Cost of Acute and Follow-Up Care in Patients With Pre-Existing Psychiatric Diagnoses Undergoing Radiation Therapy

Case report: IORT as an alternative treatment option for breast cancer patients with difficulty staying still

Background

Administering radiation therapy to individuals with intellectual disabilities (ID) and psychiatric patients taking antipsychotics poses challenges, especially with whole breast irradiation (WBI) due to difficulty staying still (DSS). In such scenarios, intraoperative radiotherapy (TARGIT-IORT) provides an alternative. Although prior studies have shown its applicability in special cases where WBI may be contraindicated, there is a paucity of literature emphasizing its role in patients with ID and psychiatric conditions who have DSS. Therefore, our case series aims to highlight the applicability of administering TARGIT-IORT in such patients.

Case reports

Four breast cancer patients underwent lumpectomy and TARGIT-IORT. Among them, two patients had ID, with one experiencing a decreased range of motion. The other two had psychiatric disorders, including schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, both manifesting involuntary movements and DSS. Three patients had invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC), and one had invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC). All patients undergoing TARGIT-IORT tolerated the procedure well. Notably, none of the patients exhibited evidence of disease on follow-up.

Conclusion

Our study underscores the potential use of TARGIT-IORT as a viable treatment option for breast cancer patients with intellectual and psychiatric disabilities. Unlike traditional EBRT, TARGIT-IORT offers a single radiation dose, addressing challenges associated with compliance or DSS. Our findings demonstrate positive outcomes and tolerance, especially in patients where standard oncologic procedures are difficult to achieve. TARGIT-IORT could also benefit breast cancer patients with concurrent movement disorders like Parkinson's disease and other movement disorders. Nonetheless, future studies are needed to reinforce its applicability for patients with DSS.

Automated data abstraction for quality surveillance and outcome assessment in radiation oncology

Rigorous radiotherapy quality surveillance and comprehensive outcome assessment require electronic capture and automatic abstraction of clinical, radiation treatment planning, and delivery data. We present the design and implementation framework of an integrated data abstraction, aggregation, and storage, curation, and analytics software: the Health Information Gateway and Exchange (HINGE), which collates data for cancer patients receiving radiotherapy. The HINGE software abstracts structured DICOM‐RT data from the treatment planning system (TPS), treatment data from the treatment management system (TMS), and clinical data from the electronic health records (EHRs). HINGE software has disease site‐specific “Smart” templates that facilitate the entry of relevant clinical information by physicians and clinical staff in a discrete manner as part of the routine clinical documentation. Radiotherapy data abstracted from these disparate sources and the smart templates are processed for quality and outcome assessment. The predictive data analyses are done on using well‐defined clinical and dosimetry quality measures defined by disease site experts in radiation oncology. HINGE application software connects seamlessly to the local IT/medical infrastructure via interfaces and cloud services and performs data extraction and aggregation functions without human intervention. It provides tools to assess variations in radiation oncology practices and outcomes and determines gaps in radiotherapy quality delivered by each provider.

Mental Health and Chemical Dependency Services at US Cancer Centers

BACKGROUND

It is standard of care and an accreditation requirement to screen for and address distress and psychosocial needs in patients with cancer. This study assessed the availability of mental health (MH) and chemical dependency (CD) services at US cancer centers.

METHODS

The 2017-2018 American Hospital Association (AHA) survey, Area Health Resource File, and Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Hospital Compare databases were used to assess availability of services and associations with hospital-level and health services area (HSA)-level characteristics.

RESULTS

Of 1,144 cancer centers surveyed, 85.4% offered MH services and 45.5% offered CD services; only 44.1% provided both. Factors associated with increased adjusted odds of offering MH services were teaching status (odds ratio [OR], 1.76; 95% CI, 1.18-2.62), being a member of a hospital system (OR, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.31-3.07), and having more beds (OR, 1.04 per 10-bed increase; 95% CI, 1.02-1.05). Higher population estimate (OR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.97-0.99), higher percentage uninsured (OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.86-0.95), and higher Mental Health Professional Shortage Area level in the HSA (OR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.98-1.00) were associated with decreased odds of offering MH services. Government-run (OR, 2.85; 95% CI, 1.30-6.22) and nonprofit centers (OR, 3.48; 95% CI, 1.78-6.79) showed increased odds of offering CD services compared with for-profit centers. Those that were members of hospital systems (OR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.14-2.29) and had more beds (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.01-1.03) also showed increased odds of offering these services. A higher percentage of uninsured patients in the HSA (OR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.88-0.97) was associated with decreased odds of offering CD services.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients' ability to pay, membership in a hospital system, and organization size may be drivers of decisions to co-locate services within cancer centers. Larger organizations may be better able to financially support offering these services despite poor reimbursement rates. Innovations in specialty payment models highlight opportunities to drive transformation in delivering MH and CD services for high-need patients with cancer.

Impact of Patient Stage and Disease Characteristics on the proposed Radiation Oncology Alternative Payment Model (RO-APM)

PURPOSE

The proposed Radiation Oncology Alternative Payment Model (RO-APM) released on July 10, 2019, represents a dramatic shift from fee-for-service (FFS) reimbursement in radiation therapy (RT). This study compares historical revenue at Mayo Clinic to the RO-APM and quantifies the effect that disease characteristics may have on reimbursement.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

FFS Medicare reimbursements were determined for patients undergoing RT at Mayo Clinic from 2015 to 2016. Disease categories and payment episodes were defined as per the RO-APM. Average RT episode reimbursements were reported for each disease site, except for lymphoma and metastases, and stratified by stage and disease subcategory. Comparisons with RO-APM reimbursements were made via descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

A total of 2098 patients were identified, of whom 1866 (89%) were categorized per the RO-APM; 840 (45%) of those were aged >65 years. Breast (33%), head and neck (HN) (14%), and prostate (11%) cancer were most common. RO-APM base rate reimbursements and sensitivity analysis range were lower than historical reimbursement for bladder (-40%), cervical (-34%), lung (-28%), uterine (-26%), colorectal (-24%), upper gastrointestinal (-24%), HN (-23%), pancreatic (-20%), prostate (-16%), central nervous system (-13%), and anal (-10%) and higher for liver (+24%) and breast (+36%). Historical reimbursement varied with stage (stage III vs stage I) for breast (+57%, P < .01), uterine (+53%, P = .01), lung (+50%, P < .01), HN (+24%, P = .01), and prostate (+13%, P = .01). Overall, for patients older than 65 years of age, the RO-APM resulted in a -9% reduction in total RT reimbursement compared with historical FFS (-2%, -15%, and -27% for high, mid, and low adjusted RO-APM rates).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicate that the RO-APM will result in significant reductions in reimbursement at our center, particularly for cancers more common in underserved populations. Practices that care for socioeconomically disadvantaged populations may face significant reductions in revenue, which could further reduce access for this vulnerable population.

Performance/outcomes data and physician process challenges for practical big data efforts in radiation oncology

It is an exciting time for big data efforts in radiation oncology. The use of big data to help aid both outcomes and decision-making research is becoming a reality. However, there are true challenges that exist in the space of gathering and utilizing performance and outcomes data. Here, we summarize the current state of big data in radiation oncology with respect to outcomes and discuss some of the efforts and challenges in radiation oncology big data.

Treatment data and technical process challenges for practical big data efforts in radiation oncology

The term Big Data has come to encompass a number of concepts and uses within medicine. This paper lays out the relevance and application of large collections of data in the radiation oncology community. We describe the potential importance and uses in clinical practice. The important concepts are then described and how they have been or could be implemented are discussed. Impediments to progress in the collection and use of sufficient quantities of data are also described. Finally, recommendations for how the community can move forward to achieve the potential of big data in radiation oncology are provided.