Medicaid expansion is associated with a higher likelihood of early diagnosis, resection, transplantation, and overall survival in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma

Medicaid expansion and palliative care for advanced-stage liver cancer

BACKGROUND

Medicaid expansion (ME) has contributed to transforming the United States healthcare system. However, its effect on palliative care of primary liver cancers remains unknown. This study aimed to evaluate the association between ME and the receipt of palliative treatment in advanced-stage liver cancer.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with stage IV hepatocellular carcinoma or intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma were identified from the National Cancer Database and divided into pre-expansion (2010-2013) and postexpansion (2015-2019) cohorts. Logistic regression identified predictors of palliative treatment. Difference-in-difference (DID) analysis assessed changes in palliative care use between patients living in ME states and patients living in non-ME states.

RESULTS

Among 12,516 patients, 4582 (36.6%) were diagnosed before expansion, and 7934 (63.6%) were diagnosed after expansion. Overall, rates of palliative treatment increased after ME (18.1% [pre-expansion] vs 22.3% [postexpansion]; P < .001) and are more pronounced among ME states. Before expansion, only cancer type and education attainment were associated with the receipt of palliative treatment. Conversely, after expansion, race, insurance, location, cancer type, and ME status (odds ratio [OR], 1.23; 95% CI, 1.06-1.44; P = .018) were all associated with palliative care. Interestingly, the odds were higher if treatment involved receipt of pain management (OR, 2.05; 95% CI, 1.23-2.43; P = .006). Adjusted DID analysis confirmed increased rates of palliative treatment among patients living in ME states relative to non-ME states (DID, 4.4%; 95% CI, 1.2-7.7; P = .008); however, racial disparities persist (White, 5.6; 95% CI, 1.4-9.8; P = .009; minority, 2.6; 95% CI, -2.5 to 7.6; P = .333).

CONCLUSION

The implementation of ME contributed to increased rates of palliative treatment for patients residing in ME states after expansion. However, racial disparities persist even after ME, resulting in inequitable access to palliative care.

Impact of Medicaid expansion on the multimodal treatment of biliary tract cancer

INTRODUCTION

The impact of Medicaid expansion (ME) on the treatment of patients with cancer remains controversial, especially individuals requiring complex multidisciplinary care. We sought to evaluate the impact of Medicaid expansion (ME) on receipt of multimodal care, including surgical resection, for Stage I-III biliary tract cancer (BTC).

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with BTC between 40 and 65 years of age were identified from the National Cancer Database and divided into pre- (2008-2012) and post- (2015-2018) ME cohorts. Difference-in-difference (DID) analysis was used to determine the impact of ME on the utilization of surgery and multimodal chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy treatment for BTC.

RESULTS

Among 12,415 patients with BTC (extrahepatic, n = 5622, 45.3%; intrahepatic, n = 4352, 35.1%; gallbladder, n = 1944, 15.7%; overlapping, n = 497, 4.0%), 5835 (47.0%) and 6580 (53.0%) patients were diagnosed before versus after ME, respectively. Overall utilization of surgery (OR 1.13, 95% CI 1.02-1.26) and multimodality therapy (OR 1.13, 95% CI 1.01-1.27) increased in states that adopted ME. Utilization of surgery among uninsured/Medicaid patients in ME states increased relative to patients living in non-ME states (∆+10.1%, p = 0.01). Similarly, the use of multimodal treatment increased among uninsured/Medicaid patients living in ME versus non-ME states (∆+6.4%, p = 0.04); in contrast, there were no difference among patients with other insurance statuses (overall: ∆+1.5%, private: ∆-2.0%, other: ∆+3.9%, all p > 0.5). Uninsured/Medicaid patients with BTC who lived in a ME state had a lower risk of long-term death in the post-ME era (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.67-0.98; p = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of ME positively impacted survival among patients who underwent surgical and multimodal treatment for Stage I-III BTC.

Differences in the surgical management of early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma at minority versus non-minority-serving hospitals

BACKGROUND

We examined differences in surgical intervention at minority-serving hospitals versus non-minority-serving hospitals among patients with early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma. We also investigated associations between surgical management and overall survival, stratified by minority-serving hospital status.

METHODS

Patients with early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma, defined as cT1, were identified within the National Cancer Database (2004-2018). The primary outcome was surgical intervention (resection, ablation, or transplantation). The proportion of minority (non-Hispanic Black or Hispanic) patients treated at each facility was determined, and hospitals in the top decile were considered minority-serving hospitals.

RESULTS

A total of 46,703 patients with early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma were identified, of whom 4,214 (9.0%) were treated at minority-serving hospitals. Patients treated at minority-serving hospitals were less likely to undergo surgical intervention than patients treated at non-minority-serving hospitals (odds ratio = 0.87, 95% confidence interval: 0.81-0.94). Minority patients treated at non-minority-serving hospitals were less likely to undergo surgical intervention than White patients (odds ratio = 0.86, 95% confidence interval: 0.82-0.90) and had a further associated decrease in the likelihood of surgical intervention when treated at minority-serving hospitals (odds ratio = 0.81, 95% confidence interval: 0.69-0.94). Regardless of minority-serving hospital status, surgery was associated with improved overall survival. There were no clinically meaningful differences in overall survival between White and minority patients who underwent surgery either at minority-serving hospitals or non-minority-serving hospitals.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma had an associated decrease in the likelihood of surgical intervention when treated at minority-serving hospitals. Minority patients treated at minority-serving hospitals had an associated decrease in the likelihood of surgery, but to a lesser extent when treated at non-minority-serving hospitals. Surgery was associated with improved overall survival regardless of minority or minority-serving hospital status.

The Impact of Medicaid Expansion on Early-Stage Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma at High- Versus Low-Volume Facilities

INTRODUCTION

While Medicaid Expansion (ME) has improved healthcare access, disparities in outcomes after volume-dependent surgical care persist. We sought to characterize the impact of ME on postoperative outcomes among patients undergoing resection for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) at high-volume (HVF) versus low-volume (LVF) facilities.

METHODS

Patients who underwent resection for PDAC were identified from the National Cancer Database (NCDB; 2011-2018). HVF was defined as ≥20 resections/year. Patients were divided into pre- and post-ME cohorts, and the primary outcome was textbook oncologic outcomes (TOO). Difference-in-difference (DID) analysis was used to assess changes in TOO achievement among patients living in ME versus non-ME states.

RESULTS

Among 33,764 patients who underwent resection of PDAC, 19.1% (n = 6461) were treated at HVF. Rates of TOO achievement were higher at HVF (HVF: 45.7% vs. LVF: 32.8%; p < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, undergoing surgery at HVF was associated with higher odds of achieving TOO (odds ratio [OR] 1.60, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.49-1.72) and improved overall survival (OS) [hazard ratio (HR) 0.96, 95% CI 0.92-0.99]. Compared with patients living in non-ME states, individuals living in ME states were more likely to achieve TOO on adjusted DID analysis (5.4%, p = 0.041). Although rates of TOO achievement did not improve after ME at HVF (3.7%, p = 0.574), ME contributed to markedly higher rates of TOO among patients treated at LVF (6.7%, p = 0.022).

CONCLUSIONS

Although outcomes for PDAC remain volume-dependent, ME has contributed to significant improvement in TOO achievement among patients treated at LVF. These data highlight the impact of ME on reducing disparities in surgical outcomes relative to site of care.

Care for Vulnerable Populations with Chronic Liver Disease: A Safety-Net Perspective

Safety-net hospitals (SNHs) and facilities are the cornerstone of healthcare services for the medically underserved. The burden of chronic liver disease-including end-stage manifestations of cirrhosis and liver cancer-is high and rising among populations living in poverty who primarily seek and receive care in safety-net settings. For many reasons related to social determinants of health, these individuals often present with delayed diagnoses and disease presentations, resulting in higher liver-related mortality. With recent state-based policy changes such as Medicaid expansion that impact access to insurance and critical health services, an overview of the body of literature on SNH care for chronic liver disease is timely and informative for the liver disease community. In this narrative review, we discuss controversies in the definition of a SNH and summarize the known disparities in the cascade of the care and management of common liver-related conditions: (1) steatotic liver disease, (2) liver cancer, (3) chronic viral hepatitis, and (4) cirrhosis and liver transplantation. In addition, we review the specific impact of Medicaid expansion on safety-net systems and liver disease outcomes and highlight effective provider- and system-level interventions. Lastly, we address remaining gaps and challenges to optimizing care for vulnerable populations with chronic liver disease in safety-net settings.

The Impact of Medicaid Expansion on Early-Stage Hepatocellular Carcinoma Care

INTRODUCTION

The impact of Medicaid expansion (ME) on hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains controversial, and heterogeneous effects on care processes may relate to sociodemographic factors. We sought to evaluate the association between ME and receipt of surgery in early-stage HCC.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with early-stage HCC between 40 and 64 years of age were identified from the National Cancer Database and divided into pre- (2004-2012) and post- (2015-2017) expansion cohorts. Logistic regression was used to identify predictors of surgical treatment. Difference-in-difference (DID) analysis assessed changes in surgical treatment between patients living in ME and non-ME states.

RESULTS

Among 19,745 patients, 12,220 (61.9%) were diagnosed before ME and 7525 (38.1%) after. Although overall utilization of surgery decreased after expansion (ME, pre-expansion: 62.2% versus post-expansion: 51.6%; non-ME, pre-expansion: 62.1% versus post-expansion: 50.8%, p < 0.001), this trend varied relative to insurance status. Notably, receipt of surgery increased among uninsured/Medicaid patients living in ME states after expansion (pre-expansion: 48.1%, post-expansion: 52.3%, p < 0.001). Moreover, treatment at academic or high-volume facilities increased the likelihood of undergoing surgery before expansion. After expansion, treatment at an academic facility and living in an ME state (OR 1.28, 95% CI 1.07-1.54, p < 0.01) were predictors of surgical treatment. DID analysis demonstrated increased utilization of surgery for uninsured/Medicaid patients living in ME states relative to non-ME states (uninsured/Medicaid: 6.4%, p < 0.05), although no differences were noted among patients with other insurance statuses (overall: 0.7%, private: -2.0%, other: 0.3%, all p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of ME heterogeneously impacted utilization of care in early-stage HCC. Notably, uninsured/Medicaid patients residing in ME states demonstrated increased utilization of surgical treatment after expansion.

The Impact of Medicaid Expansion on Patients with Cancer in the United States: A Review

Since 2014, American states have had the option to expand their Medicaid programs as part of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), which was signed into law by former President Barack H. Obama in 2010. Emerging research has found that Medicaid expansion has had a significant impact on patients with cancer, who often face significant financial barriers to receiving the care they need. In this review, we aim to provide a comprehensive examination of the research conducted thus far on the impact of Medicaid expansion on patients with cancer. We begin with a discussion of the history of Medicaid expansion and the key features of the ACA that facilitated it. We then review the literature, analyzing studies that have investigated the impact of Medicaid expansion on cancer patients in terms of access to care, quality of care, and health outcomes. Our findings suggest that Medicaid expansion has had a positive impact on patients with cancer in a number of ways. Patients in expansion states are more likely to receive timely cancer screening and diagnoses, and are more likely to receive appropriate cancer-directed treatment. Additionally, Medicaid expansion has been associated with improvements in cancer-related health outcomes, including improved survival rates. However, limitations and gaps in the current research on the impact of Medicaid expansion on patients with cancer exist, including a lack of long-term data on health outcomes. Additionally, further research is needed to better understand the mechanisms through which Medicaid expansion impacts cancer care.

Average treatment effect of facility hepatopancreatobiliary malignancy case volume on survival of patients with nonoperatively managed hepatobiliary malignancies

BACKGROUND

Surgical volume-outcome relationships have been described for a variety of procedures. There is scant literature on total institutional volume and outcomes in patients who are nonoperatively managed. We examined the average treatment effect of total hepatopancreatobiliary malignancy case volume on survival outcomes of patients with nonresected hepatobiliary malignancies.

METHODS

We identified patients with hepatopancreatobiliary malignancies [pancreatic adenocarcinoma, pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms, hepatocellular carcinoma, biliary tract cancers] within the National Cancer Database (2004-2018). We determined percentile thresholds based on the total annual hepatopancreatobiliary malignancy case volume. We then identified nonoperatively managed patients with hepatocellular carcinoma or biliary tract cancers. We used inverse probability-weighted Cox regression to estimate the effect of facility volume on overall survival.

RESULTS

We identified 710,988 patients with hepatopancreatobiliary malignancies. Total annual hepatopancreatobiliary malignancy case volume of 32, 71, and 177 cases/year corresponded to the 25th, 50th, and 75th percentiles. A total of 96,420 with hepatocellular carcinoma and 52,627 patients with biliary tract cancers were managed nonoperatively. In patients with hepatocellular carcinoma or biliary tract cancer, treatment at ≥25th, ≥50th, and ≥75th percentile facilities was associated with improved median, 1-, 2-, and 3-year overall survival compared with treatment at lower-percentile facilities. On inverse probability-weighted Cox analysis, treatment at higher-percentile facilities resulted in a lower hazard of death. Consistent findings were observed in patients with early or intermediate/advanced hepatocellular carcinoma or metastatic biliary tract cancers.

CONCLUSION

Patients with nonoperatively managed hepatocellular carcinoma or biliary tract cancer who receive treatment at higher-volume facilities have improved survival outcomes. These data suggest regionalization of care for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma or biliary tract cancer to high-volume centers may improve survival.