Early effect of Medicare Shared Savings Program accountable care organization participation on prostate cancer care

Physician Payment Incentives and Active Surveillance in Low-Risk Prostate Cancer

Importance

Active surveillance in men with less aggressive prostate cancer is inconsistently used despite clinical guidelines. Renumeration generally favors treatment over conservative management and may contribute to the variable adoption of active surveillance, which suggests that value-based payment incentives may promote guideline-concordant care.

Objective

To describe the adoption of active surveillance in low-risk prostate cancer, following the initiation of a novel payment incentive sponsored by a commercial payer to support its use.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cohort study included men with prostate cancer diagnosed between 2015 to 2021 with data registered with the Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MUSIC), a statewide quality-improvement collaborative of practicing urologists. Eligible participants were men with newly diagnosed low-risk or low-volume, favorable intermediate-risk prostate cancer who were eligible for active surveillance. Data were analyzed from January 2015 through December 2021.

Exposure

Health insurance payment incentive established between June 9, 2017, and September 30, 2018, to encourage active surveillance adoption within MUSIC. Upon meeting the target (ie, at least 72% of men with low-risk disease consider or initiate surveillance), the insurer would provide enhanced reimbursement on claims covered by preferred provider organization plans independent of diagnosis.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Active surveillance adoption relative to the preincentive period among men with low-risk prostate cancer. Secondary analyses examined practices by baseline surveillance use and proportion of patients with eligible insurance plans, as well as patients with favorable intermediate-risk disease.

Results

We identified 15 273 patients (median [IQR] age, 65 [59-70] years), of whom 10 457 (68.5%) had low-risk disease. The percentage of these men electing for surveillance increased, from 54.4% in 2015 (729 of 1340 men) to 84.1% in 2021 (1089 of 1295 men). Relative to the preincentive period, the payment incentive was not associated with increased surveillance use among patients with low-risk disease (odds ratio [OR], 0.96; 95% CI, 0.75-1.24) during its application. Secondary analyses similarly did not demonstrate an association between the payment incentive and active surveillance adoption.

Conclusions and Relevance

A payment incentive was not associated with increased active surveillance adoption in men with low-risk prostate cancer relative to the preincentive period. Value-based reimbursement incentives may require tailored implementation that considers existing reimbursement policy and practice characteristics to improve prostate cancer care quality.

National Trends in Management of Newly Diagnosed Prostate Cancer

BACKGROUND

Deciding whether to treat or conservatively manage patients with prostate cancer is challenging. Recent changes in guidelines, advances in treatment technologies, and policy can influence decision making surrounding management, particularly for those for whom the decision to treat is discretionary. Contemporary trends in management of newly diagnosed prostate cancer are unclear.

METHODS

Using national Medicare data, men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer were identified between 2014 and 2019. Patients were classified by 5- and 10-year noncancer mortality risk. Multinomial logistic regression models were fit to assess adjusted trends in management over time. The primary outcome was management of prostate cancer: local treatment (inclusive of surgery, radiation, brachytherapy, or cryotherapy), hormone therapy, or observation.

RESULTS

Local treatment was the most common form of management and stable across years (68%). Use of observation increased (21%-23%, P < .001) and use of hormone therapy decreased (11%-8%, P < 0.001). After stratifying by 10-year non-cancer mortality risk, observation increased among men with low (22.3%-26.1%, P < .001) and moderate (19.9%-23.5%, P < .001) mortality risk. Conversely, use of treatment increased among those with high (62.8%-68.0%, P = .004) and very high (45.5%-54.1%, P < .001) risk of noncancer mortality. These trends were similar across groups when stratified by 5-year noncancer mortality risk.

CONCLUSION

Nationally, use of local treatment remains common and was stable throughout the study period. However, while local treatment declined among men with a lower risk of noncancer mortality, it increased among men with a higher risk of non-cancer mortality.

Association Between Urologist Merit-Based Incentive Payment System Performance and Quality of Prostate Cancer Care

INTRODUCTION

We performed a study to evaluate the association between urologist performance in the Merit-Based Incentive Payment System (MIPS), and quality and spending for prostate cancer care.

METHODS

Medicare beneficiaries with prostate cancer diagnosed between 2017 and 2019 were assigned to their primary urologist. Associated MIPS scores were identified and categorized based on thresholds for payment adjustment as low (worst), moderate, and high (best). Multivariable mixed effects models were used to measure the association between MIPS performance and adherence to quality measures and price standardized spending for prostate cancer.

RESULTS

Adherence to quality measures did not vary across MIPS performance groups for pretreatment counselling by both a urologist and radiation oncologist (low-76%, [95% CI 73%-80%], moderate-77% [95% CI 74%-79%], and high-75% [95% CI 74%-76%]) and avoiding treatment in men with a high risk of noncancer mortality within 10 years of diagnosis (low-40% [95% CI 35%-45%], moderate-39% [95% CI 36%-43%], high-38% [95% CI 36%-39%]). Men on active surveillance managed by high performers more likely received a confirmatory test (44% [95% CI 43%-46%]) compared to those managed by moderate (38% [95% CI 33%-42%]) performers, but not low performers (36% [95% CI 29%-44%]). There was no difference in adjusted spending across MIPS performance groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Better performance in MIPS is associated with a higher rate of confirmatory testing in men initiating active surveillance for prostate cancer. However, performance was not associated with other dimensions of quality nor spending.

Value-based payment models and management of newly diagnosed prostate cancer

OBJECTIVE

To examine the effect of urologist participation in value-based payment models on the initial management of men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer.

METHODS

Medicare beneficiaries with prostate cancer diagnosed between 2017 and 2019, with 1 year of follow-up, were assigned to their primary urologist, each of whom was then aligned to a value-based payment model (the merit-based incentive payment system [MIPS], accountable care organization [ACO] without financial risk, and ACO with risk). Multivariable mixed-effects logistic regression was used to measure the association between payment model participation and treatment of prostate cancer. Additional models estimated the effects of payment model participation on use of treatment in men with very high risk (i.e., >75%) of non-cancer mortality within 10 years of diagnosis (i.e., a group of men for whom treatment is generally not recommended) and price-standardized prostate cancer spending in the 12 months after diagnosis.

RESULTS

Treatment did not vary by payment model, both overall (MIPS-67% [95% CI 66%-68%], ACOs without risk-66% [95% CI 66%-68%], ACOs with risk-66% [95% CI 64%-68%]). Similarly, treatment did not vary among men with very high risk of non-cancer mortality by payment model (MIPS-52% [95% CI 50%-55%], ACOs without risk-52% [95% CI 50%-55%], ACOs with risk-51% [95% CI 45%-56%]). Adjusted spending was similar across payment models (MIPS-$16,501 [95% CI $16,222-$16,780], ACOs without risk-$16,140 [95% CI $15,852-$16,429], ACOs with risk-$16,117 [95% CI $15,585-$16,649]).

CONCLUSIONS

How urologists participate in value-based payment models is not associated with treatment, potential overtreatment, and prostate cancer spending in men with newly diagnosed disease.

Practice Competition and Treatment of Newly Diagnosed Prostate Cancer

OBJECTIVE

To examine the effect of urology practice market competition on use of treatment in men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective national cohort study of 48,067 Medicare beneficiaries with newly diagnosed prostate cancer between 2014 and 2018. The primary exposure was urology practice-level market competition. Markets were established by the flow of patients to a practice using a variable radius approach. Practice level competition was measured annually using the Herfindahl-Hirschman Index. The primary outcome was use of treatment for prostate cancer (ie, surgery, radiation, or cryotherapy) stratified by 10-year risk of noncancer mortality.

RESULTS

Between 2014 and 2018, there was a decrease in the total percent of urologists practicing in small single-specialty groups (49%-41%) with an increase in multispecialty practices (38%-47%). After adjusting for demographic and clinical characteristics, a lower percentage of men underwent treatment in practices with low competition relative to those managed in practices with high competition (70% vs 67.0%, P < .001). Among men with the highest risk of noncancer mortality, those managed in practices in the least competitive markets were less likely to receive treatment relative to men managed by practices in the most competitive markets (48% vs 60%, P-value<.001).

CONCLUSION

Reduction in competition between urology practices is not associated with greater use of treatment in men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer, particularly in those with a high risk of noncancer mortality.

Medicare accountable care organizations: post-acute care use and post-surgical outcomes in urologic cancer surgery

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate association between Medicare accountable care organizations (ACOs) participation of hospitals on post-acute care (PAC) use and spending, and post-surgical outcomes in Medicare beneficiaries undergoing urologic cancer surgeries. Despite increasing prevalence of urologic cancer and surgical care contributing to a large proportion of total health care costs, and recent Medicare payment reforms such as accountable care organizations, the role of ACOs in urologic cancer care has been unexplored.

METHODS

We conducted a longitudinal analysis of 2011-2017 Medicare claims data to compare post-surgical outcomes between Medicare ACO and non-ACO patients before and after implementation of Medicare shared savings program (MSSP). Our outcomes of interest were Post-acute care (PAC) use (overall, institutional, and home health), Skilled Nursing Facility (SNF) length of stay and Medicare spending for SNF patients, 30-day and 90-day unplanned readmissions and complications after index procedure.

RESULTS

Study sample included a total of 334,514 Medicare patients undergoing bladder, prostate, kidney cancer surgeries at 524 Medicare ACO and 2066 non-ACO hospitals. For bladder cancer surgery, Medicare ACO participation was associated with significantly reduced overall post-acute care use, but not with changes in readmission or complication rate. For prostate cancer and kidney cancer surgery, we found no significant association between hospital participation in Medicare ACOs and PAC use or post-surgical outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Hospital participation in MSSP ACOs leads to lower post-acute care use without compromising patient outcomes for Medicare beneficiaries undergoing bladder cancer surgery. Future research is needed to understand longer-term impact of ACO participation on urologic cancer surgery outcomes.

The Effect of Network-Level Payment Models on Care Network Performance: A Scoping Review of the Empirical Literature

Introduction

Traditional payment models reward volume rather than value. Moving away from reimbursing separate providers to network-level reimbursement is assumed to support structural changes in health care organizations that are necessary to improve patient care. This scoping review evaluates the performance of care networks that have adopted network-level payment models.

Methods

A scoping review of the empirical literature was conducted according to the five-step York framework. We identified indicators of performance, categorized them in four categories (quality, utilization, spending and other consequences) and scored whether performance increased, decreased, or remained stable due to the payment model.

Results

The 76 included studies investigated network-level capitation, disease-based bundled payments, pay-for-performance and blended global payments. The majority of studies stem from the USA. Studies generally concluded that performance in terms of quality and utilization increased or remained stable. Most payment models were associated with improved spending performance. Overall, our review shows that network-level payment models are moderately successful in improving network performance.

Discussion/conclusion

As health care networks are increasingly common, it seems fruitful to continue experimenting with reimbursement models for health care networks. It is also important to broaden the scope to not only scrutinize outcomes, but also the contexts and mechanisms that lead to certain outcomes.

The Impact of Health Delivery Integration on Cancer Outcomes

Although integrated health care has largely been associated with increases in prices and static or decreased quality across many disease states, it has shown some successes in improving cancer care. However, its impact is largely equivocal, making consensus statements difficult. Critically, integration does not necessarily translate to clinical coordination, which might be the true driver behind the success of integrated health care delivery. Moving forward, it is important to establish payment models that support clinical care coordination. Shifting from a fragmented health system to a coordinated one may improve evidence-based cancer care, outcomes, and value for patients.

The Development and Validation of Prostate Cancer-specific Physician-Hospital Networks

OBJECTIVE

To develop prostate cancer-specific physician-hospital networks to define hospital-based units that more accurately group hospitals, providers, and the patients they serve.

METHODS

Using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare, we identified men diagnosed with localized prostate cancer between 2007 and 2011. We created physician-hospital networks by assigning each patient to a physician and each physician to a hospital based on treatment patterns. We assessed content validity by examining characteristics of hospitals anchoring the physician-hospital networks and of the patients associated with these hospitals.

RESULTS

We identified 42,963 patients associated with 344 physician-hospital networks. Networks anchored by a teaching hospital (compared to a nonteaching hospital) had higher median numbers of prostate cancer patients (117 [interquartile range {71-189} vs 82 {50-126}]) and treating physicians (7 [4-11] vs 4 [3-6]) (both P <0.001). On average, patients traveled farther to networks anchored by a teaching hospital (49 miles [standard deviation] [207] vs 41 [183]; P <.001). Hospitals known as high-volume centers for robotic prostatectomies, proton-beam therapy, and active surveillance had network rates for these procedures well above the mean. Hospitals known as safety net providers served higher proportions of minorities.

CONCLUSION

We empirically developed prostate-cancer specific physician-hospital networks that exhibit content validity and are relevant from a clinical and policy perspective. They have the potential to become targets for policy interventions focused on improving the delivery of prostate cancer care.

Trends and appropriateness of perioperative chemotherapy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer

INTRODUCTION

Contemporary guidelines recommend cystectomy with neoadjuvant or adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy given with curative intent for patients with resectable muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). However, rates and appropriateness of perioperative chemotherapy utilization remain unclear. We therefore sought to characterize use of perioperative chemotherapy in older radical cystectomy MIBC patients and examine factors associated with use.

METHODS

Using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare data, we identified patients with MIBC diagnosed between 2004 and 2013 and treated with radical cystectomy. We classified patients into 3 treatment groups: cystectomy alone, neoadjuvant, or adjuvant chemotherapy. Chemotherapy was classified by regimen. We then fit a multinomial multivariable logistic regression model to assess association between patient factors with the receipt of each treatment.

RESULTS

We identified 3,826 eligible patients. The majority (484; 65%) received cystectomy alone. Neoadjuvant (676; 18% overall, 69% cisplatin-based), and adjuvant chemotherapy (666, 17% overall, 55% cisplatin-based) were used in similar proportions of cystectomy patients. Over the study period, the odds of receiving adjuvant chemotherapy decreased by 7.5%, whereas neoadjuvant therapy increased by 27.5% (both P < 0.001). There was an increase in use of cisplatin-based regimens in the neoadjuvant setting (35 to 72%, P < 0.001), but not the adjuvant setting. Female gender, lower comorbidity, married status, and lower stage disease were associated with greater odds of receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy (all P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

From 2004 to 2013 use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for MIBC increased while use of adjuvant chemotherapy decreased. Future studies examining barriers to appropriate chemotherapy use, and the comparative effectiveness of neoadjuvant versus adjuvant chemotherapy are warranted.

Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Is Associated with Increased Medicare Spending in Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance

BACKGROUND

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) may improve prostate cancer risk stratification and decrease the need for repeat biopsies in men on prostate cancer active surveillance (AS). However, the impact of mpMRI on AS-related healthcare spending has not been established.

OBJECTIVE

To characterize the impact of mpMRI on AS-related Medicare expenditures.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare files, we identified men ≥66 yr old with localized prostate cancer diagnosed during 2008-2013.

OUTCOME MEASURES AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

With a validated algorithm, we classified men into AS with and without mpMRI groups. We then determined Medicare spending on AS in each group using inflation-adjusted, price-standardized Medicare payments for AS-related procedures (ie, prostate-specific antigen [PSA] tests, prostate biopsies, biopsy complications, and mpMRI). Multivariable median regression compared Medicare spending on AS for men who received mpMRI and those who did not.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

We identified 9081 men on AS with a median follow-up of 45 mo (interquartile range 29-64 mo). Thirteen percent (N = 1225) received mpMRI. On multivariable median regression, receipt of mpMRI was associated with an additional $447 (95% confidence interval $409-487) in Medicare spending per year. We observed greater frequency of AS-related procedures and higher spending for identical procedures (eg, PSA or prostate biopsy) in the mpMRI group than in the non-mpMRI group (all p <  0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Among Medicare beneficiaries on AS, mpMRI is associated with additional annual Medicare spending. Future studies are needed to determine optimal use of mpMRI during AS to maximize value.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) helps physicians determine which prostate cancers are aggressive and which can be monitored safely. We studied whether using MRI during prostate cancer monitoring (also called active surveillance) resulted in increased healthcare spending. There was a modest increase in spending, but this may be worthwhile if the use of MRI allows physicians to monitor prostate cancer more accurately.

Recommended Cancer Screening in Accountable Care Organizations: Trends in Colonoscopy and Mammography in the Medicare Shared Savings Program

PURPOSE

Accountable care organizations (ACOs) are a delivery and payment model designed to encourage integrated, high-value care. We designed a study to test the association between ACOs and two recommended cancer screening tests, colonoscopy for colorectal cancer and mammography for breast cancer.

METHODS

Using the random 20% sample of Medicare claims, beneficiaries were attributed to ACO or non-ACO cohorts on the basis of providers' enrollment in the Medicare Shared Savings Program. An inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to balance patient characteristics between ACO and non-ACO cohorts. A propensity score-weighted, difference-in-differences analysis was then performed using the same provider groups in 2010-pre-ACO-as a baseline. A secondary analysis for older-nonrecommended-age ranges was performed.

RESULTS

Prevalence of colonoscopy in recommended age ranges in ACOs from 2010 to 2014 increased from 15.3% (95% CI, 14.9% to 15.6%) to 17.9% (95% CI, 17.3% to 18.5%). This differed significantly from the change in non-ACOs (difference in differences, 1.2%; P < .001). Among women in ACOs, mammography prevalence rose from 53.7% (95% CI, 53.0% to 54.4%) to 54.9% (95% CI, 54.2% to 55.7%). In contrast to colonoscopy, the difference in mammography prevalence was not significantly different in ACO versus non-ACOs (difference in differences, 0.49%; P < .13). A similar pattern was also observed in older-nonrecommended-age ranges with significant difference in differences (ACO v non-ACO) in colonoscopy, but not mammography.

CONCLUSION

The impact of ACOs on cancer screening varies between screening tests. Our results are consistent with a greater effect of ACOs on high-cost, high-complexity screening services, which may be more sensitive to integrated care delivery models.

Medicare Accountable Care Organizations and Use of Potentially Low-Value Procedures

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs) on the use of vertebroplasty and arthroscopic partial meniscectomy, 2 procedures for which randomized controlled trials suggest similar outcomes to sham surgery and therefore may provide low value. Medicare Shared Savings Program ACOs aim to improve quality and decrease health care spending. Reducing the use of potentially low-value procedures can accomplish both of these goals.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent potentially low-value orthopedic procedures (vertebroplasty and partial meniscectomy) and a control (hip fracture) from 2010 to 2015 using a 20% sample of national Medicare claims. We performed an interrupted time-series analysis using linear spline models to evaluate the count of each procedure per 1000 patients, stratified by ACO participation.

RESULTS

We identified 76 256 patients who underwent arthroscopic partial meniscectomy, 44 539 patients who underwent vertebroplasty, and 50 760 patients who underwent hip fracture admission. Arthroscopic partial meniscectomy rates decreased, vertebroplasty rates remained stable, and hip fracture rates increased for both groups during the study period, with similar trends among ACO and non-ACO patients. After January 1, 2013, ACO and non-ACO populations had similar trends for vertebroplasty (ACO incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 1.15 [1.08-1.23] vs non-ACO IRR = 1.11 [1.05-1.16]), meniscectomy (ACO IRR = 1.06 [1.01-1.12] vs non-ACO IRR = 1.03 [0.99-1.07]), and hip fracture (ACO IRR = 1.08 [1.01-1.14] vs non-ACO IRR = 1.08 [1.03-1.13]).

CONCLUSIONS

ACOs were not associated with a reduction in the frequency of vertebroplasty and arthroscopic partial meniscectomy.

The Accountable Care Organization for Surgical Care

Rising health care costs superimposed on uncertainty surrounding the relationship between health care spending and quality have resulted in an urgent need to develop strategies to better align health care payment with value. Such approaches, at least in theory, work to achieve the dual aims of reducing growth in health care spending and improving population health. To date, surgery has not been prioritized in accountable care organizations (ACOs). Nonetheless, it is critically important to begin to consider strategic and impactful mechanisms through which surgery can be seamlessly woven into innovative population health models.

Variation in prostate cancer treatment and spending among Medicare shared savings program accountable care organizations

BACKGROUND

Accountable care organizations (ACOs) have been shown to reduce prostate cancer treatment among men unlikely to benefit because of competing risks (ie, potential overtreatment). This study assessed whether the level of engagement in ACOs by urologists affected rates of treatment, overtreatment, and spending.

METHODS

A 20% sample of national Medicare data was used to identify men diagnosed with prostate cancer between 2012 and 2014. The extent of urologist engagement in an ACO, as measured by the proportion of patients in an ACO managed by an ACO-participating urologist, served as the exposure. The use of treatment, potential overtreatment (ie, treatment in men with a ≥75% risk of 10-year noncancer mortality), and average payments in the year after diagnosis for each ACO were modeled.

RESULTS

Among 2822 men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer, the median rates of treatment and potential overtreatment by an ACO were 71.3% (range, 23.6%-79.5%) and 53.6% (range, 12.4%-76.9%), respectively. Average Medicare payments among ACOs in the year after diagnosis ranged from $16,523.52 to $34,766.33. Stronger urologist-ACO engagement was not associated with treatment (odds ratio, 0.87; 95% confidence interval, 0.6-1.2; P = .4) or spending (9.7% decrease in spending; P = .08). However, urologist engagement was associated with a lower likelihood of potential overtreatment (odds ratio, 0.29; 95% confidence interval, 0.1-0.86; P = .03).

CONCLUSIONS

ACOs vary widely in treatment, potential overtreatment, and spending for prostate cancer. ACOs with stronger urologist engagement are less likely to treat men with a high risk of noncancer mortality, and this suggests that organizations that better engage specialists may be able to improve the value of specialty care. Cancer 2018. © 2018 American Cancer Society.