included. Only 22/296 studies evaluated an intervention. There were 105 studies evaluating outcomes indicative of potentially high-risk, non-recommended, or avoidable opioid use, e.g., continuous use—described as chronic use, prolonged use, and persistent use (n=17); use after completion of curative-intent treatment—described as chronic opioid use, long-term opioid use, persistent opioid use, prolonged opioid use, continued opioid use, late opioid use, post-treatment opioid use (n=27); use of opioids concurrent with other potentially high-risk medications (n=13), and opioid misuse (n=14). Conclusions We found lack of consistency in the measurement of and terms used to describe similar opioid use outcomes, and a lack of interventional research targeting well-documented patterns of potentially non-recommended, potentially avoidable, or potentially high-risk opioid prescribing or use.

PURPOSE: Among cancer survivors who have completed curative-intent treatment, the high prevalence and adverse consequences of chronic pain are well documented. Yet, research on clinicians' experiences with and perspectives on managing chronic pain among cancer survivors is critically lacking. METHODS: We conducted semistructured interviews with 17 clinicians (six oncology, three palliative care, and eight primary care) affiliated with an academic medical center. Interview questions addressed clinicians' experiences with and perspectives on managing chronic pain (with or without opioid therapy) during the transition from active treatment to survivorship. A multidisciplinary team conducted content analysis of interview transcripts to identify and refine themes related to current practices and challenges in managing chronic pain in this context. RESULTS: Overall, clinicians perceived chronic pain to be relatively uncommon among cancer survivors. Identified challenges included a lack of clarity about which clinician (or clinicians) are best positioned to manage chronic pain among cancer survivors, and (relatedly) complexities introduced by long-term opioid management, with many clinicians describing this practice as outside their skill set. Additionally, although most clinicians recognized chronic pain as a biopsychosocial phenomenon, they described challenges with effectively managing psychosocial stressors, including difficulty accessing mental or behavioral health services for cancer survivors. CONCLUSION: Discovered challenges highlight unmet needs related to cancer survivor-clinician communication about chronic pain and the absence of a chronic pain management home for cancer survivors, including those requiring long-term opioid therapy. Research evaluating routine pain monitoring and accessible, tailored models of multimodal pain care in survivorship may help to address these challenges.

BACKGROUND: Substantial racial and socioeconomic disparities in metastatic RCC (mRCC) have persisted following the introduction of targeted oral anticancer agents (OAAs). The relationship between patient characteristics and OAA access and costs that may underlie persistent disparities in mRCC outcomes have not been examined in a nationally representative patient population. METHODS: Retrospective SEER-Medicare analysis of patients diagnosed with mRCC between 2007–2015 over age 65 with Medicare part D prescription drug coverage. Associations between patient characteristics, OAA receipt, and associated costs were analyzed in the 12 months following mRCC diagnosis and adjusted to 2015 dollars. RESULTS: 2,792 patients met inclusion criteria, of which 32.4%received an OAA. Most patients received sunitinib (57%) or pazopanib (28%) as their first oral therapy. Receipt of OAA did not differ by race/ethnicity or socioeconomic indicators. Patients of advanced age (> 80 years), unmarried patients, and patients residing in the Southern US were less likely to receive OAAs. The mean inflation-adjusted 30-day cost to Medicare of a patient’s first OAA prescription nearly doubled from $3864 in 2007 to $7482 in 2015, while patient out-of-pocket cost decreased from $2409 to $1477. CONCLUSION: Race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status were not associated with decreased OAA receipt in patients with mRCC; however, residing in the Southern United States was, as was marital status. Surprisingly, the cost to Medicare of an initial OAA prescription nearly doubled from 2007 to 2015, while patient out-of-pocket costs decreased substantially. Shifts in OAA costs may have significant economic implications in the era of personalized medicine.

Background Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is responsible for the most cancer-related deaths in the United States. A better understanding of treatment-related disparities and ways to address them are important to improving survival for patients with metastatic NSCLC. Materials and Methods We performed a retrospective analysis using the National Cancer Database. Included in this analysis were 107,116 patients with metastatic NSCLC who were treated at academic centers (AC), community-based centers (CC), and integrated centers (IC) between 2004 and 2015. The primary end point was overall survival, with comparisons of AC, CC, and IC. Results The survival disparity between AC and CC continued to grow over the study period, from a 5.7% difference in 2-year survival to a 7.5% difference. Treatment at IC was initially associated with survival similar to CC (hazard ratio [HR], 0.93), however, later in the study period treatment at IC improved (HR, 0.74) outpacing the improvement in survival in CC (HR, 0.82) but not to the same degree as the improvement in AC (HR, 0.64). The improvement in survival at IC was noted predominantly in patients with adenocarcinoma (HR, 0.72; P Conclusion Treatment of metastatic NSCLC at IC was associated with improved survival during our study period compared with treatment at CC. This appeared to be histology-dependent, suggesting a treatment-related improvement in survival because over this period newer therapies were preferentially available for adenocarcinoma. Integrating care across treatment facilities might be one way to bridge the growing gap in survival between AC and CC.

Purpose Treatment of advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC) remains a challenging clinical entity occurring predominantly in older patients with limited treatment options. However, real-world treatment patterns, differential cancer center access, and association with outcomes is lacking in nationally representative clinical practice and will provide context for emerging therapies. Materials and Methods We used SEER-Medicare data to identify patients with locally advanced or metastatic UC of the bladder or upper urinary tract diagnosed between 2008 and 2012. We characterized utilization systemic therapy, including first- and second-line chemotherapy. Patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy were excluded; results were stratified by academic versus non-academic setting. Results 3569 patients met study criteria; 48% received some form of chemotherapy within 2 years of diagnosis. Of these, one-third subsequently received second-line chemotherapy. The majority received a regimen including ≥2 agents. Gemcitabine alone or in combination with platinum was the most common first- and second-line treatment. Similar patterns of first- and second-line chemotherapy were observed between patients treated in academic and non-academic centers. Sensitivity analyses of trial-similar patients demonstrated increased utilization (69%). Receipt of platinum doublet as 1st line therapy was less likely in older patients and those with renal disease, and more likely for grade IV disease. Conclusions Roughly half of all Medicare patients with locally advanced/metastatic UC receive systemic therapy regardless of access to academic cancer centers and despite poor oncologic outcomes. Cytotoxic, gemcitabine-based doublet chemotherapy remains the most common treatment. A substantial population of older patients exists for whom alternative, non-cytotoxic, treatment options may be of benefit.

610 Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (IOs) and oral anti-cancer agents (OAAs) have demonstrated survival improvements in randomized trials of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). IOs were approved as second-line mRCC therapy in 2015 (nivolumab), followed by first-line approval in 2018 (ipilimumab/nivolumab). Real-world changes in overall treatment rates and IO usage have not been examined in patients over 65, who are often underrepresented in trials. Disparities in mRCC outcomes have persisted in the era of these novel therapies, raising the question of whether receipt of IOs and OAAs varies by race and ethnicity. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries over age 65 diagnosed with mRCC from 2015 through 2019 who were enrolled in fee-for-service Medicare Parts A, B, and D from 1 year prior to diagnosis through 1 year after presumed diagnosis or until death. We identified our cohort using diagnosis codes for primary or secondary kidney malignancy. We queried claims from 2014-2020, identifying receipt of IO, OAA, or other systemic therapies in the 2 months before through 1 year after diagnosis. Patients that received both IOs and OAAs were categorized as IO if both therapies were started within 60 days; otherwise, patients were categorized by the first therapy received. We assessed trends in treatment from 2015-2019, stratifying by race and ethnicity to compare non-Hispanic White (NHW) patients with Hispanic, Black, Asian, Pacific Islander, American Indian, Native Alaskan, or Other patients (grouped as non-NHW due to limited sample sizes). Results: We identified 15,407 patients who were diagnosed with mRCC between 2015-2019 and met study criteria. Non-Hispanic White patients comprised 84% of our sample. Receipt of IOs increased from 4% of patients in 2015 to 37% in 2019 ( P < .001). Among NHW patients, IO treatment receipt increased from 4% in 2015 to 38% in 2019 ( P < .001); for non-NHW patients, IO receipt grew from 3% in 2015 to 31% in 2019 ( P < .001). OAA usage decreased over time, from 31% of all patients in 2015 to 11% in 2019 ( P < .001). The percent of NHW patients treated with any systemic therapy increased from 51% in 2015 to 60% in 2019 ( P < .001), while there was no significant change for non-NHW patients (51% in 2015 to 54% in 2019; P = 0.27). Conclusions: Among Medicare beneficiaries, receipt of IO therapy for mRCC increased from 2015-2019. Receipt of any systemic therapy significantly increased over time for NHW patients, but not for non-NHW patients. [Table: see text]

Kidney cancer is the fastest-growing cancer diagnosis in the developed world. About 16% of new cases are stage IV, which has a low five-year survival rate. Many patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) are older and may have mild cognitive impairment or dementia (MCI/D). Given prior reports of patients with dementia initiating less cancer therapy and the importance of oral anticancer agents (OAAs) in mRCC treatment, we investigated the prevalence of preexisting MCI/D in patients with mRCC and their OAA use.SEER-Medicare patients were analyzed who were ≥65 years, diagnosed with mRCC between 2007 and 2015, and had Medicare part D coverage. Patterns and predictors of (a) OAA utilization within the 12 months following mRCC diagnosis and (b) adherence (percent of days covered [PDC] ≥ 80%) during the first 90 days following treatment initiation were assessed.Of the 2792 eligible patients, 268 had preexisting MCI/D, and 907 initiated OAA treatment within 12 months of mRCC diagnosis. Patients with preexisting MCI/D were less likely to begin an OAA than those without MCI/D (fully-adjusted HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.38-0.76). Among OAA initiators, a preexisting MCI/D diagnosis did not alter the likelihood that a person would be adherent (adjusted RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.55-1.28).Patients with preexisting MCI/D were half as likely to start an OAA during the year following mRCC diagnosis than patients without comorbid MCI/D. The 90-day adherence of OAA initiators was not significantly different between those with and without preexisting MCI/D. In light of this, clinicians should assess mRCC patients for cognitive impairment and take steps to optimize OAA utilization by those with MCI/D.

Cancer precision medicine depends on high-quality tumor biomarker tests (TBTs) for treatment selection. TBT reimbursement within the United States in the current regulatory environment is not tied to premarket evidence of clinical utility, resulting in a vicious cycle wherein low-level evidence of utility leads to poor reimbursement, thereby impeding investment in developing new, clinically valuable TBTs supported by high-level evidence. Rational, value-based TBT pricing presents many practical challenges. Precise one-to-one mapping of reimbursement to cost savings or cost effectiveness is precluded by an absence of formal cost-effectiveness analyses for many emerging TBTs, and for more established TBTs, it has become clear that such analyses may yield wildly variable, subjective estimates. To address these challenges, we propose a system of tiered reimbursement that rewards development of high-quality TBTs within specific use contexts, supported by strong evidence of analytic validity and clinical utility. We propose three use contexts of TBTs, each defined by its influence on treatment decisions relative to the current standard of care—Opt-Out, Opt-In, and the use of appropriate, alternative, effective therapies (Opt-Alt). By ensuring minimum levels of reimbursement, this system provides a return on investment to encourage and support the research and development needed to generate high levels of evidence for claims of clinical utility for TBTs by using a robust, objective, and value-based system. We believe our proposed evaluation system will serve as a practical starting point to raise the bar for TBT quality and utility, which has the potential to redirect health care dollars from futile or ineffective treatment to investment in the development of high-quality TBTs needed for safe and effective precision cancer care.

In an era of rapid expansion of FDA approvals for oral anticancer agents (OAAs), it is important to understand the factors associated with survival among real-world populations, which include groups not well-represented in pivotal clinical trials of OAAs, such as the elderly, racial minorities, and medically complex patients. Our objective was to evaluate patient- and provider-level characteristics' associations with mortality among a multi-payer cohort of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients who initiated OAAs.This retrospective cohort study was conducted using data from the North Carolina state cancer registry linked to multi-payer claims data for the years 2004 to 2015. Provider data were obtained from North Carolina Health Professions Data System and the National PlanProvider Enumeration System. Included patients were individuals with mRCC who initiated an OAA and survived ≥90 days after beginning treatment. We estimated hazard ratios (HR) and corresponding 95% confidence limits (CL) using Cox hazard models for associations between patient demographics, patient clinical characteristics, provider-level factors, and 2-year all-cause mortality.The cohort included 207 patients with mRCC who received OAAs. In multivariable models, clinical variables such as frailty (HR: 1.36, 95% CL: 1.11-1.67) and de novo metastatic diagnosis (HR: 2.63, 95%CL: 1.67-4.16) were associated with higher all-cause mortality. Additionally, patients solely on Medicare had higher adjusted all-cause mortality compared with patients with any private insurance (HR: 2.35, 95% CL: 1.32-4.18). No provider-level covariates investigated were associated with all-cause mortality.Within a real-world population of mRCC patients taking OAAs, survival differed based on patient characteristics. In an era of rapid expansion of FDA approvals for OAAs, these real-world data underscore the continued importance of access to high-quality care, particularly for medically complex patients with limited resources.

Background As treatments for cancer have improved, more people are surviving cancer. However, compared to people without a history of cancer, cancer survivors are more likely to die of cardiovascular disease (CVD). Increased risk for CVD-related mortality among cancer survivors is partially due to lack of medication adherence and problems that exist in care coordination between cancer specialists, primary care physicians, and cardiologists. Methods/Design The Onco-primary care networking to support TEAM-based care (ONE TEAM) study is an 18-month cluster-randomized controlled trial with clustering at the primary care clinic level. ONE TEAM compares the provision of the iGuide intervention to patients and primary care providers versus an education-only control. For phase 1, at the patient level, the intervention includes video vignettes and a live webinar; provider-level interventions include electronic health records-based communication and case-based webinars. Participants will be enrolled from across North Carolina one of their first visits with a cancer specialist (e.g., surgeon, radiation or medical oncologist). We use a sequential multiple assignment randomized trial (SMART) design. Outcomes (measured at the patient level) will include Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS) quality measures of management of three CVD comorbidities using laboratory testing (glycated hemoglobin [A1c], lipid profile) and blood pressure measurements; (2) medication adherence assessed pharmacy refill data using Proportion of Days Covered (PDC); and (3) patient-provider communication (Patient-Centered Communication in Cancer Care, PCC-Ca-36). Primary care clinics in the intervention arm will be considered non-responders if 90% or more of their participating patients do not meet the modified HEDIS quality metrics at the 6-month measurement, assessed once the first enrollee from each practice reaches the 12-month mark. Non-responders will be re-randomized to either continue to receive the iGuide 1 intervention, or to receive the iGuide 2 intervention, which includes tailored videos for participants and specialist consults with primary care providers. Discussion As the population of cancer survivors grows, ONE TEAM will contribute to closing the CVD outcomes gap among cancer survivors by optimizing and integrating cancer care and primary care teams. ONE TEAM is designed so that it will be possible for others to emulate and implement at scale. Trial registration This study (NCT04258813) was registered in clinicaltrals.gov on February 6, 2020.

Key Points Question Is adoption of prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and genomic testing associated with increased use of observation rather than active treatment for prostate cancer? Findings In this cohort study of 65 530 commercially insured patients with prostate cancer, uptake of prostate MRI and genomic testing was associated with increased use of observation vs active treatment as initial management. Although prostate MRI, genomic testing, and observation increased overall, use was highly varied across hospital referral regions. Meaning The findings of this study suggest that adoption of technologies designed to improve decision-making may lead to perceivable reductions in overtreatment of prostate cancer, Importance The clinical decisions that arise from prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and genomic testing in patients with prostate cancer are not well understood. Objective To evaluate the association between regional uptake of prostate MRI and genomic testing and observation vs treatment for prostate cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants This retrospective cohort study of commercial insurance claims for prostate MRI and genomic testing included 65 530 patients 40 to 89 years of age newly diagnosed with prostate cancer from July 1, 2012, through June 30, 2019. Exposures Patient- and regional-level use of prostate MRI and genomic testing. Main Outcomes and Measures Observation vs definitive treatment for prostate cancer. Patient-level analyses examined the association between receipt of testing or residing in a hospital referral region (HRR) that adopted testing and observation. In regional-level analyses, the dependent variable was the change in the proportion of patients observed for prostate cancer at the HRR level between 2 periods: July 1, 2012, to June 30, 2014, and July 1, 2017, to June 20, 2019. The independent study variables included HRR-level changes in the proportion of men undergoing prostate MRI and genomic testing between these periods, and the models were adjusted for contextual factors associated with prostate cancer care and socioeconomic status. Results This study identified 65 530 patients, including 27 679 in the early period (mean [SD] age, 58.0 [5.9] years) and 37 851 in the late period (mean [SD] age, 59.0 [5.7] years). Use of prostate MRI increased significantly from 7.2% (95% CI, 6.9%-7.5%) to 16.7% (95% CI, 16.3%-17.1%) from the early to late period. Use of genomic testing increased significantly from 1.3% (95% CI, 1.1%-1.4%) to 12.7% (95% CI, 12.3%-13.0%) from the early to late period. Compared with the lowest, the highest HRR quartiles of prostate MRI and genomic testing uptake were associated with an adjusted 4.1% (SE, 1.1%; P, This cohort study assesses the association between the use of prostate magnetic resonance imaging and genomic testing and the initial management of prostate cancer.

399 Background: Metastatic breast cancer (mBC) expresses varied levels of HER2 protein. While HER2+ mBC patients are treated with anti-HER2 therapies, those with lower levels of HER2 expression [HER2-low; immunohistochemistry (IHC) 1+, IHC 2+ with In Situ Hybridization (ISH) -] are currently classified as HER2-negative and are not treated with anti-HER2 therapies. This study aims to estimate population-based prevalence of HER2-low expression among mBC patients and assess healthcare resource utilization and breast cancer specific mortality rates, comparing HER2-low and HER2 IHC 0 patients. Methods: This was a retrospective population-based cohort study of women diagnosed with de novo mBC in North Carolina from 2010-2016, using a multi-payer linkage of insurance claims to state cancer registry data. We examined demographic and clinical characteristics, inpatient, emergency department (ED), and outpatient infusion visits over 12 months and lines of systemic therapy over 24 months by HER2 status and hormone receptor (HR) status. We estimated rates of hospitalization, emergency department (ED) and outpatient infusion visits per 1000-person days as well as hazard ratios for 3-year breast cancer specific mortality. Results: The cohort included 635 mBC patients; 53% (n = 337) met HER2-low criteria and 23.1% (n = 147) were HER2 IHC 0. Compared to HER2 IHC 0 patients, more HER2-low patients had hormone receptor (HR)+ disease (82% vs. 71%, p = 0.008) and were Black (26% vs. 16%, p = 0.029). HER2-low patients also had slightly higher rates of hospitalization (21.4 vs. 18.9, p = 0.003) and ED visits (2.4 vs. 1.8, p = 0.015), but similar rates of outpatient infusion visits (15.7 vs. 16.0, p = 0.684) compared to HER2 IHC 0. There were no differences in mortality due to mBC, comparing HER2 IHC 0 and HER2-low patients (HR: 0.90, 95% CI: 0.68-1.20, p = 0.483). Among HER2-low/HR+ patients, the most common regimens in first line (1L) included endocrine monotherapy (46.6%), chemotherapy (combination or monotherapy) (32.9%), and endocrine therapy with CDK4/6 inhibitors (18.8%). Similar patterns were seen in the second line (2L) with endocrine monotherapy (63.5%), chemotherapy (combination or monotherapy) (25.9%), and endocrine therapy with CDK4/6 inhibitors (9.5%). Most HER2-low/HR- patients received chemotherapy in 1L (88.9%) and 2L (90.9%). Conclusions: About 1 in 2 mBC patients met criteria to be classified as HER2-low. Overall, HER2-low patients experienced slightly higher rates of healthcare utilization than HER2 IHC 0 patients but had similar outcomes. Among HER2-low patients, treatment patterns by HR status were consistent with the standard of care for HER2 IHC 0 patients. There may be potential to improve outcomes among HER-low patients with anti-HER2 therapies demonstrating efficacy across levels of HER2 expression.

BACKGROUND: Dementia and cancer are both more common in adults as they age. As new cancer treatments become more popular, it is important to consider how these treatments might affect older patients. This study evaluates metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) as a risk factor for older adults developing mild cognitive impairment or dementia (MCI/D) and the impact of mRCC-directed therapies on the development of MCI/D. METHODS: We identified patients diagnosed with mRCC in a Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare dataset from 2007–2015 and matched them to non-cancer controls. Exclusion criteria included age

PURPOSE: Availability of targeted oral anticancer agents (OAAs) has transformed care for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Our objective was to identify patterns and predictors of OAA use within 12 months after mRCC was detected to understand real-world adoption of OAAs. METHODS: We used a novel, North Carolina cancer registry–linked multipayer claims data resource to examine patterns of use of five oral therapies among patients with mRCC diagnosed in 2006-2015, with claims through 2016. Patients were required to have 12 months of continuous enrollment before metastatic index date. Log-Poisson models estimated unadjusted and adjusted risk ratios (RRs) for associations between patient characteristics and OAA use. In sensitivity analyses, we used a competing risk framework to estimate adjusted risk differences in OAA use. RESULTS: Our population-based study of 713 patients demonstrated low (37%) OAA use during the first year after metastatic index date among both publicly and privately insured patients, with shifting patterns of use consistent with regulatory approvals over time. Compared with patients age 18-49 years, patients age 70-74 years were half likely to use OAAs (95% confidence limit [CL], 0.34 to 0.78) and patients age 80+ years were 71% less likely to use OAAs (95% CL, 0.17 to 0.50). Patients with two comorbidities (RR, 0.73; 95% CL, 0.55 to 0.98) and those with 3+ comorbidities (RR, 0.68; 95% CL, 0.50 to 0.91) were less likely to receive OAA than those without comorbidities. Patients with higher frailty also had lower OAA utilization (RR, 0.67; 95% CL, 0.52 to 0.85). CONCLUSION: These findings suggest a need to better understand the system-level and provider-level drivers of OAA underuse, as well as OAA adherence and associated survival.

Background: Oncotype DX (ODX) or 21-gene recurrence score genomic testing is used to stratify risk and determine appropriate treatment in women with early-stage breast cancer (BC). Diffusion of ODX by way of physician networks has not been studied. Objective: To determine the association between physician network connections, defined by shared patients, and the use of ODX testing. Methods: SEER-Medicare claims from 2008-2012 were used to identify a cohort of woman with a diagnosis of BC from registry/ICD codes, continuously enrolled in Medicare fee-for-service Part A and B one year prior to and one year following diagnosis. We identify receipt of ODX from the associated CPT code, claim reimbursement, and performing NPI. To look at the influence of network connections on ODX use, we split the study into two time periods: early adoption from 2008-2009, and late from 2010-2012. Medical oncologists with a BC-related claim in the cohort above, and any rendered BC-related service are considered 'connected' if they shared two or more BC patients. Analyses describe these connections and explore the association between connectedness to an early adopting medical oncologist and ODX use in parallel physician and patient-level analyses using generalized linear mixed models with a hospital referral region-specific random effect. Models control for physician and patient-level characteristics where applicable. Results:24,463 women met study criteria; 12,874 were diagnosed with BC in the early adoption time period (1,790 received ODX) and 11,589 were diagnosed in the late period (2,334 received ODX). 2,073 medical oncologists treated these patients from 2008-2009. The mean number of BC patients treated per medical oncologist was 86.8 during the early adoption period, and medical oncologists had a median number of peer connections of 11 (IQR: 7-18). Early adopting medical oncologists had higher numbers of peer connections and higher average patient counts than non-early adopters. A higher percentage of female medical oncologists were early adopters (39%) then male medical oncologists (33%) (p Conclusions: We observe a positive adjusted association between connectedness to an early-adopting physician and ODX prescribing/use in both physician-level and patient-level analyses. These results suggest that provider networks may help diffuse new technologies, and that BC genomic testing is likely to be an area of shared practices between providers. Efforts to increase testing, where appropriate, may benefit from a range of peer-to-peer connection strategies. Citation Format: Rotter J, Wilson L, Greiner M, Pollack C, Dinan M. Shared-patient physician networks and their impact on the uptake of genomic testing in early-stage breast cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2018 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2018 Dec 4-8; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P4-09-08.

10056 Background: Treatment exposure-based risk-stratification oflong-term cancer survivors is needed to allocate tailored health care in survivorship clinics. Investigators from the United Kingdom (UK) developed a treatment exposure-based algorithm that stratifies survivors into low, medium, and high risk groups. Because this algorithm has not been validated, we sought to use the large, diverse population of the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study (CCSS) to validate risk for poor outcomes. Methods: Five-year survivors of childhood cancer (diagnosed between 1970-1999 at < 21 years of age) were categorized into low, medium, and high risk groups based on treatment exposures and diagnoses (Table). Primary endpoints included cumulative health-related (i.e., non-recurrence, non-external) late mortality and cumulative incidence of grade 3-5 chronic conditions (CTCAEv4.03) conditional on reaching age 20 without the outcome. Siblings were a comparison group for chronic conditions. Cox proportional hazards models among survivors estimated hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) adjusted for sex and race. Results: A total of 21,504 survivors were analyzed with a median follow-up of 22 years. Application of the risk stratification algorithm resulted in 3,152 low risk, 6,443 medium risk, and 11,909 high risk survivors. Among those who survived to age 20 without any grade 3-5 conditions, the risk of developing one by age 35 was 12.2% (95% CI 1.0-14.7%), 14.2% (12.8-15.7%) and 25.4% (24.2-26.6%) for low, medium, and high-risk patients, respectively, and 6.9% (6.1-7.9%) for siblings. HRs of grade 3-5 conditions for medium (HR 1.8, 95% CI 1.6-2.1) and high (HR 3.9, 95% CI 3.5-4.4) risk relative to low risk survivors, respectively, were elevated. Cumulative health-related mortality was similarly associated with risk categories; conditional on being alive at age 20, survivors within low, medium, and high risk groups had cumulative incidences of 2.3% (95% CI 1.7-3.1%), 3.3% (2.8-3.9%) and 6.1% (5.6-6.6%), respectively, by age 35. Conclusions: Risk categorizations based on treatment exposures were effective at providing generalized risk stratification within the CCSS with respect to risk of grade 3-5 conditions and health related mortality, particularly for identifying high risk survivors. These risk groups may be useful to physicians in determining follow-up intervals and guiding management and long-term surveillance of these survivors. [Table: see text]

This cross-sectional study investigates demographic data reporting and demographic representation by sex, age, and race/ethnicity in premarketing and postmarketing studies of novel cancer therapeutics., Key Points Question Are the demographic characteristics of patients enrolled in premarketing and postmarketing studies used by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to evaluate the safety and efficacy of novel cancer therapeutics clearly reported and representative of the US cancer population? Findings In this cross-sectional study of 77 premarketing studies and 56 postmarketing studies for FDA-approved cancer therapeutics, there was inconsistent reporting of demographic data and underrepresentation of older adults and Black patients in premarketing and postmarketing studies of cancer therapeutics. Meaning Premarketing and postmarketing studies used by the FDA to evaluate novel cancer therapeutics may not adequately represent the US cancer population., Importance Adequate representation of demographic subgroups in premarketing and postmarketing clinical studies is necessary for understanding the safety and efficacy associated with novel cancer therapeutics. Objective To characterize and compare the reporting of demographic data and the representation of individuals by sex, age, and race in premarketing and postmarketing studies used by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to evaluate novel cancer therapeutics. Design, Setting, and Participants In this cross-sectional study, premarketing and postmarketing studies for novel cancer therapeutics approved by the FDA from 2012 through 2016 were identified. Study demographic information was abstracted from publicly available sources, and US cancer population demographic data was abstracted from US Cancer Statistics. Analyses were conducted from February 25 through September 21, 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures The percentages of trials reporting sex, age, and race/ethnicity were calculated, and participation to prevalence ratios (PPRs) were calculated by dividing the percentage of study participants in each demographic group by the percentage of the US cancer population in each group. PPRs were constructed for premarketing and postmarketing studies and by cancer type. Underrepresentation was defined as PPR less than 0.8. Results From 2012 through 2016, the FDA approved 45 cancer therapeutics. The study sample included 77 premarketing studies and 56 postmarketing studies. Postmarketing studies, compared with premarketing studies, were less likely to report patient sex (42 studies reporting [75.0%] vs 77 studies reporting [100%]; P

Background No population-based studies have examined chronic opioid use among cancer survivors who are diverse with respect to diagnosis, age group, and insurance status. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study using North Carolina cancer registry data linked with claims from public and private insurance (2006-2016). We included adults with nonmetastatic cancer who had no prior chronic opioid use (n = 38 366). We used modified Poisson regression to assess the adjusted relative risk of chronic opioid use in survivorship (>90-day continuous supply of opioids in the 13-24 months following diagnosis) associated with patient characteristics. Results Only 3.0% of cancer survivors in our cohort used opioids chronically in survivorship. Predictors included younger age (adjusted risk ratio [aRR] 50-59 vs 60-69 = 1.23, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.05 to 1.43), baseline depression (aRR = 1.22, 95% CI = 1.06 to 1.41) or substance use (aRR = 1.43, 95% CI = 1.15 to 1.78) and Medicaid (aRR vs private = 1.93, 95% CI = 1.56 to 2.40). Survivors who used opioids intermittently (vs not at all) before diagnosis were twice as likely to use opioids chronically in survivorship (aRR = 2.62, 95% CI = 2.28 to 3.02). Those who used opioids chronically (vs intermittently or not at all) during active treatment had a nearly 17-fold increased likelihood of chronic use in survivorship (aRR = 16.65, 95% CI = 14.30 to 19.40). Conclusions Younger and low-income survivors, those with baseline depression or substance use, and those who require chronic opioid therapy during treatment are at increased risk for chronic opioid use in survivorship. Our findings point to opportunities to improve assessment of psychosocial histories and to engage patients in shared decision-making around long-term pain management, when chronic opioid therapy is required during treatment.

300 Background: Although oral anti-cancer agents (OAAs) have improved outcomes for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), most patients still die from the disease. High quality end-of-life (EOL) care remains a crucial component of optimal care for patients with mRCC, but neither it nor systemic therapy use at EOL have been well characterized in these patients. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study of decedents with mRCC in 2 cohorts analyzed in parallel: 1) patients aged ≥18 years (diagnosed with RCC in 2004 through 2015) drawn from the University of North Carolina Cancer Information Population Health Resource (NC-CIPHR) and 2) patients aged ≥66 years (diagnosed with RCC in 2007 through 2015) from SEER-Medicare. OAA use was measured from date of mRCC diagnosis until 30 days prior to death. We assessed use of hospice in the last 30 days of life as well as established measures of low EOL care quality: receipt of systemic therapy, hospital admission, and ICU admission in last 30 days of life, and death in hospital. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence limits (95%CL) for associations between OAA use, patient and provider characteristics, and EOL care quality in both cohorts. Results: We identified 410 (NC-CIPHR) and 1508 (SEER-Medicare) patients with median ages of 69 and 75 years, respectively. 53.4% and 43.5% of decedents received an OAA in NC-CIPHR and SEER-Medicare, respectively. OAA use was associated with increased systemic therapy in the last 30 days prior to death in both datasets, increased hospice in the last 30 days prior to death in SEER-Medicare, and increased death in hospital in NC-CIPHR. OAA use was not associated with inpatient or ICU admission near EOL in both cohorts. Older patients were less likely to receive chemotherapy, be admitted, or die in the hospital near EOL in both cohorts. Dual-enrolled beneficiaries (Medicare and Medicaid) had decreased likelihood of hospice use in 30 days prior to death (OR = 0.71; 95%CL: 0.54, 0.94) and increased death in hospital (OR = 1.40; 95%CL: 1.02, 1.93) in SEER-Medicare. Conclusions: Patients with mRCC who received OAAs were more likely to receive systemic therapy at the EOL, however, they were also more likely to receive hospice care at EOL in the SEER-Medicare cohort with no differences in hospitalization near EOL. Future directions include characterization of EOL care in the era of immunotherapy treatments. [Table: see text]

Background Inflation-adjusted cancer costs in the United States have increased 40% in the last decade, leading to increasing financial burden on both payers and patients. Patients under 65 show substantial increases in utilization of expensive targeted therapy anticancer agents; however, patients aged 65+ account for the majority of new malignancies. Utilization and cost trends for these emerging agents have not been examined in detail in the Medicare population. Patients and methods Retrospective prevalent cohort analysis of patients 65+ with any stage of invasive lung, breast, colorectal, or prostate cancer, receiving systemic therapy drawn from the United States Medicare 5% fee-for-service sample claims (2005–2015). Yearly trends in utilization and associated costs were modeled with adjustment for inflation, demographics, and comorbidities. Results Among Medicare beneficiaries with fee-for-service and Part D enrollment who were receiving some type of systemic anticancer therapy, there were 9230 patients with colorectal, 32,738 patients with breast, and 16,278 patients with lung cancers identified from 2006 to 2015, and 19,295 patients with prostate cancer from 2009 to 2015. The share of cancer costs to Medicare attributable to targeted therapies, increased dramatically for prostate cancer (1.7% to 19.4%), lung cancer (6.7% to 19.4%), colorectal cancer (11.7% to 22.2%), and breast cancer (15.8% to 25.5%). Although the proportion of patients receiving targeted therapies remained stable, mean per-patient cancer costs increased dramatically from 2006 to 2015 for patients with lung or prostate cancer receiving targeted therapy and for patients with breast cancer receiving non-hormonal targeted therapies. Targeted agents for these cancers showed substantial inflation-adjusted price growth over this time period.

Background: Oncotype DX (ODX) genomic testing to evaluate recurrence risk and benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with ER-positive, node-negative breast cancers was approved for Medicare reimbursement in 2006. We previously examined patient-level factors associated with utilization of ODX testing from 2005-2009 in the SEER-Medicare population; ODX testing occurred most frequently in patients with ER+, node negative disease, with 80% of all tests occurring in patients aged 66-75. In our current study, we examined potential provider factors associated with patient-level ODX testing from 2008 to 2012. Methods: Using a retrospective cohort design, we identified all individuals who had a SEER diagnosis of breast cancer from 2008-2011 and were enrolled in fee-for-service Medicare parts A and B for one year before and one year after diagnosis. We limited our analysis to individuals who had surgical resection of their breast tumor within 4 months of diagnosis and had a breast tumor which was ER+, invasive, and non-metastatic to capture the eligible patient population. Using Medicare claims data linked with the AMA physician dataset (which includes AMA members and non-members), we identified physician characteristics of the primary breast surgeon and medical oncologist including specialty, gender, years in practice, case volume, utilization of chemotherapy, and whether they serve rural populations. For patients with an ODX test, we used the identification on the claim to link to the performing provider. We examined the associations between provider characteristics and patient receipt of ODX testing using unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression models. Adjusted models included patient demographic and clinical characteristics. Results: We identified 24,463 eligible breast cancer patients who received their care from 3172 primary surgeons and 2475 medical oncologists. Of 4124 ODX tests ordered for patients in the study, 70% were ordered by the assigned medical oncologist and 16% were ordered by the breast surgeon. In multivariable regression models, multiple physician characteristics were associated with receipt of ODX testing including having an assigned medical oncologist (OR 2.77, 95% CI 2.00-3.82), having a surgeon with a specialty of surgical oncology (OR 1.20, 95% CI 1.09-1.31), having a female medical oncologist (OR 1.10 95% CI 1.02-1.20). Having a medical oncologist with ≥5 years in practice was associated with lower odds of testing (OR 0.83 95% CI 0.76-0.92). Breast surgery performed at an academic hospital was associated with higher odds of ODX testing (OR 1.11 95% CI 1.02-1.20). Conclusion: The majority of ODX testing for indicated breast cancer patients is ordered by medical oncologists, though surgeons and physicians of other specialties also order the tests in practice. Physician characteristics including gender and time in practice appear to affect a patient's likelihood of receiving ODX testing, creating opportunities for targeting interventions to help women with breast cancer receive optimal care. Citation Format: Dinan MA, Wilson LE, Greiner M, Pollack CE. Provider characteristics and receipt of oncotype Dx testing in women diagnosed with early stage breast cancer using SEER-Medicare data [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 P6-09-10.

Key Points Question Can existing data sets be used to link sociodemographic, clinical, and genomic data into a single population-level data set to investigate disparities in cancer outcomes? Findings This cohort study used first-in-kind linkage of Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results, Medicare, and residual tumor repository data of 3522 women with newly diagnosed screening- vs symptomatic-detected estrogen receptor–positive nonmetastatic breast cancer to demonstrate that screening and socioeconomic factors remain associated with breast cancer outcomes, even after adjusting for clinical, demographic, and genomic factors. Meaning These findings suggest that screening detection, tumor stage, gene expression, and survival are associated phenomena that may offer novel insights when examined together within a single context., This cohort study uses linked registry data to investigate the biological and clinical progression of cancer associated with sociodemographic data and screening vs symptomatic detection in women with nonmetastatic invasive estrogen receptor–positive breast cancers., Importance Understanding interactions among health service, sociodemographic, clinical, and genomic factors in breast cancer disparities research has been limited by a disconnect between health services and basic biological approaches. Objective To describe the first linkage of Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)–Medicare data to physical tumor samples and to investigate the interaction among screening detection, socioeconomic status, tumor stage, tumor biology, and breast cancer outcomes within a single context. Design, Setting, and Participants This population-based cohort study used tumor specimen blocks from a subset of women aged 66 to 75 years with newly diagnosed nonmetastatic, estrogen receptor–positive invasive breast cancer from January 1, 1993, to December 31, 2007. Specimens were obtained from the Iowa and Hawaii SEER Residual Tissue Repositories (RTRs) and linked with Medicare claims data and survival assessed through December 31, 2015. Data were analyzed from August 1, 2018, to July 25, 2021. Exposures Screening- vs symptom-based detection of tumors was assessed using validated claims-based algorithms. Demographic factors and zip code–based educational attainment and poverty socioeconomic characteristics were obtained via SEER. Main Outcomes and Measures Molecular subtyping and exploratory genomic analyses were completed using the NanoString Breast Cancer 360 gene expression panel containing the 50-gene signature classifier. Factors associated with overall and breast cancer–specific (BCS) survival were analyzed using Cox proportional hazards regression models combining sociodemographic, clinical, and genomic data. Results SEER-Medicare data were available for 3522 women (mean [SD] age, 70.9 [2.6] years; 3049 [86.6%] White), of whom 1555 (44.2%) were diagnosed by screening mammogram. In the SEER-Medicare cohort, factors associated with increased BCS mortality included symptomatic detection (hazard ratio [HR], 1.49 [95% CI, 1.16-1.91]), advanced disease stage (HR for stage III, 2.33 [95% CI, 1.41-3.85]), and high-grade disease (HR, 1.85 [95% CI, 1.46-2.34]). The molecular cohort of 130 cases with luminal A/B cancer further revealed increased all-cause mortality associated with genomic upregulation of transforming growth factor β activation and p53 dysregulation (eg, p53 dysregulation: HR, 2.15 [95% CI, 1.20-3.86]) and decreased mortality associated with androgen receptor, macrophage, cytotoxicity, and Treg signaling (eg, androgen receptor signaling: HR, 0.23 [95% CI, 0.12-0.45]). Symptomatic detection (HR, 2.49 [95% CI, 1.19-5.20]) and zip codes with low levels of educational attainment (HR, 5.17 [95% CI, 2.12-12.60]) remained associated with mortality after adjusting for all clinical and demographic factors. Conclusions and Relevance Linkage of SEER-Medicare data to physical tumor specimens may elucidate associations among biology, health care access, and disparities in breast cancer outcomes. The findings of this study suggest that screening detection and socioeconomic status are associated with survival in patients with locally advanced, estrogen receptor–positive tumors, even after incorporating clinical and genomic factors.

Background Improving oral anticancer agent (OAA) initiation and adherence is the important quality‐of‐care issues, particularly since one fourth of anticancer agents being developed will be administered orally. Our objective was to identify provider‐ and patient‐level characteristics associated with OAA initiation and adherence among individuals with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Methods We used state cancer registry data linked to multi‐payer claims data to identify patients with mRCC diagnosed in 2004–2015. Provider data were obtained from North Carolina Health Professions Data System and the National Plan & Provider Enumeration System. We estimated risk ratios (RRs) and corresponding 95% confidence limits (CLs) using modified Poisson regression to evaluate factors associated with OAA initiation and adherence. Results Among the 207 (out of 687) patients who initiated an OAA following mRCC diagnosis and survived 90 days, median proportion of days covered was 0.91. Patients with a modal provider specializing in hematology/medical oncology were much more likely to initiate OAAs than those seen by other specialties. Additionally, patients with a female provider were more likely to initiate OAAs than those with a male provider. Compared to patients treated by providers practicing in both urban and rural areas, patients with providers practicing solely in urban areas were more likely to initiate OAAs, after controlling for patient‐level factors (RR = 1.37; 95% CL: 1.09–1.73). Medicare patients were less likely to be adherent than those with private insurance (RR = 0.61; 95% CL: 0.42–0.87). Conclusions Our results suggest that provider‐ and patient‐level factors influence OAA initiation in patients with mRCC but only insurance type was associated with adherence., While several patient‐level factors have been associated with oral anticancer agent (OAA) initiation and adherence for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) and other cancers, few provider‐level factors have been examined, despite providers being a key component driving OAA access. We examined provider and patient characteristics associated with OAA initiation and adherence among individuals with mRCC. Our results suggest that provider‐ and patient‐level factors are associated with OAA initiation but only patient‐level factors are associated with adherence.

116 Background: It is important to understand how emerging new therapies, such as oral anti-cancer agents (OAAs), diffuse across and can improve outcomes within real-world populations, which include age groups and racial groups not well-represented in clinical trials, such as people older than age 65 and Black patients. Our objectives were to examine whether disparities in mortality persist among patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) receiving OAAs and whether these disparities may be partially explained by patient’s clinical characteristics or provider-level factors. Methods: We used linked state cancer registry data and multi-payer claims data to identify patients with mRCC who were diagnosed in 2004 through 2015 and had initiated an OAA and survived ≥ 90 days after initiating. Provider data were obtained from North Carolina Health Professions Data System and the National Plan & Provider Enumeration System. A patient’s modal provider was the provider most frequently on claims with a diagnosis code of RCC or metastatic cancer between 2 months prior to and 3 months following the index date. We estimated hazard ratios (HR) and corresponding 95% confidence limits (CL) using Cox proportional hazard models to evaluate which patient demographics, patient clinical characteristics, and provider-level factors were associated with 2-year all-cause mortality. Results: The cohort included 207 patients with mRCC. In unadjusted analyses, public insurance (Medicaid or Medicare), de novo metastatic diagnosis, frailty, polypharmacy, and a visit to a skilled nursing facility were associated with increased all-cause mortality. In multivariable models, clinical variables such as frailty (HR: 1.36, 95% CL: 1.11-1.67) and de novo metastatic diagnosis (HR: 2.63, 95%CL: 1.67-4.16) were associated with higher all-cause mortality. Additionally, Medicare-insured patients continued to have higher all-cause mortality compared to privately insured patients (HR: 2.35, 95% CL: 1.32-4.18). None of the provider-level covariates (i.e., specialization, experience, volume, or practice location) investigated were associated with all-cause mortality. Conclusions: Even when adjusting for age, frailty, and comorbidities, Medicare-insured patient had lower overall survival than privately-insured patients. Patient survival did not differ based on modal provider’s characteristics.

6554 Background: Evidence of racial disparity in the use of prostate MRI presents new obstacles to closing recognized gaps in treatment and outcome for black men with prostate cancer. To anticipate strategies for improving equity in cancer care, we examined mediators of racial disparity in the use of prostate MRI surrounding the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Methods: We conducted a multiple mediation analysis among patients with localized prostate cancer in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database between January 2008 and December 2015. We assessed claims for prostate MRI within the six-month period preceding or following diagnosis. We first identified candidate clinical and sociodemographic meditators based on their association with both race and prostate MRI, including the Index of Concentrations at the Extremes (ICE), a measure of racialized residential segregation calculated at the zip code or census tract level. We used non-linear Multiple Additive Regression Trees (MART) models to estimate the direct and indirect relative effects of mediators. Results: We identified 71,597 eligible patients. Black patients with prostate cancer were less likely (5.3%) to receive a prostate MRI when compared with white patients (7.0%; unadjusted odds ratio 0.75, 95% CI 0.67-0.84, p < 0.001). 33.1% (95% CI 20.6-44.9) of the racial disparity in prostate MRI use was attributable to variation in SEER region, 22.5% (95% CI 13.0-30.2) to residence in a high poverty area, 17.2% to residential segregation (ICE group 17.2%, 95% CI 8.1-27.9%), and 13.2% to dual eligibility for Medicaid (95% CI 8.6-20.2%). Clinical and pathologic factors were not significant mediators. After accounting for the mediators, the direct effects of race accounted for 6.2% of the observed disparity in prostate MRI use. Conclusions: Sociodemographic factors including geographic region, and area-level measures of income and residential segregation explain the majority of the observed racial disparity in the use of prostate MRI among older Americans with prostate cancer. The findings underscore that measurable structural factors can be readily identified that underlie racial disparity in access to emerging diagnostic tools for patients with cancer.

Given the potential savings in cost and resource utilization, several algorithms have been proposed to predict Oncotype DX recurrence score (ODX RS) using commonly acquired histopathologic variables. Although it is promising, additional independent validation of these surrogate markers is needed prior to guide the patient management.In this retrospective study, we analyzed 305 patients with invasive breast cancer at our institution who had ODX RS available. We selected five equations that provide a surrogate measure of ODX as previously published by Klein et al. (Magee equations 1-3), Gage et al., and Tang et al. All equations used estrogen receptor status and progesterone receptor status along with different combinations of grade, proliferation indices (Ki-67, mitotic rate), HER2 status, and tumor size.Of all surrogate scores tested, the Magee equation 2 provided the highest correlation with ODX both with regard to raw score (Pearson's correlation coefficient = 0.66 95% CI 0.59-0.72) and categorical correlation (Cohen's kappa = 0.43, 95% CI 0.33-0.53). Although Magee equation 2 provided a way to reliably identify high-risk disease by assigning 95% of the patients with high ODX RS to either the intermediate- or high-risk group, it was unable to reliably identify the potential for patients to have intermediate- or high-risk disease by ODX (66% of such patients identified).Although commonly available surrogates for ODX appear to predict high-risk ODX RS, they are unable to reliably rule out the presence of patients with intermediate-risk disease by ODX. Given the potential benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy in women with intermediate-risk disease by ODX, current surrogates are unable to safely substitute for ODX. Characterizing the true recurrence risk in patients with intermediate-risk disease by ODX is critical to the clinical adoption of current surrogate markers and is an area of ongoing clinical trials.

PURPOSE: Efforts to curb the rising costs of cancer care while improving quality include alternative payment models (APMs), which offer incentives to reduce avoidable spending and provide high-quality and cost-efficient care. The impact of proposed APMs has not been quantified in real-world practice. In this study, we evaluated ASCO’s Patient-Centered Oncology Payment (PCOP) model in existing fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare beneficiaries to understand the magnitude of potential cost savings. MATERIALS AND METHODS: SEER-Medicare data were used to identify women with advanced ovarian cancer diagnosed between 2000 and 2012 who either (1) underwent primary debulking surgery followed by chemotherapy or (2) received neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery. Medicare payments in each cohort were used to compare FFS and PCOP and to estimate the potential for cost savings across health care services received, including outpatient emergency department visits, hospitalizations, and imaging. RESULTS: Three thousand seven hundred seventy-seven primary debulking surgery and 866 neoadjuvant chemotherapy patients were included in the study, with mean total costs of $75,433 and $95,138 in 2016 US$, respectively Most costs were related to chemotherapy or hospitalization. Additional PCOP-related payments would be offset if hospitalizations could be reduced by 11.6% or imaging claims by 88%. CONCLUSION: APMs have the potential to reduce costs of current FFS reimbursement via either a large reduction in imaging or a modest reduction in hospitalizations during treatment of ovarian cancer. PCOP is a reasonable payment structure for oncologists if the additional payments can provide the necessary resources to invest in improved coordination of care.

BACKGROUND: Factors influencing the adoption of genomic testing are poorly understood, which may lead to inequitable and suboptimal treatment in cancer patients. Oncotype DX (ODX) is one of the first and most widely used genomic assays to stratify risk in women with early-stage breast cancer (BC). Physician networks have emerged as a significant and modifiable driver of emerging medical technology adoption. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the association between physician network connections and the use of ODX testing. METHODS: A retrospective study of women diagnosed with BC using SEER-Medicare from 2008–2012 was used. Medical oncologists were “connected” if they shared two or more patients during the early adoption period (2008–2009). Parallel physician and patient-level analyses employed logistic mixed models to determine the impact of being “connected” to an early-adopting oncologist on ODX use in 2011–2012. RESULTS: 24,463 women met study criteria; 12,874 were diagnosed with BC in the early-adoption time period. 2,129 medical oncologists treated these patients from 2008–2009. Medical oncologists had a median number of peer connections of 4 (IQR:2–7). Peer connection to an early-adopting provider in 2008–2009 was associated with a 1.7-fold increase in providers’ adopting ODX (95%CI: 1.1–2.6) and a 1.5-fold increase in their patients receiving ODX (95%CI: 1.1–2.0) in 2010–2012. CONCLUSIONS: Peer connectedness to an early-adopting physician predicts ODX adoption in both physician-level and patient-level analyses. Provider networks may provide a potent and modifiable means to modulate the diffusion of emerging medical technologies. Efforts to increase testing, where appropriate, may benefit from peer-to-peer-based connection strategies.

BackgroundTotal thyroidectomy is more common than lobectomy for low-risk papillary thyroid cancer, despite equipoise in survival. Because postoperative morbidity increases with age, we aimed to investigate how the extent of thyroidectomy affects short-term outcomes among older patients.MethodsUsing the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare database, we identified patients aged ≥66 years who were treated between 1996 and 2011 for papillary thyroid cancer with tumors ≤2 cm in diameter. We used multivariable logistic regression to evaluate the effect of extent of surgery on complications, emergency-department visits, and unplanned readmissions.ResultsAmong 3,341 selected patients, 77.3% were female, mean age was 72.9 years, and tumors averaged 0.8 cm in diameter. A total of 67.6% of patients underwent total thyroidectomy, and 32.4% underwent lobectomy. Total thyroidectomy was associated with complications (odds ratio= 1.99) and readmissions (odds ratio= 1.59; both P < 0.01). Complications were higher in female patients (odds ratio= 1.34), black patients (versus white patients, odds ratio= 1.65), and those with ≥2 comorbidities (vs 0, odds ratio= 1.43; all P < 0.01). Black patients and those with ≥2 comorbidities had more emergency-department visits (odds ratio= 1.50 and 1.92, respectively) and readmissions (odds ratio= 2.19 and 2.29, respectively; all P < 0.01).ConclusionTotal thyroidectomy for older adults with low-risk papillary thyroid cancer may lead to potentially avoidable complications and readmissions, particularly for black and female patients. In many cases, lobectomy may be a safer and less costly alternative.

BackgroundPapillary thyroid cancer (PTC) is the fastest increasing cancer in the United States; incidence increases with age. It generally has a favorable prognosis but may behave more aggressively in older patients. This study aims to describe national treatment patterns for low-risk PTC in older adults.Materials and methodsThe Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare database was used to identify patients ≥66y treated for clinical T1N0M0 PTC between 1996 and 2011. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with extent of surgery (total thyroidectomy versus lobectomy) and radioactive iodine (RAI) administration. Cox proportional hazards modeling was used to estimate the effect of treatment type on disease-specific survival (DSS).ResultsThree thousand two hundred and fourteen patients met inclusion criteria; 77.6% were women, median age was 72y, and mean tumor size was 0.7cm. 42.7% had preoperatively diagnosed PTC (versus incidental). 65.4% underwent total thyroidectomy, 29.0% lobectomy, and 5.6% lobectomy followed by completion thyroidectomy; 33.4% received postoperative RAI. Five- and 10-year DSS were 98.9% and 98.3%, respectively. After adjustment, larger tumor size (1.1-2cm), multifocality, and a preoperative PTC diagnosis were associated with greater odds of undergoing more extensive surgery and receiving RAI (P0.05).ConclusionsMost older adults with PTC underwent total thyroidectomy and a third received RAI; neither treatment improved DSS. In the growing elderly population, less extensive interventions for PTC may reduce morbidity and improve quality of life while preserving an excellent prognosis.

Recombinant human thyroid-stimulating hormone (rhTSH) has been approved for diagnostic (1998) and therapeutic (2008) indications in conjunction with radioactive iodine (RAI) administration post-thyroidectomy. Potential benefits of rhTSH, including avoidance of hypothyroidism side effects and shorter, less costly hospital stays, have not been assessed at the population level within the United States. In this study we quantify utilization, outcomes, and associated costs of rhTSH within the nationally representative Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare patient population.We conducted a retrospective analysis of beneficiaries aged65 years diagnosed within the SEER-Medicare data with differentiated thyroid cancer. Endpoints examined included ( 1) rhTSH utilization in the 2 years post-thyroidectomy (patients diagnosed 1996-2011 [utilization cohort]) and ( 2) comparison of resource utilization and costs as a function of rhTSH receipt in the 30 days prior to and 1 year following therapeutic RAI administration (patients diagnosed 2008-2011 [resource use cohort]). All costs were adjusted to reflect 2013 dollars.A total of 6,482 patients met inclusion criteria, of which, 1,363 (21.0%) received rhTSH. Receipt varied by region and was higher in the South (18%), Northeast (28%), and West (44%) compared to the Midwest (10%), and lower in census tracts in the bottom quartile of high school education rates (odds ratio 0.68, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.55-0.83). rhTSH receipt was not associated with patient sex, age, comorbidities, or stage. Post-therapeutic RAI, 1,444 patients were assessed for resource utilization (2008-2011). The average cost of rhTSH was $905 per patient, with $2,483 being spent on average among patients who received rhTSH in association with therapeutic RAI. rhTSH receipt was not significantly associated with total inpatient days or number of outpatient and emergency department visits. Multivariable analyses showed similar overall costs among patients who did versus did not receive rhTSH (cost ratio [CR] 0.96, 95% CI 0.86-1.09), partially due to increased mean outpatient costs ($5,213 vs. $4,190) being offset by lower inpatient costs ($3,493 vs. $6,143). Overall costs were significantly higher in multivariable analyses among patients with distant metastatic disease (CR 1.92, 95% CI 1.58-2.32) and multiple comorbidities (CR 2.15, 95% CI 1.83-2.53).rhTSH recipients had higher outpatient, lower inpatient, and similar total Medicare payments as those not receiving rhTSH in conjunction with RAI, lending support to the use of rhTSH as a cost-neutral treatment option from the payer perspective.CI = confidence interval; CMS = Centers for MedicareMedicaid Services; CR = cost ratio; HCPCS = Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System; IQR = interquartile range; mCi = millicurie; OR = odds ratio; PET = positron emission tomography; RAI = radioactive iodine; rhTSH = recombinant human thyroid-stimulating hormone; RR = risk ratio; SEER = Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results.

280 Background: Multiple effective oral anticancer agents (OAAs) are now approved for the treatment of patients with advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) based on improvement in overall and progression-free survival in randomized clinical trials. However, real-world adherence and outcomes associated with OAA use in the general mRCC patient population have not been previously investigated. Methods: Retrospective analysis of SEER-Medicare patients with mRCC who received treatment with an OAA between 2007 and 2015. Adherence was assessed as proportion of days covered (PDC) within 3 months of OAA initiation with PDC > 50% categorized as adherent. The impact of initial OAA adherence on overall and disease-specific survival was analyzed landmarked at 3 months after OAA initiation. Results: A total of 905 patients met study criteria, of which 577 (63.8%) were categorized as adherent to initial OAA treatment. Multivariable analysis adjusting for clinical and demographic factors revealed that living within an impoverished neighborhood was associated with a 20% lower likelihood of adherence (OR 0.80, CI 0.68 – 0.93). No association was observed between adherence and race, ethnicity, marital status, or number of comorbidities. In survival analyses OAA adherence was associated with a significant reduction in both overall (HR 0.71, CI 0.58 – 0.87) and RCC-specific mortality (HR 0.68, CI 0.57 – 0.86). Receipt of sunitinib was associated with a significant reduction in overall and disease specific mortality compared with sorafenib. Post-hoc analysis of patients taking pazopanib as their initial OAA (N = 252) demonstrated reduced all-cause mortality if they received the minimum effective dose of 800 mg daily (HR 0.50, CI 0.35 – 0.72) and decreased adherence associated with initial higher out-of-pocket payments (χ2 test, p = 0.003). Conclusions: Socioeconomic factors predict poor adherence to OAA therapy in Medicare beneficiaries with metastatic RCC, which is in turn associated with poor overall and disease-specific survival. Efforts to improve outcomes and mitigate disparities in the general mRCC population should incorporate considerations of OAA adherence and economic factors. Sunitinib and pazopanib appear associated with favorable survival and remain the most commonly used OAAs in this over 65 year old patient population.

279 Background: Availability of targeted oral anti-cancer agents (OAA) has transformed care delivery for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) patients. Our objective was to identify patterns and predictors of OAA use within the 12 months after metastatic RCC was detected to understand the extent of real-world adoption of these treatment advances. Methods: We used a novel, North Carolina, registry-linked multi-payer claims data resource to examine patterns of use of sorafenib, sunitinib, pazopanib, everolimus, axitinib, cabozantinib, and levantinib in a cohort of metastatic RCC patients diagnosed over 10 years (2006-2015, with claims through 2016). Patients were required to have 12 months of pre- and post-metastatic-index-date continuous enrollment. Log-Poisson models estimated unadjusted and adjusted risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence limits (CLs) for associations between patient characteristics and OAA use. In sensitivity analyses, we used a competing risk framework to estimate adjusted risk differences (RD) in OAA use. Results: Our population-based study of 713 patients demonstrated relatively low (37%) OAA use at any time during the 12 months post-metastatic-index date among publicly and privately insured patients, with shifting patterns of use consistent with regulatory approvals over time. Lower OAA use was observed among patients who were older, frailer, and with greater comorbidity burden. Other patient-level characteristics, such as sex, race, rurality and type of insurance were not significant predictors of OAA use. Conclusions: These data underscore the importance of distinguishing clinically appropriate from potentially poor-quality care and warrant additional studies to understand in more depth the system, provider and patient level drivers of these patterns.

Background Our objective was to investigate why early studies regarding adoption of the 21-gene recurrence score (RS) assay did not show an initial reduction in the number of patients with breast cancer receiving real-world chemotherapy. Materials and Methods We addressed 2 sources of confounding suspected in previous studies: (1) the early time frame during the initial adoption phase of the RS assay, and (2) suspected selective, increased administration to patients more likely to have been chemotherapy candidates. To address selective use during initial adoption, we used updated SEER-Medicare data from 2004 and 2011. To address individual selection bias, we examined whether RS test utilization was negatively associated with rates of local chemotherapy use assessed at the hospital referral region level using conventional ordinary least squares and instrumental variable approaches to adjust for selection bias. Results A total of 26,009 patients met inclusion criteria. Assay use was associated with a decrease in absolute percentage use of chemotherapy of 4.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.2%-5.7%), which was even more pronounced in sensitivity analyses limited to later study years (2008-2011), with a decrease of 6.8% (95% CI, 5.3%-8.3%). Instrumental variable models yielded similar point estimates but were insufficiently powered to draw conclusions. Conclusion Receipt of the 21-gene assay was associated with decreased utilization of chemotherapy by 2008.

Purpose Oncotype DX (ODX) is a tumor gene-profiling test that aids in adjuvant chemotherapy decision-making. ODX has the potential to improve quality of care; however, if not equally accessible across racial groups, disparities in cancer care quality may persist or worsen. We examined racial disparities in ODX testing uptake. Methods We used data from the Carolina Breast Cancer Study, phase III, a longitudinal, population-based study of 2,998 North Carolina women who received a diagnosis of breast cancer between 2008 and 2014. Our primary analysis used modified Poisson regression to determine the association between race and whether ODX testing was ordered among two strata: node-negative and node-positive breast cancer. Results A total of 1,468 women with estrogen receptor–positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor-2–negative, stage I or II breast cancer met inclusion criteria. Black patients had higher-grade and larger tumors, more comorbidities, younger age at diagnosis, and lower socioeconomic status than non-black women. Overall, 42% of women had ODX test results in their pathology reports. Compared with those who did not receive ODX testing, women who received ODX testing tended to be younger and have medium tumor size and grade. Our regression analyses indicated no racial disparities in ODX uptake among node-negative patients. However, racial differences were detected among node-positive patients, with black patients being 46% less likely to receive ODX testing than non-black women (adjusted relative risk, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.84; P = .006). Conclusion We did not find racial disparities in ODX testing for node-negative patients for whom ODX testing is guideline recommended and widely covered by insurers. However, our findings suggest that a newer, non–guideline-concordant application of ODX testing for node-positive breast cancer was accessed less by black women than by non-black women, reflecting more guideline concordant care among black women.

In recent years, palliative treatment of prostate cancer metastases has been characterized by the use of more complex radiation treatment, despite a lack of evidence demonstrating a clinical benefit of these technologies in the palliative setting. The impact of adoption of these technologies on the costs of palliative radiation treatment in patients with metastatic prostate cancer remains poorly understood in the general patient population.The study was a retrospective analysis of Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) Medicare data of men aged 66 and older who died from metastatic prostate cancer between 2000 and 2007 and received radiation therapy for bony metastases in the last year of life. Direct costs were obtained from Medicare carrier and outpatient facility payments for all radiation treatment claims and adjusted to 2008 dollars.A total of 1705 men met study inclusion criteria. Total Medicare payments for radiation therapy for bony metastases in the last year of life increased by 44.4% from an average of $2,763 in 2000 to $3,989 in 2007, with the proportion of all payments accrued within hospital-based settings increasing from 48% to 57%. Complexity of radiation therapy techniques over the same period was characterized by use of less simple (30.1% to 23.3%) and more complex (59.9% versus 66.7%) radiation therapy. From 2000-2003 to 2004-2007, the use of shorter treatment courses (≤5 fractions) decreased from 22% to 14%, and the use of single fraction treatment courses decreased by half (6.3% to 2.9%; P≤.001).Between 2000 and 2007, palliative radiation therapy for bony prostate cancer metastases was characterized by the use of more advanced treatment technologies and prolonged radiation treatment courses. Further research investigating barriers to cost-effective palliation is warranted.

106 Background: Although survival among patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has improved with the introduction of targeted therapies, substantial disparities in mRCC survival persist. The purpose of this study was to identify patient characteristics associated with differential adoption of emerging oral anticancer agents (OAAs) and related costs in the management of mRCC. Methods: SEER-Medicare patients diagnosed with mRCC aged 65 years or older from 2007-2015 continuously enrolled in Medicare Part D benefits for at least 1 year after diagnosis or until death were included. Associations between patient-level characteristics and OAA receipt were analyzed using univariable and multivariable log-binomal regression; associations between patient characteristics, OAA receipt, and total, cancer-specific, and OAA-specific costs in the 12 months following diagnosis were modeled as relative cost ratios using generalized linear regression with a gamma link. Reported costs were adjusted to 2015 dollars. Results: 2,792 patients with mRCC met inclusion criteria; 32.4% received an OAA in the 12 months following diagnosis. The majority of patients receiving an OAA used either sunitinib or pazopanib. Receipt increased slightly over the study period from 2007 (31% of patients) to 2015 (37%). In multivariable-adjusted models, patients of advanced age ( > 80 years RR 0.50; 95% CI 0.42-0.60) or residing in the Southern US (RR 0.83 95% CI 0.70-0.98) were less likely to receive OAAs. Married patients were 20% more likely (RR 1.19; 95% CI 1.04-1.37) to receive OAAs. After multivariable adjustment, receipt of OAAs was associated with higher total and cancer-specific costs, as was Hispanic ethnicity. Among patients receiving an OAA, the cost of OAAs to Medicare increased approximately 7% per year (95% CI 4%-9%), while patient out-of-pocket spending for OAAs decreased approximately 10% per year (95% CI 7%-14%). Out-of-pocket OAA costs were consistently lower for Black, Hispanic, and Other patient race/ethnicity categories compared to the White Non-Hispanic category. Conclusions: Patient characteristics including age at metastatic diagnosis, marital status, geographic region, and certain comorbidities are related to the likelihood of receiving OAAs. Future research is warranted to investigate if such differences in OAA use lead to differences in survival.

e24050 Background: Despite treatment advances, patients (pts) with CLL, a common chronic cancer affecting the elderly, often experience adverse outcomes due to their comorbidities and frequent lack of routine health maintenance. We examined osteoporosis/osteopenia (OSTEO) prevalence, rates of bone mineral density (BMD, g/cm2) screening by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA), use of bisphosphonates, and fragility fractures among Medicare pts with CLL. Methods: We identified a cohort of CLL pts >65 years with Medicare fee-for-service between 1/1/2011-12/31/2015 using the Medicare 5% national sample. Controls (5:1) were matched based on age, sex, race, and year of eligibility. Among those with OSTEO, we compared rates of bisphosphonates. Chi-square tests for categorical variables and Wilcoxon Rank-sum tests for continuous variables were used to compare CLL vs controls. Cumulative incidence of BMD screening and fragility fractures were estimated using the cumulative incidence function and compared to controls using Gray tests. For fragility fractures, we compared among subgroups with and without OSTEO. Results: Baseline characteristics are in the Table. Compared to controls, CLL pts were more likely to have OSTEO (p < .001) but less bisphosphonate use (p = .006). The 3-yr cumulative incidence of fragility fractures was higher among CLL pts (8.0%, 95% CI 7.5%-8.6%) vs controls (7.2%, 6.9%-7.4%; p = .002) as well as among those without an OSTEO diagnosis (p = .02). Cumulative 3-yr DXA use was higher among CLL pts vs controls ( < .001); however, DXA 3-yr incidence was lower in CLL pts who had chemotherapy (13.2%, 11.4%-15.4%) vs none (17.0%, 16.2%-17.9%, p = .002). Conclusions: It appears that CLL pts may have a higher risk of osteoporosis and higher rates of fragility fractures than non-CLL individuals. Fragility fractures are higher even in the subgroup of CLL pts without OSTEO, suggesting that pts may be underdiagnosed. [Table: see text]

Introduction Although metastatic NSCLC is widely treated in both academic centers (ACs) and community-based centers (CCs), it is unclear whether outcomes are similar across both settings. A growing variety of chemotherapies and targeted agents for an increasingly histology- and molecular-based treatment strategy could provide an advantage to patients treated in ACs. Using the National Cancer Database, we investigated whether treatment at ACs was associated with a survival advantage in metastatic NSCLC. Methods We conducted a retrospective analysis of the National Cancer Database after the introduction of novel NSCLC chemotherapy agents from 1998 to 2010. The primary outcome was 2-year survival, which was analyzed by using a multivariable regression model controlling for age, year of diagnosis, sex, primary payer, histologic type, facility type (AC versus CC), and an interaction term allowing a time-based comparison of survival between ACs and CCs. Alpha was set to 0.001 because of the size of the data set. Results There were 193,279 patients included in this study. The percentage of patients achieving 2-year survival was higher in ACs versus in CCs in 1998 (11.5% versus 9.2% [+2.3%]), and by 2010, the difference had increased to 17.4% versus 13.1% (+4.3%). Multivariable analysis confirmed a significant relative increase in 2-year survival associated with ACs versus with CCs from 1998 to 2010 (p = 0.0005). A histology-dependent survival difference was also noted in adenocarcinoma versus in squamous cell carcinoma (10.2% versus 9.9% in 1998 [+0.3%], increasing to 17.3% versus 10.1% in 2010 [+7.2%]). Adenocarcinoma survival also varied by treatment facility, with the difference in 2-year survival in ACs versus in CCs increasing from 12.3% versus 9.1% (+3.2%) in 1998 to 20.5% versus 15.5% (+5%) in 2010, with a trend toward significance in our multivariable model (p = 0.005). Conclusions A greater increase in survival was noted in ACs than in CCs over this time period, and it was particularly pronounced among patients with adenocarcinoma versus in those with squamous cell carcinoma. Given the known advances in adenocarcinoma treatment compared with in squamous cell lung cancer over this time period, our study suggests that potential treatment-related disparities may exist between ACs and CCs. Further study will be needed to validate this disparity in health care and address opportunities to improve survival in patients with stage IV NSCLC across treatment settings.