Insurance-Mediated Disparities in Gynecologic Oncology Care

The association between affordable care act implementation and the prevalence of women having ever received a Pap smear

BACKGROUND

To assess if implementation of the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) was associated with changes in the prevalence of women having ever received a pap smear.

METHODS

This study utilised the publicly available Centre for Disease Control National Survey of Family Growth (NSFG) data set. This was a serial cross-sectional study. The comparison groups were defined as women who received cancer screening and prevention interventions prior to full implementation of the ACA (2011-2013) and post full implementation (2017-2019). The primary outcome was self-reporting receipt of a Papanicolaou (Pap) smear. Secondary outcomes included HPV vaccination and mammogram rates. Anonymized patient information was collected from the nationally representative dataset, and analyses were performed utilising STATA 18.

RESULTS

The two study cohorts obtained from the NSFG included women who responded in 2011-2013 (n = 5601), deemed to be 'Pre-ACA implementation' (Pre ACA), and those who responded in 2017-2019 (n = 6141) 'Post-ACA implementation' (Post ACA). The proportion of women who were 21 years and older and ever had a Pap smear in the Pre ACA group (96.0%) was higher than that of the Post ACA group (94.1%) (OR 0.66 (0.49-0.91)). In contrast, HPV vaccination rates rose, and mammogram rates remained stable in the Post ACA period.

CONCLUSION

A decrease in proportion of women ever having had a Pap smear despite implementation of health policies to increase access to preventive measures suggests further interventions to improve access to cervical cancer screening are warranted.

A National Survey of Obstetrics and Gynecology Resident Perspectives on Their Preparedness to Provide Care for Underserved Patients with Gynecologic Malignancies

Obstetrics and Gynecology (Ob/Gyn) residents will encounter, screen for, and diagnose gynecologic malignancies. This survey assessed residents' confidence in providing NCCN Guidelines-based care to Gynecologic Oncology patients of differing racial/ethnic backgrounds and insurance statuses while accounting for residents' backgrounds. An anonymous, novel Qualtrics survey was disseminated to current US Ob/Gyn residents, with multiple-choice questions about subject demographics and Likert scale questions about their readiness to care for diverse patients. Differences in responses between racial groups were analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis Rank Sum test. Differences in responses between ethnic groups were evaluated using the Wilcoxon Rank Sum test. Regardless of their backgrounds, residents feel "somewhat prepared" to care for diverse patients. There was no statistical between ethnic groups regarding confidence in caring for racial minorities or insurance types. Similarly, there was no statistical difference between racial groups regarding caring for racial minorities, but a difference did exist for insurance types (p = 0.027). No significant racial/ethnic differences were found in opinions on trial enrollment or chemotherapy delays, though most residents agreed that racial/ethnic minorities face delays in chemotherapy. Finally, resident ethnicity and race both impacted resident perceptions of difficulties for Medicaid and minority patients in obtaining non-operative gynecologic care (p = 0.044; p = 0.017) and scheduling outpatient appointments (p = 0.016; p = 0.032). Ob/Gyn residents feel prepared to provide NCCN Guidelines-based care to socioeconomically diverse patients with gynecologic malignancies, though differences exist when accounting for residents' racial/ethnic backgrounds. These results reflect the importance of emphasizing on culturally competent care in residency, particularly for patients with cancer.

Financial toxicity in gynecologic oncology: a multi-practice survey

BACKGROUND

Financial toxicity is associated with worse cancer outcomes, including lower survival.

OBJECTIVE

To characterize the prevalence of, and patient risk factors for, financial toxicity among gynecologic oncology patients in a multi-site health system.

METHODS

We identified patients seen in University of Pennsylvania gynecologic oncology practices between January 2020 and February 2022 with a patient portal account. We sent a survey to all alive patients twice between March and April 2022, including the 11-item Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity (COST) tool. We compared differences between patients reporting high (COST score <26) and low financial toxicity (COST score ≥26) in Χ2 and regression analyses.

RESULTS

Of 8239 patients, 6925 had a portal account, and 498 completed the survey for 7.2% response rate. 44% had a COST score <26, indicating financial toxicity. Patients with high financial toxicity were more likely to be younger (mean age 54 vs 60), have cervical cancer (10% vs 4%; p=0.008), be privately insured (71% vs 57%; p=0.003) or have Medicaid (7% vs 3%; p=0.03), or be unemployed (18% vs 3%; p=<0.001), and less likely to be white (79% vs 90%, p=0.003) than those with low financial toxicity. Patients with Medicare were less likely to experience financial toxicity than privately insured patients (RR=0.59, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.95).

CONCLUSION

In this study of patients with gynecologic cancer or pre-cancer, 44% had financial toxicity. Financial toxicity was higher in patients who were younger, did not identify as White, and had private insurance. Targeted measures to address financial toxicity are needed to minimize disparities in patient burden of cancer treatment.

An Intervention-Based Approach to Achieve Racial Equity in Gynecologic Oncology

Racial inequities within gynecologic oncology exist at every step of the cancer continuum. Although the disparities have been well described, there is a significant gap in the literature focused on eliminating inequities in gynecologic cancer outcomes. The goal of this narrative review is to highlight successful, evidence-based interventions from within and outside of gynecologic oncology that alleviate disparity, providing a call to action for further research and implementation efforts within the field. These solutions are organized in the socioecologic framework, where multiple levels of influence-societal, community, organizational, interpersonal, and individual-affect health outcomes.

Insurance and racial disparities in prior authorization in gynecologic oncology

While prior authorization aims to reduce unnecessary care, it may limit or delay medically necessary care. Delays in cancer care can impact survival and are more common in historically-marginalized populations. Our objective was to examine to what extent disparities occurred in prior authorizations for gynecologic oncology. Using electronic medical records, we performed a retrospective review of prior authorization occurrence during gynecologic oncology care and analyzed the association with patient race and insurance in a multivariate regression model. In this cohort of 1,406 patients treated at an academic gynecologic oncology practice, patients with Medicare Advantage and patients of Asian descent were more likely to experience prior authorization. Addressing insurance-mediate disparities, such as in the occurrence of prior authorization, may help reduce disparities in gynecologic cancer care.

Beyond BRCA: Patterns of risk-reducing surgery for non-BRCA, homologous recombination repair pathway gene variant carriers

OBJECTIVE

The real-world management of patients with non-BRCA, homologous recombination repair pathway variants with increased or uncertain risks of ovarian cancer is unknown. The objective was to determine the adoption of risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) for carriers of variants with increased or uncertain risks of ovarian cancer beyond BRCA.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of patients at three hospitals with non-BRCA, homologous recombination repair pathway variants with increased risk (BRIP1, RAD51C, RAD51D) and uncertain risk (ATM, BARD1, NBN, PALB2) of ovarian cancer. Outcomes of interest were adoption of RRSO and factors associated with adoption of RRSO. Wilcoxon rank-sum, chi-square, and logistic regression were performed with p < 0.05.

RESULTS

Of 318 patients, 76 (24%) had pathogenic variants with increased risks of ovarian cancer (BRIP1, 45; RAD51C, 20; RAD51D, 11), and 242 (76%) had variants with uncertain risks of ovarian cancer (ATM, 145; PALB2, 69; NBN, 23; BARD1, 5). Of 64 patients eligible for RRSO by National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) criteria or family history, 31 (48%) underwent RRSO. Among eligible patients who did not undergo RRSO, 24 (73%) were not referred for gynecologic oncology consultation. Older age at testing (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.08, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.03-1.13) and referral to gynecologic oncology (aOR 33.48, CI 8.10-138.39) were associated with increased adoption of RRSO when adjusting for personal and family history of breast and ovarian cancer.

CONCLUSION

Half of RRSO-eligible patients by NCCN criteria beyond BRCA did not undergo RRSO. Opportunities exist for improving education to increase referrals to facilitate RRSO for these patients.

Supply of obstetrician-gynecologists and gynecologic oncologists to the US Medicare population: a state-by-state analysis

BACKGROUND

The supply of obstetrician-gynecologists and gynecologic oncologists across the United States has been described. However, these studies focused on reproductive-age patients and did not assess the growing demand for services to the advanced-age female population.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the supply of obstetrician-gynecologists and gynecologic oncologists who serve the US Medicare population per 100,000 female Medicare beneficiaries, over time and by state and region.

STUDY DESIGN

The supply of obstetrician-gynecologists and gynecologic oncologists was extracted from the Physician and Other Supplier Public Use File database of Medicare Part B claims submitted to the US Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Data were only available from 2012 to 2019. The supply of providers was divided by the number of original female Medicare beneficiaries obtained from the Kaiser Family Foundation; all values reported are providers per 100,000 female beneficiaries by state. Trends over time were assessed as the difference in provider-to-beneficiary ratio and the percentage change from 2012 to 2019. All data were collected in 2021. All analyses were performed with SAS, version 9.4. This study was exempt from institutional review board approval.

RESULTS

In 2019, the average number of obstetrician-gynecologists per 100,000 female beneficiaries across all states was 121.32 (standard deviation±33.03). The 3 states with the highest obstetrician-gynecologist-to-beneficiary ratio were the District of Columbia (268.85), Connecticut (204.62), and Minnesota (171.60), and the 3 states with the lowest were Montana (78.37), West Virginia (82.28), and Iowa (83.92). The average number of gynecologic oncologists was 4.48 (standard deviation±2.08). The 3 states with the highest gynecologic oncologist-to-beneficiary ratio were the District of Columbia (11.30), Rhode Island (10.58), and Connecticut (9.24), and the 3 states with the lowest were Kansas (0.82), Vermont (1.41), and Mississippi (1.47). The number of obstetrician-gynecologists per 100,000 female beneficiaries decreased nationally by 8.4% from 2012 to 2019; the difference in provider-to-beneficiary ratio from 2012 to 2019 ranged from +29.97 (CT) to -82.62 (AK). Regionally, the Northeast had the smallest decrease in the number of obstetrician-gynecologists per 100,000 female beneficiaries (-3.8%) and the West had the largest (-18.2%). The number of gynecologic oncologists per 100,000 female beneficiaries increased by 7.0% nationally during the study period; this difference ranged from +8.96 (DC) to -3.39 (SD). Overall, the West had the smallest increase (4.7%) and the Midwest had the largest (15.4%).

CONCLUSION

There is wide geographic variation in the supply and growth rate of obstetrician-gynecologists and gynecologic oncologists for the female Medicare population. This analysis provides insight into areas of the country where the supply of obstetrician-gynecologists and gynecologic oncologists may not meet current and future demand. The national decrease in the number of obstetrician-gynecologists is alarming, especially because population projections estimate that the proportion of elderly female patients will grow. Future work is needed to determine why fewer providers are available to see Medicare patients and what minimum provider-to-enrollee ratios are needed for gynecologic and cancer care. Once such ratios are established, our results can help determine whether specific states and regions are meeting demand. Additional research is needed to assess the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the supply of women's health providers.

Disparities in Fertility-Sparing Treatment and Use of Assisted Reproductive Technology After a Diagnosis of Cervical, Ovarian, or Endometrial Cancer

OBJECTIVE

To assess the presence of sociodemographic and clinical disparities in fertility-sparing treatment and assisted reproductive technology (ART) use among patients with a history of cervical, endometrial, or ovarian cancer.

METHODS

We conducted a population-based cohort study of patients aged 18-45 years who were diagnosed with cervical cancer (stage IA, IB), endometrial cancer (grade 1, stage IA, IB), or ovarian cancer (stage IA, IC) between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2015, using linked data from the CCR (California Cancer Registry), the California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development, and the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology. The primary outcome was receipt of fertility-sparing treatment , defined as surgical or medical treatment to preserve the uterus and at least one ovary. The secondary outcome was fertility preservation , defined as ART use after cancer diagnosis. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to estimate odds ratios and 95% CIs for the association between fertility-sparing treatment and exposures of interest: age at diagnosis, race and ethnicity, health insurance, socioeconomic status, rurality, and parity.

RESULTS

We identified 7,736 patients who were diagnosed with cervical, endometrial, or ovarian cancer with eligible histology. There were 850 (18.8%) fertility-sparing procedures among 4,521 cases of cervical cancer, 108 (7.2%) among 1,504 cases of endometrial cancer, and 741 (43.3%) among 1,711 cases of ovarian cancer. Analyses demonstrated nonuniform patterns of sociodemographic disparities by cancer type for fertility-sparing treatment, and ART. Fertility-sparing treatment was more likely among young patients, overall, and of those in racial and ethnic minority groups among survivors of cervical and ovarian cancer. Use of ART was low (n=52) and was associated with a non-Hispanic White race and ethnicity designation, being of younger age (18-35 years), and having private insurance.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates that clinical and sociodemographic disparities exist in the receipt of fertility-sparing treatment and ART use among patients with a history of cervical, endometrial, or ovarian cancer.

Using Genomic Variation to Distinguish Ovarian High-Grade Serous Carcinoma from Benign Fallopian Tubes

The preoperative diagnosis of pelvic masses has been elusive to date. Methods for characterization such as CA-125 have had limited specificity. We hypothesize that genomic variation can be used to create prediction models which accurately distinguish high grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSC) from benign tissue.

METHODS

In this retrospective, pilot study, we extracted DNA and RNA from HGSC specimens and from benign fallopian tubes. Then, we performed whole exome sequencing and RNA sequencing, and identified single nucleotide variants (SNV), copy number variants (CNV) and structural variants (SV). We used these variants to create prediction models to distinguish cancer from benign tissue. The models were then validated in independent datasets and with a machine learning platform.

RESULTS

The prediction model with SNV had an AUC of 1.00 (95% CI 1.00-1.00). The models with CNV and SV had AUC of 0.87 and 0.73, respectively. Validated models also had excellent performances.

CONCLUSIONS

Genomic variation of HGSC can be used to create prediction models which accurately discriminate cancer from benign tissue. Further refining of these models (early-stage samples, other tumor types) has the potential to lead to detection of ovarian cancer in blood with cell free DNA, even in early stage.

Medicaid expansion and 2-year survival in women with gynecologic cancer: a difference-in-difference analysis

BACKGROUND

The Affordable Care Act implemented optional Medicaid expansion starting in 2014, but the association between Medicaid expansion and gynecologic cancer survival is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of Medicaid expansion by comparing 2-year survival among gynecologic cancers before and after 2014 in states that did and did not expand Medicaid using a difference-in-difference analysis.

STUDY DESIGN

We searched the National Cancer Database for women aged 40 to 64 years, diagnosed with a primary gynecologic malignancy (endometrial, ovarian, cervical, vulvar, and vaginal) between 2010 and 2016. We used a quasiexperimental difference-in-difference multivariable Cox regression analysis to compare 2-year survival between states that expanded Medicaid in January 2014 and states that did not expand Medicaid as of 2016. We performed univariable subgroup difference-in-difference Cox regression analyses on the basis of stage, income, race, ethnicity, and geographic location. Adjusted linear difference-in-difference regressions evaluated the proportion of uninsured patients on the basis of expansion status after 2014. We evaluated adjusted Kaplan-Meier curves to examine differences on the basis of study period and expansion status.

RESULTS

Our sample included 169,731 women, including 78,669 (46.3%) in expansion states and 91,062 (53.7%) in nonexpansion states. There was improved 2-year survival on adjusted difference-in-difference Cox regressions for women with ovarian cancer in expansion than in nonexpansion states after 2014 (hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% confidence interval, 0.82-0.94; P<.001) with no differences in endometrial, cervical, vaginal, vulvar, or combined gynecologic cancer sites on the basis of expansion status. On univariable subgroup difference-in-difference Cox analyses, women with ovarian cancer with stage III-IV disease (P=.008), non-Hispanic ethnicity (P=.042), those in the South (P=.016), and women with vulvar cancer in the Northeast (P=.022), had improved 2-year survival in expansion than in nonexpansion states after 2014. In contrast, women with cervical cancer in the South (P=.018) had worse 2-year survival in expansion than in nonexpansion states after 2014. All cancer sites had lower proportions of uninsured patients in expansion than in nonexpansion states after 2014.

CONCLUSION

There was a significant association between Medicaid expansion and improved 2-year survival for women with ovarian cancer in states that expanded Medicaid after 2014. Despite improved insurance coverage, racial, ethnic, and regional survival differences exist between expansion and nonexpansion states.

Relative importance of individual insurance status and hospital payer mix on survival for women with cervical cancer

OBJECTIVE

To assess the relative contributions of individual insurance status and hospital payer mix (safety net status) to quality of care and survival for patients with cervical cancer.

METHODS

We used the National Cancer Database to identify patients with cervical cancer diagnosed from 2004 to 2017. Patients were classified by insurance (uninsured/Medicaid/private/Medicare/other) and hospitals were grouped into quartiles based on the proportion of uninsured/Medicaid patients (payer mix) (top quartile defined as safety-net hospital (SNHs) and lowest as Q1 hospitals). Quality-of-care was assessed by adherence to evidence-based metrics. Individual contributions of insurance status and payer mix to survival was assessed with a proportional hazards Cox model.

RESULTS

A total of 124,339 patients including 11,338 uninsured (9.1%) and 27,281 Medicaid (21.9%) recipients treated at 1156 hospitals were identified. Quality-of-care was not significantly different across hospital quartiles. Adjusting for patients' clinical/demographic characteristics, treatment at a SNH was associated with a 14% higher mortality (HR = 1.14; 95% CL, 1.08-1.20) than at Q1 hospitals. Testing for individual insurance, uninsured patients had 32% increased mortality (HR = 1.32; 95% CI,1.26-1.38) and Medicaid recipients 40% increased (HR = 1.40; 95%CI,1.35-1.44) compared to privately insured patients. Examining both payer mix and insurance, only individual insurance retained a significant impact on mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Individual insurance may be a more important predictor of survival than site-of-care and hospital payer mix for women with cervical cancer. There is substantial variation in outcomes within hospitals based on individual insurance, regardless of hospital payer mix.