Contemporary trends in utilization of metastasectomy in the era of targeted and immunotherapies

BACKGROUND

Metastasectomy is a useful adjunct in the management of metastatic cancer. Widespread adoption of novel targeted and immunotherapies has improved the survival profiles of multiple malignancies, which has potentially altered the role of metastasectomy. This study aimed to characterize trends in metastasectomy across five primary cancers eligible for these therapies.

METHODS

The National Inpatient Sample was used to identify patients who underwent metastasectomy in the United States (2016-2021). Patients with procedure codes for resection of the lung, liver, adrenal gland, brain, or small bowel and concurrent diagnosis codes for secondary malignant neoplasm of that site were included. Subjects were subcategorized by primary malignancy: colorectal cancer, lung cancer, breast cancer, melanoma, or renal cancer. Sample weights were used to produce national estimates, which were incidence adjusted by primary malignancy. Trends in utilization were calculated with average annual percent change (AAPC) and linear regression coefficients.

RESULTS

Colorectal cancer was the most frequent indication for metastasectomy (n = 57,644 cases), followed by lung cancer (n = 55,090 cases), breast cancer (n = 12,616 cases), renal cancer (n = 8427 cases), and melanoma (n = 5658 cases). Utilization of metastasectomy increased over the study period for breast cancer (AAPC, +10.6%; p = .013) and melanoma (AAPC, +8.3%; p = .040) but did not change for lung cancer (AAPC, -1.6%; p = .26), colorectal cancer (AAPC, +0.3%; p = .83), or renal cancer (AAPC, +2.3%; p = .36).

CONCLUSIONS

Between 2016 and 2021, utilization of metastasectomy increased significantly for melanoma and breast cancer. The role of metastasectomy will likely continue to develop as new treatment protocols improve survival profiles for patients with metastatic disease.

Estimating the impact of enhanced care at minority-serving hospitals on disparities in the treatment of breast, prostate, lung, and colon cancers

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to quantify disparities in cancer treatment delivery between minority-serving hospitals (MSHs) and non-MSHs for breast, prostate, nonsmall cell lung, and colon cancers from 2010 to 2019 and to estimate the impact of improving care at MSHs on national disparities.

METHODS

Data from the National Cancer Database (2010-2019) identified patients who were eligible for definitive treatments for the specified cancers. Hospitals in the top decile by minority patient proportion were classified as MSHs. Multivariable logistic regression adjusted for patient and hospital characteristics compared the odds of receiving definitive treatment at MSHs versus non-MSHs. A simulation was used to estimate the increase in patients receiving definitive treatment if MSH care matched the levels of non-MSH care.

RESULTS

Of 2,927,191 patients from 1330 hospitals, 9.3% were treated at MSHs. MSHs had significant lower odds of delivering definitive therapy across all cancer types (adjusted odds ratio: breast cancer, 0.83; prostate cancer, 0.69; nonsmall cell lung cancer, 0.73; colon cancer, 0.81). No site of care-race interaction was significant for any of the cancers (p > .05). Equalizing treatment rates at MSHs could result in 5719 additional patients receiving definitive treatment over 10 years.

CONCLUSIONS

The current findings underscore systemic disparities in definitive cancer treatment delivery between MSHs and non-MSHs for breast, prostate, nonsmall cell lung, and colon cancers. Although targeted improvements at MSHs represent a critical step toward equity, this study highlights the need for integrated, system-wide efforts to address the multifaceted nature of racial and ethnic health disparities. Enhancing care at MSHs could serve as a pivotal strategy in a broader initiative to achieve health care equity for all.

Patient-Reported Outcome and Experience Measures in Advanced Nursing Practice: What Are Key Considerations for Implementation and Optimized Use?

OBJECTIVE

To discuss the opportunities and challenges of implementing patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) within advanced practice nursing services in cancer care.

METHODS

This discussion paper has been informed by an environmental scan of evidence from systematic reviews and primary studies evaluating the use and implementation of PROMs and PREMs. Literature from the contexts of cancer and chronic disease, including nursing and multidisciplinary supportive care literature, has been included.

RESULTS

Advanced practice nurses are well-positioned to evaluate and respond to PROMs and PREMs data; several studies have highlighted improved patient outcomes concerning quality of life, symptom distress, and functional status within nurse-led services. Nevertheless, the implementation of PROMs and PREMs in cancer care and nurse-led services is variable. Previous studies have highlighted implementation challenges, which can hinder comparability and generalizability of PROMs and PREMs instruments. Advanced practice nurses should consider these challenges, including ways to use standardized PROM instruments. Electronic PROMs, while efficient, may exclude individuals at risk of inequity. Complex, lengthy, and frequent administration of PROMs may also overburden people living with or after cancer, with people affected by cancer expressing preference for flexible use in some studies. Therefore, the involvement of people affected by cancer in planning for PROMs/PREMs implementation may overcome this challenge. Finally, organizational considerations in implementation should address financial investments, including initial costs for technology and training and consideration of the operationalization of PROMs within existing infrastructure for the seamless utilization of PROMs data.

CONCLUSION

Despite the potential of advanced practice nursing services to enhance patient-reported outcomes and experiences, variability in the implementation of PROMs and PREMs poses challenges. Use of validated measures, electronic or paper-based instruments, and the preferences of people affected by cancer for the use of PROMs and PREMs must be carefully considered in consultation with end users for successful implementation.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

In planning for the implementation of PROMs and PREMs within nurse-led services, implementation risks may be mitigated through establishing clear guidelines for their use, investment in the development of the required infrastructure, user education, and rigorous implementation processes, including patient involvement in PROMs/PREMs selection.

Factors Associated with the Decision to Decline Chemotherapy in Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

(1) Background: Disparities in cancer treatment and outcomes have long been well-documented in the medical literature. With the eruption of advances in new treatment modalities, the long-existing disparities are now being further uncovered and brought to the attention of the medical community. While social health determinants have previously been linked to treatment disparities in lung cancer, we analyzed data from the National Cancer Database to explore sociodemographic and geographic factors related to accepting or declining physician-recommended chemotherapy. Patients diagnosed with metastatic lung cancer between 2004 and 2016 who declined chemotherapy recommended by their physicians were included in this study. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed. Cox Regression and Kaplan-Meier analyses were performed to look for survival characteristics. (2) Results: 316,826 patients with Stage IV lung cancer were identified. Factors related to a higher rate of refusal by patients included older age > 70, female sex, low income, lack of insurance coverage, residency in the New England region, and higher comorbidity. Patients living in areas with lower education were less likely to decline chemotherapy. (3) Conclusion: Further understanding of the factors impacting treatment decisions would be essential to improve the efficacy of care delivery in patients with cancer and reduce reversible causes of disparity.

How subjective well-being, patient-reported clinical improvement (PROMs) and experience of care (PREMs) relate in an acute psychiatric care setting?

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) are increasingly acknowledged as critical tools for enhancing patient-centred, value-based care. However, research is lacking on the impact of using standardized patient-reported indicators in acute psychiatric care. The aim of this study was to explore whether subjective well-being indicators (generic PROMs) are relevant for evaluating the quality of hospital care, distinct from measures of symptom improvement (disease-specific PROMs) and from PREMs.

METHODS

Two hundred and forty-eight inpatients admitted to a psychiatric university hospital were included in the study between January and June 2021. Subjective well-being was assessed using standardized generic PROMs on well-being, symptom improvement was assessed using standardized disease-specific PROMs, and experience of care using PREMs. PROMs were completed at admission and discharge, PREMs were completed at discharge. Clinicians rated their experience of providing treatment using adapted PREMs items.

RESULTS

Change in subjective well-being (PROMs) at discharge was significantly (p < 0.001), but moderately (r² = 28.5%), correlated to improvement in symptom outcomes, and weakly correlated to experience of care (PREMs) (r² = 11.0%), the latter being weakly explained by symptom changes (r² = 6.9%). Patients and clinicians assessed the experience of care differently.

CONCLUSIONS

This study supports the case for routinely measuring patients' subjective well-being to better capture the unmet needs of patients undergoing psychiatric hospital treatment, and the use of standardized patient-reported measures as key indicators of high quality of care across mental health services.

Changes in Burnout Among Oncology Physician Assistants Between 2015 and 2019

PURPOSE

Burnout has significant implications for the individual provider, the oncology workforce, and the quality of care for patients with cancer. The primary aim of this study was to explore temporal changes in burnout among physician assistants (PAs) in oncology in 2019 compared with 2015.

METHODS

Oncology PAs were surveyed to assess for burnout using the Maslach Burnout Inventory according to the same cross-sectional design of the study performed in 2015. Comparison between oncology PAs in 2015 and 2019 in the prevalence of burnout and personal and professional characteristics was performed.

RESULTS

Two hundred thirty-four participants completed the full-length survey. The participants in 2015 and 2019 were similar in age (41.8 v 40.3 years), sex (88.8% v 86.3% female), number of years as a PA in oncology (9.6 v 10), and percentage involved in academic practice (55.2% v 59.2%). There was a significant increase in burnout in 2019 compared with 2015 with 48.7% of PAs reporting at least one symptom of burnout compared with 34.8% (odds ratio for burnout, 2019 v 2015 = 1.92 [95% CI, 1.40 to 2.65], P < 0.001). The odds of burnout remained higher in 2019 compared with 2015 when adjusted for age, sex, relationship status, practice setting, subspecialty, practice type, and hours worked. Factors associated with burnout in both 2015 and 2019 include the percentage of time spent on patient care, collaborative physician relationship, number of hours worked, and satisfaction with compensation. No new factors associated with burnout emerged in 2019 that were not identified in 2015.

CONCLUSION

The rate of burnout of oncology PAs has significantly increased. Burnout in oncology PAs is multifactorial, and the increase cannot be easily explained. Additional research is needed to better define the drivers of PA burnout.

Internal Medicine Residents' Perception of Cancer Prognosis

Cancer is the second leading cause of death in the USA. Many internal medicine physicians feel uncomfortable having to prognosticate; however, oncology patients often ask this of them. The inability to provide an accurate prognosis could lead a patient to make a treatment decision incongruent with their true wishes. We conducted this study to assess resident and attending physicians' knowledge of cancer prognosis and to establish the source of residents' knowledge. We conducted a prospective, cross-sectional study to assess internal medicine resident and attending physician knowledge of median survival for seven different oncologic case scenarios. Correct answers were defined by results of randomized, phase III trials. Residents were asked to identify the source(s) of information that most significantly influenced their choices. All residents and attending physicians affiliated with the University of Hawaii were invited to participate. A total of 67 of 85 surveys (78.8%) were completed, representing 41 residents and 26 attending physicians. Overall, the respondents correctly estimated median survival 42.6% of the time. The respondents underestimated more often than overestimated median survival (46.3% vs. 14.9%, p = 0.0001). Seventy-three percent of residents cited inpatient experience as influencing their oncologic knowledge. Internal medicine residents and attending physicians correctly estimate median survival of cancer patients less than 50% of the time and often underestimate survival. Inpatient rotations, where residents care for the oncologic patients experiencing significant complications of their cancer and treatment, may be giving them an unbalanced perspective on cancer prognosis.

Closing the Rural Cancer Care Gap: Three Institutional Approaches

Patients in rural areas face limited access to medical and oncology providers, long travel times, and low recruitment to clinical trials, all of which affect quality of care and health outcomes. Rural counties also have high rates of cancer-related mortality and other negative treatment outcomes. On April 10, 2019, ASCO hosted Closing the Rural Cancer Care Gap, the second event in its State of Cancer Care in America series. The event focused on two aspects of rural cancer care: a review of the major issues and concerns in delivering rural cancer care and a discussion of creative solutions to address rural-nonrural disparities. This article draws from the event and supporting literature to summarize the challenges to delivering high-quality care in rural communities, update ASCO’s workforce data on the geographic distribution of oncologists, and highlight 3 institutional approaches to addressing these challenges in diverse rural settings. The experience of the 3 institutions featured in the article suggests that increasing rural patients’ access to care requires expanding services and decreasing travel distances, mitigating financial burdens when insurance coverage is limited, opening avenues to clinical trial participation, and creating partnerships between providers and community leaders to address local gaps in care. Because the characteristics of rural communities, health care resources, and patient populations are not homogeneous, rural health disparities require local solutions that are based on community needs, available resources, and trusting and collaborative partnerships.

Cardiovascular disease burden in adult patients with cancer: An 11-year nationwide population-based cohort study

BACKGROUND

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is an important cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with cancer. However, the real-world CVD burden of adult cancer patients has not been well established. This study aimed to evaluate the prevalence and mortality of pre-existing and new-onset CVD in patients with cancers.

METHODS

We analysed the prevalence and mortality of pre-existing and new-onset CVD in 41,034 adult patients with ten common solid cancers in a single payer system using data from the Korean National Health Insurance Service-National Sample Cohort from 2002 to 2013.

RESULTS

When all types of cancer were included, 11.3% (n = 4647) of patients had pre-existing CVD when they were diagnosed with cancer. After excluding patients with pre-existing CVD, 15.7% of cancer patients (n = 5703) were newly diagnosed with CVD during the follow-up period (median 68 months). Both pre-existing and new-onset CVD were associated with increased risk of overall mortality and 5-year mortality. Multivariate analysis to predict all-cause mortality indicated both pre-existing and new-onset CVD, male sex, old age, prior history of diabetes or chronic kidney disease, suburban residential area, and low-income status as significant factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Eleven percent of cancer patients had pre-existing CVD at the time of cancer diagnosis, and about 16% of cancer patients without pre-existing CVD were newly diagnosed with CVD, mostly within 5 years after the cancer diagnosis. Proper management of pre-existing CVD is necessary and pre-emptive prevention of new-onset CVD may alter treatment options and outcomes.

Automated delineation of cancer service areas in northeast region of the United States: A network optimization approach

OBJECTIVE

Derivation of service areas is an important methodology for evaluating healthcare variation, which can be refined to more robust, condition-specific, and empirically-based automated regions, using cancer service areas as an exemplar.

DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING

Medicare claims (2014-2015) for the nine-state Northeast region were used to develop a ZIP-code-level origin-destination matrix for cancer services (surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation). This population-based study followed a utilization-based approach to delineate cancer service areas (CSAs) to develop and test an improved methodology for small area analyses.

DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS

Using the cancer service origin-destination matrix, we estimated travel time between all ZIP-code pairs, and applied a community detection method to delineate CSAs, which were tested for localization, modularity, and compactness, and compared to existing service areas.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Delineating 17 CSAs in the Northeast yielded optimal parameters, with a mean localization index (LI) of 0.88 (min: 0.60, max: 0.98), compared to the 43 Hospital Referral Regions (HRR) in the region (mean LI: 0.68; min: 0.18, max: 0.97). Modularity and compactness were similarly improved for CSAs vs. HRRs.

CONCLUSIONS

Deriving cancer-specific service areas with an automated algorithm that uses empirical and network methods showed improved performance on geographic measures compared to more general, hospital-based service areas.

Personalized Approach to Cancer Treatment-Related Cardiomyopathy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Cancer treatment-related cardiotoxicity (CTRC) represents a significant cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. The purpose of our review is to summarize the epidemiology, natural history, and pathophysiology of cardiotoxicity-related to cancer treatment. We also summarize appropriate screening, surveillance, and management of CTRC. While cardiotoxicity is characteristically associated with anthracyclines, HER2-B antagonists, and radiation therapy (XRT), there is growing recognition of toxicity with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), tyrosine kinase inhibitors, and proteasome inhibitors.

RECENT FINDINGS

Patients at risk for cardiotoxicity should be screened based on available guidelines, generally with serial echocardiograms. The role of medical heart failure (HF) therapies is controversial in patients with asymptomatic left ventricular dysfunction but may be considered in some instances. Once symptomatic HF has developed, treatment should be in accordance with ACC/AHA guidelines. The goal in caring for patients receiving cancer treatment is to optimize cardiac function and prevent interruptions in potentially lifesaving cancer treatment.

Prevalence and scope of advanced practice provider oncology care among Medicare beneficiaries with breast cancer

PURPOSE

Advanced practice providers (APPs) have increasingly become members of the oncology care team. Little is known about the scope of care that APPs are performing nationally. We determined the prevalence and extent of APP practice and examined associations between APP care and scope of practice regulations, phase of cancer care, and patient characteristics.

METHODS

We performed an observational study among women identified from Medicare claims as having had incident breast cancer in 2008 with claims through 2012. Outpatient APP care included at least one APP independently billing for cancer visits/services. APP scope of practice was classified as independent, reduced, or restricted. A logistic regression model with patient-level random effects was estimated to determine the probability of receiving APP care at any point during active treatment or surveillance.

RESULTS

Among 42,550 women, 6583 (15%) received APP care, of whom 83% had APP care during the surveillance phase and 41% during the treatment phase. Among women who received APP care during a given year of surveillance, the overall proportion of APP-billed clinic visits increased with each additional year of surveillance (36% in Year 1 to 61% in Year 4). Logistic regression model results indicate that women were more likely to receive APP care if they were younger, black, healthier, had higher income status, or lived in a rural county or state with independent APP scope of practice.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides important clinical and policy-relevant findings regarding national practice patterns of APP oncology care. Among Medicare beneficiaries with incident breast cancer, 15% received outpatient oncology care that included APPs who were billing; most of this care was during the surveillance phase. Future studies are needed to define the degree of APP oncology practice and training that maximizes patient access and satisfaction while optimizing the efficiency and quality of cancer care.

Measuring the Impact of Academic Cancer Network Development on Clinical Integration, Quality of Care, and Patient Satisfaction

PURPOSE

Many US academic centers have acquired community practices to expand their clinical care and research footprint. The objective of this assessment was to determine whether the acquisition and integration of community oncology practices by Yale/Smilow Cancer Hospital improved outcomes in quality of care, disease team integration, clinical trial accrual, and patient satisfaction at network practice sites.

METHODS

We evaluated quality of care by testing the hypothesis that core Quality Oncology Practice Initiative measures at network sites that were acquired in 2012 were significantly different after their 2016 integration into the network. Clinical and research integration were measured using the number of tumor board case presentations and total accruals in clinical trials. We used Press-Ganey scores to measure patient satisfaction pre- and postintegration.

RESULTS

Mean Quality Oncology Practice Initiative scores at Smilow Care Centers were significantly higher in 2016 than in 2012 for core measures related to improvement in tumor staging ( z = 1.33; P < .05), signed consent and documentation plans for antineoplastic treatment ( z = 2.69; P < .01; and z = 2.36; P < .05, respectively), and appropriately quantifying and addressing pain during office visits ( z = 2.95; P < .05; and z = 3.1; P < .01, respectively). A total of 493 cases were presented by care center physicians at the tumor board in 2017 compared with 45 presented in 2013. Compared with 2012, Smilow Care Center clinical trial accrual increased from 25 to 170 patients in 2017. Last, patient satisfaction has remained at greater than the 90th percentile pre- and postintegration.

CONCLUSION

The process of integration facilitates the ability to standardize cancer practice and provides a platform for quality improvement.

Impact of an Interprofessional Primary Care Training on Fear of Cancer Recurrence on Clinicians' Knowledge, Self-Efficacy, Anticipated Practice Behaviors, and Attitudes Toward Survivorship Care

There are an estimated 15.5 million cancer survivors in the United States, with numbers projected to increase. Many cancer survivors are receiving survivorship care in primary care settings, yet primary care providers report a need for additional training on addressing medical and psychosocial concerns of cancer survivors. This paper presents findings from a pilot study on the effectiveness of a novel training for interprofessional primary care providers on the clinically significant issue of fear of cancer recurrence. The on-site training was provided to a total of 46 participants, including physicians (61%), physician assistants (11%), nurse practitioners (7%), nurses (17%), and social workers (4%) in six different primary care practices. The average number of years of professional experience was 18.8, with standard deviation of 10.9. Results of paired-sample t tests indicated that the training increased knowledge and self-efficacy of providers in identifying and addressing FCR. The training was well-received by participants, who had high confidence in implementing practice behavior changes, although they also identified barriers. Results suggest the feasibility of a brief training for continuing education and have implications for models of care delivery in cancer survivorship.

Priority setting in head and neck oncology in low-resource environments

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Most information about priority setting comes from developed countries. In low-resource settings, many factors should be considered to select the best candidate for the treatments that are available. The physician is always under pressure to obtain better results in spite of the lower quantity of resources. This exposes physicians to daily ethical dilemmas and increases their anxiety and burnout.

RECENT FINDINGS

Most low-resource settings have restrictions in major treatments, and the number of specialized centers that have all the services is low. The surgeon has to navigate through the system as a patient advocate, taking the responsibilities of other health system actors, has to 'negotiate' to design a treatment based on outdated results or to wait for new results and has to decide whether to start or to wait for other treatments to be ready to comply with protocol recommendations.

SUMMARY

The surgeons face the dilemma of offering the best treatment with scarce resources but with a higher possibility of completion. Finally, we must do the best we can with what we have.

Time to initial cancer treatment in the United States and association with survival over time: An observational study

Background

Delays in time to treatment initiation (TTI) for new cancer diagnoses cause patient distress and may adversely affect outcomes. We investigated trends in TTI for common solid tumors treated with curative intent, determinants of increased TTI and association with overall survival.

Methods and findings

We utilized prospective data from the National Cancer Database for newly diagnosed United States patients with early-stage breast, prostate, lung, colorectal, renal and pancreas cancers from 2004–13. TTI was defined as days from diagnosis to first treatment (surgery, systemic or radiation therapy). Negative binomial regression and Cox proportional hazard models were used for analysis. The study population of 3,672,561 patients included breast (N = 1,368,024), prostate (N = 944,246), colorectal (N = 662,094), non-small cell lung (N = 363,863), renal (N = 262,915) and pancreas (N = 71,419) cancers. Median TTI increased from 21 to 29 days (P<0.001). Aside from year of diagnosis, determinants of increased TTI included care at academic center, race, education, prior history of cancer, transfer of facility, comorbidities and age. Increased TTI was associated with worsened survival for stages I and II breast, lung, renal and pancreas cancers, and stage I colorectal cancers, with hazard ratios ranging from 1.005 (95% confidence intervals [CI] 1.002–1.008) to 1.030 (95% CI 1.025–1.035) per week of increased TTI.

Conclusions

TTI has lengthened significantly and is associated with absolute increased risk of mortality ranging from 1.2–3.2% per week in curative settings such as early-stage breast, lung, renal and pancreas cancers. Studies of interventions to ease navigation and reduce barriers are warranted to diminish potential harm to patients.

Risks and consequences of travel burden on prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factor administration and incidence of febrile neutropenia in an aged Medicare population

OBJECTIVE

Granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs) decrease the incidence of febrile neutropenia (FN) in patients receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy. This study examines the impact patient travel burden has on administration of prophylactic G-CSFs and the subsequent impact on FN incidence.

METHODS

Medicare claims data were used to identify a cohort of beneficiaries age 65+ with non-myeloid cancers at high risk for FN between January 2012 and December 2014. Driving distance and time were calculated from patient residence ZIP code to the location of G-CSF and/or chemotherapy administration. Regression models were used to estimate the odds of G-CSF prophylaxis relative to patient driving distance and time, and odds of FN incidence relative to timing of G-CSF administration (optimal [days 2-4 after chemotherapy], sub-optimal [same day], or none).

RESULTS

The 52,389 study patients had a mean age of 73.5 years, and were 82% female and 89% white race; 49% had female breast cancer, 12% lung cancer, 15% ovarian cancer, and 24% non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Of these high FN risk patients, 69% had at least one prophylactic G-CSF administration within at least one chemotherapy cycle. The percentage of patients receiving prophylactic G-CSFs in the first cycle was 56%. Median travel time was slightly longer for patients who did not receive G-CSFs and patients receiving short-acting vs long-acting G-CSFs. The odds of receiving no G-CSFs were 26-52% higher (depending on cancer type) for patients with a >80-min one-way travel time, compared to patients traveling <20-min. Concurrently, the odds of FN (using a "narrow" definition) were 18-93% higher for patients who did not receive G-CSFs in the first cycle of chemotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Travel burden, linked to clinic visits for G-CSF administration following myelosuppressive chemotherapy, is associated with sub-optimal use of G-CSF prophylaxis, which may result in a higher incidence of FN.

The Drug Shortage Crisis in the United States: Impact on Cancer Pharmaceutical Safety

Drug shortages pose a significant public health concern in the United States, and cancer drugs are among those most affected. Shortages present serious safety risks for patients and substantial burden on providers and the healthcare system. Multifaceted drivers of this complex problem include manufacturing disruptions, raw material shortages, regulatory issues, market dynamics, and limited financial incentives that reward quality and production of off-patent drugs. Oncology drugs in short supply have resulted in substitution of less effective or more toxic alternatives, medication errors, and treatment delays, and are especially concerning for medications with no adequate substitute. Consequently, patient outcomes such as disease progression and survival have been adversely affected. Furthermore, emerging gray markets have contributed to cost-prohibitive markups and introduction of counterfeit products that compromise patient safety. The Food and Drug Administration plays a key role in preventing and managing pharmaceutical shortages, largely through regulations requiring early notification of manufacturing interruptions. Other proposed strategies similarly target upstream causes and center on reducing regulatory hurdles for manufacturers and increasing incentives for market entry and quality improvement. Despite progress in preventing supply disruptions, continued exploration of underlying systemic drivers remains critical to informing long-term solutions and alleviating the clinical and economic impact of drug shortages.

Routine Surveillance of Chemotherapy Toxicities in Cancer Patients Using the Patient-Reported Outcomes Version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE)

Introduction

Systematic documentation of chemotoxicities in outpatient clinics is challenging. Incorporating patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures in clinical workflows can be an efficient strategy to strengthen the assessment of symptomatic treatment toxicities in oncology clinical practice. We compared the adequateness, feasibility, and acceptability of toxicity documentation using systematic, prospective, application of the PRO Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) tool.

Methods

At a comprehensive cancer center, data abstraction of electronic health record reviews elucidated current methods and degree of chemotoxicity documentation. Web-based 32-item PRO-CTCAE questionnaires, administered in ambulatory clinics of patients receiving chemotherapy, captured chemotoxicities and respective severities. Patient telephone surveys assessed whether healthcare providers had addressed chemotoxicities to the patients’ satisfaction.

Results

Over a broad demographic of 497 patients receiving chemotherapy, 90% (95% CI 84–96%) with significant chemotoxicities (n = 107) reported that their providers had discussed toxicities with them; of these, 70% received a therapy management change, while among the rest, 17% desired a change in management. Of patients surveyed, 91% (95% CI 82–99%) were satisfied with their current chemotoxicity management. Clinician chart documentation varied greatly; descriptors rather than numerical grading scales were typically used. Although 93% of patients were willing to complete the PRO survey, only 50% thought that it would be acceptable to complete this survey at routine clinic visits.

Conclusion

Use of PRO-CTCAE in routine clinical practice promotes systematic evaluation of symptomatic toxicities and improves the clarity, consistency, and efficiency of clinician documentation; however, methods to improve patient willingness to complete this tool routinely are needed.

Travel burden associated with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor administration in a Medicare aged population: a geospatial analysis

OBJECTIVE

Prophylaxis with granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs) is recommended for patients receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy regimens with a high risk of febrile neutropenia (FN). G-CSFs should be administered starting the day after chemotherapy, necessitating return trips to the oncology clinic at the end of each cycle. We examined the travel burden related to prophylactic G-CSF injections after chemotherapy in the US.

METHODS

We used 2012-2014 Medicare claims data to identify a national cohort of beneficiaries age 65+ with non-myeloid cancers who received both chemotherapy and prophylactic G-CSFs. Patient travel origin was based on residence ZIP code. Oncologist practice locations and hospital addresses were obtained from the Medicare Physician Compare and Hospital Compare websites and geocoded using the Google Maps Application Programming Interface (API). Driving distance and time to the care site from each patient ZIP code tabulation area (ZCTA) were calculated using Open Street Maps road networks. Geographic and socio-economic characteristics of each ZCTA from the US Census Bureau's American Community Survey were used to stratify and analyze travel estimates.

RESULTS

The mean one-way driving distance to the G-CSF provider was 23.8 (SD 30.1) miles and the mean one-way driving time was 33.3 (SD 37.8) minutes. When stratified by population density, the mean one-way travel time varied from 12.1 (SD 10.1) minutes in Very Dense Urban areas to 76.7 (SD 72.1) minutes in Super Rural areas. About 48% of patients had one-way travel times of <20 minutes, but 19% of patients traveled ≥50 minutes one way for G-CSF prophylaxis. Patients in areas with above average concentrations of aged, poor or disabled residents were more likely to experience longer travel.

CONCLUSIONS

Administration of G-CSF therapy after chemotherapy can present a significant travel burden for cancer patients. Technological improvements in the form and methods of drug delivery for G-CSFs might significantly reduce this travel burden.

Evaluating The Role Of Payment Policy In Driving Vertical Integration In The Oncology Market

The health care industry has experienced massive consolidation over the past decade. Much of the consolidation has been vertical (with hospitals acquiring physician practices) instead of horizontal (with physician practices or hospitals merging with similar entities). We documented the increase in vertical integration in the market for cancer care in the period 2003-15, finding that the rate of hospital or health system ownership of practices doubled from about 30 percent to about 60 percent. The two most commonly cited explanations for this consolidation are a 2005 Medicare Part B payment reform that dramatically reduced reimbursement for chemotherapy drugs, and the expansion of hospital eligibility for the 340B Drug Discount Program under the Affordable Care Act (ACA). To evaluate the evidence for these explanations, we used difference-in-differences methods to assess whether consolidation increased more in areas with greater exposure to each policy than in areas with less exposure. We found little evidence that either policy contributed to vertical integration. Rather, increased consolidation in the market for cancer care may be part of a broader post-ACA trend toward integrated health care systems.

Intrastate Variations in Rural Cancer Risk and Incidence: An Illinois Case Study

CONTEXT

Although rural-urban cancer disparities have been explored with some depth, disparities within seemingly homogeneous rural areas have received limited attention. However, exploration of intrarural cancer incidence may have important public health implications for risk assessment, cancer control, and resource allocation.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to explore intrastate rural cancer risk and incidence differences within Illinois.

DESIGN

Illinois's 83 rural counties were categorized into northern, central, and southern regions (IL-N, IL-C, and IL-S, respectively). Chi-square test for independence and analysis of variance calculations were performed to assess regional differences in demographic characteristics, socioeconomic deprivation, smoking history, obesity, cancer-screening adherence, and density of general practitioners. Age-adjusted incidence rates were calculated for 5 cancer categories: all cancers combined, lung, colorectal, breast (female), and prostate cancers. Unadjusted and adjusted incidence rate ratios (IRRs) were calculated to evaluate regional differences in rates for each cancer category.

RESULTS

Socioeconomic deprivation varied by region: 4.5%, 6.9%, and 40.6% of IL-N, IL-C, and IL-S counties, respectively (P < .001). Smoking history also significantly differed by region. Mean former/current smoking prevalence in IL-N, IL-C, and IL-S counties was 46.4%, 48.2%, and 51.4%, respectively (P = .006). In unadjusted analysis, IL-C (IRR = 1.12; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02-1.23) and IL-S (IRR = 1.24; 95% CI, 1.13-1.35) had increased lung cancer incidence compared with IL-N. Elevated risk remained in IL-S after adjusting for relevant factors such as smoking and socioeconomic deprivation (IRR = 1.14; 95% CI, 1.04-1.26).

CONCLUSIONS

Socioeconomic deprivation, health behaviors, and lung cancer incidence varied across rural regions. Our findings underscore the importance of identifying cancer risk heterogeneity, even within a state, to effectively target risk factor reduction and cancer control interventions.

Development and Feasibility of Bundled Payments for the Multidisciplinary Treatment of Head and Neck Cancer: A Pilot Program

Purpose:

Despite growing interest in bundled payments to reduce the costs of care, this payment method remains largely untested in cancer. This 3-year pilot tested the feasibility of a 1-year bundled payment for the multidisciplinary treatment of head and neck cancers.

Methods:

Four prospective treatment-based bundles were developed for patients with selected head and neck cancers. These risk-adjusted bundles covered 1 year of care that began with primary cancer treatment. Manual processes were developed for patient identification, enrollment, billing, and payment. Patients were prospectively identified and enrolled, and bundled payments were made at treatment start. Operational metrics tracked incremental effort for pilot processes and average payment cycle time compared with fee-for-service (FFS) payments.

Results:

This pilot confirmed the feasibility of a 1-year prospective bundled payment for head and neck cancers. Between November 2014 and October 2016, 88 patients were enrolled successfully with prospective bundled payments. Through September 2017, 94% of patients completed the pilot with 6% still enrolled. Manual pilot processes required more effort than anticipated; claims processing was the most time-consuming activity. The production of a bundle bill took an additional 15 minutes versus FFS billing. The average payment cycle time was 37 days (range, 15 to 141 days) compared with a 15-day average under FFS.

Conclusion:

Prospective bundled payments were successfully implemented in this pilot. Additional pilots should study this payment method in higher-volume cancers. Robust systems are needed to automate patient identification, enrollment, billing, and payment along with policies that reduce administrative burden and allow for the introduction of novel cancer therapies.

Benchmarking the American Society of Breast Surgeon Member Performance for More Than a Million Quality Measure-Patient Encounters

BACKGROUND

Nine breast cancer quality measures (QM) were selected by the American Society of Breast Surgeons (ASBrS) for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Quality Payment Programs (QPP) and other performance improvement programs. We report member performance.

STUDY DESIGN

Surgeons entered QM data into an electronic registry. For each QM, aggregate "performance met" (PM) was reported (median, range and percentiles) and benchmarks (target goals) were calculated by CMS methodology, specifically, the Achievable Benchmark of Care™ (ABC) method.

RESULTS

A total of 1,286,011 QM encounters were captured from 2011-2015. For 7 QM, first and last PM rates were as follows: (1) needle biopsy (95.8, 98.5%), (2) specimen imaging (97.9, 98.8%), (3) specimen orientation (98.5, 98.3%), (4) sentinel node use (95.1, 93.4%), (5) antibiotic selection (98.0, 99.4%), (6) antibiotic duration (99.0, 99.8%), and (7) no surgical site infection (98.8, 98.9%); all p values < 0.001 for trends. Variability and reasons for noncompliance by surgeon for each QM were identified. The CMS-calculated target goals (ABC™ benchmarks) for PM for 6 QM were 100%, suggesting that not meeting performance is a "never should occur" event.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgeons self-reported a large number of specialty-specific patient-measure encounters into a registry for self-assessment and participation in QPP. Despite high levels of performance demonstrated initially in 2011 with minimal subsequent change, the ASBrS concluded "perfect" performance was not a realistic goal for QPP. Thus, after review of our normative performance data, the ASBrS recommended different benchmarks than CMS for each QM.

Practical aspects of NGS-based pathways analysis for personalized cancer science and medicine

Nowadays, the personalized approach to health care and cancer care in particular is becoming more and more popular and is taking an important place in the translational medicine paradigm. In some cases, detection of the patient-specific individual mutations that point to a targeted therapy has already become a routine practice for clinical oncologists. Wider panels of genetic markers are also on the market which cover a greater number of possible oncogenes including those with lower reliability of resulting medical conclusions. In light of the large availability of high-throughput technologies, it is very tempting to use complete patient-specific New Generation Sequencing (NGS) or other "omics" data for cancer treatment guidance. However, there are still no gold standard methods and protocols to evaluate them. Here we will discuss the clinical utility of each of the data types and describe a systems biology approach adapted for single patient measurements. We will try to summarize the current state of the field focusing on the clinically relevant case-studies and practical aspects of data processing.

Protective Effects of Six Selected Dietary Compounds against Leptin-Induced Proliferation of Oestrogen Receptor Positive (MCF-7) Breast Cancer Cells

Background: Obesity is considered as one of the risk factors for breast cancer. Leptin has been found to be involved in breast cancer progression. Therefore, novel approaches to antagonize biological effects of leptin are much needed. The objective of this study was to evaluate the protective effects of six dietary compounds (quercetin, curcumin, gallic acid, epigallocatechin gallate (EGCG), ascorbic acid and catechin) and assess the phosphorylation of extracellular signal-regulated kinase 1/2 (ERK1/2) in leptin-stimulated MCF-7 breast cancer cells in vitro. Methods: MCF-7 cells were exposed to leptin, leptin and compound and compound alone for 48 h. Cell viability was determined by 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide MTT and fluorometric assays after 48 h incubation. Phosphorylation of ERK1/2 was quantified by ELISA. Results: Only quercetin, curcumin and EGCG showed significant protective effects against leptin-induced proliferation of MCF-7 cells. Increase in ERK1/2 phosphorylation in response to leptin was reduced by the addition of quercetin, curcumin and EGCG. Conclusions: Considering the high prevalence of obesity, this observation provides a rationale for use of curcumin, quercetin and EGCG as antagonists of leptin in the treatment of obese breast cancer patients.

Predicting Real-World Effectiveness of Cancer Therapies Using Overall Survival and Progression-Free Survival from Clinical Trials: Empirical Evidence for the ASCO Value Framework

OBJECTIVES

To measure the relationship between randomized controlled trial (RCT) efficacy and real-world effectiveness for oncology treatments as well as how this relationship varies depending on an RCT's use of surrogate versus overall survival (OS) endpoints.

METHODS

We abstracted treatment efficacy measures from 21 phase III RCTs reporting OS and either progression-free survival or time to progression endpoints in breast, colorectal, lung, ovarian, and pancreatic cancers. For these treatments, we estimated real-world OS as the mortality hazard ratio (RW MHR) among patients meeting RCT inclusion criteria in Surveillance and Epidemiology End Results-Medicare data. The primary outcome variable was real-world OS observed in the Surveillance and Epidemiology End Results-Medicare data. We used a Cox proportional hazard regression model to calibrate the differences between RW MHR and the hazard ratios on the basis of RCTs using either OS (RCT MHR) or progression-free survival/time to progression surrogate (RCT surrogate hazard ratio [SHR]) endpoints.

RESULTS

Treatment arm therapies reduced mortality in RCTs relative to controls (average RCT MHR = 0.85; range 0.56-1.10) and lowered progression (average RCT SHR = 0.73; range 0.43-1.03). Among real-world patients who used either the treatment or the control arm regimens evaluated in the relevant RCT, RW MHRs were 0.6% (95% confidence interval -3.5% to 4.8%) higher than RCT MHRs, and RW MHRs were 15.7% (95% confidence interval 11.0% to 20.5%) higher than RCT SHRs.

CONCLUSIONS

Real-world OS treatment benefits were similar to those observed in RCTs based on OS endpoints, but were 16% less than RCT efficacy estimates based on surrogate endpoints. These results, however, varied by tumor and line of therapy.

Radiation Oncology Physician Practice in the Modern Era: A Statewide Analysis of Medicare Reimbursement

Introduction

In recent years, major changes in health care policy have affected oncology practice dramatically. In this context, we examined the effect of practice structure on volume and payments for radiation oncology services using the 2013 Medicare Provider Utilization and Payment Data: Physician and Other Supplier Public Use File (POSPUF) for New York State radiation oncologists.

Methods

The Medicare POSPUF data was queried, and individual physicians were classified into freestanding office-based and hospital-based practices. Freestanding practices were further subdivided into urology, hematology-oncology, and other ownership structures. Additional variables analyzed included gender, year of medical school graduation, and Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI). Statistical analyses were performed to assess the impact of the above-mentioned variables on reimbursements.

Results

There were 236 New York State radiation oncologists identified in the 2013 Medicare POSPUF dataset, with a total reimbursement of $91,525,855. Among freestanding centers, the mean global Medicare reimbursement was $832,974. Global Medicare reimbursement was $1,328,743 for urology practices, compared to $754,567 for hematology-oncology practices and $691,821 for other ownership structures (p < 0.05). The mean volume of on-treatment visits (OTVs) was 240.5 per year, varying by practice structure. The mean annual OTV volumes for urology practices, hematology-oncology practices, other freestanding practices, and hospital-based programs were 424.6, 311.5, 247.5, and 209.3, respectively. After correcting for gender, physician experience, and HHI, practice structure was predictive of freestanding reimbursement and on treatment visit volume.

Conclusion

Higher Medicare payment was significantly predicted by the type of practice structure, with urology-based and hematology-oncology practices accounting for the highest total reimbursement and OTV volume.

Prevention and Monitoring of Cardiac Dysfunction in Survivors of Adult Cancers: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline

Purpose

Cardiac dysfunction is a serious adverse effect of certain cancer-directed therapies that can interfere with the efficacy of treatment, decrease quality of life, or impact the actual survival of the patient with cancer. The purpose of this effort was to develop recommendations for prevention and monitoring of cardiac dysfunction in survivors of adult-onset cancers.

Methods

Recommendations were developed by an expert panel with multidisciplinary representation using a systematic review (1996 to 2016) of meta-analyses, randomized clinical trials, observational studies, and clinical experience. Study quality was assessed using established methods, per study design. The guideline recommendations were crafted in part using the Guidelines Into Decision Support methodology.

Results

A total of 104 studies met eligibility criteria and compose the evidentiary basis for the recommendations. The strength of the recommendations in these guidelines is based on the quality, amount, and consistency of the evidence and the balance between benefits and harms.

Recommendations

It is important for health care providers to initiate the discussion regarding the potential for cardiac dysfunction in individuals in whom the risk is sufficiently high before beginning therapy. Certain higher risk populations of survivors of cancer may benefit from prevention and screening strategies implemented during cancer-directed therapies. Clinical suspicion for cardiac disease should be high and threshold for cardiac evaluation should be low in any survivor who has received potentially cardiotoxic therapy. For certain higher risk survivors of cancer, routine surveillance with cardiac imaging may be warranted after completion of cancer-directed therapy, so that appropriate interventions can be initiated to halt or even reverse the progression of cardiac dysfunction.

Prior Authorization for Medications in a Breast Oncology Practice: Navigation of a Complex Process

INTRODUCTION

The cost and burden associated with prior authorization (PA) for specialty medications are concerns for oncologists, but the impact of the PA process on care delivery has not been well described. We examined PA processes and approval patterns within a high-volume breast oncology clinic at a major academic cancer center.

METHODS

We met with institutional staff to create a PA workflow and process map. We then abstracted pharmacy and medical records for all patients with breast cancer (N = 279) treated at our institution who required a PA between May and November 2015 (324 prescriptions). We examined PA approval rates, time to approval, and associations of these outcomes with the type of medication being prescribed, patient demographics, and method of PA.

RESULTS

Seventeen possible process steps and 10 decision points were required for patients to obtain medications requiring a PA. Of the 324 PAs tracked, 316 (97.5%) were approved on the first PA request after an average time of 0.82 days (range, 0 to 14 days). Approximately half of PAs were for either palbociclib (26.5%) or pegfilgrastim (22.2%), and 13.6% of PAs were for generic hormonal therapy. Requirements to fax PA requests were associated with greater delay in approval time (1.31 v 0.17 days for online requests; P < .001). The use of specialty pharmacies increased staff burden and delays in medication receipt.

CONCLUSION

The PA process is complicated and labor intensive. Given the high PA approval rate, it is unlikely that PA requirements reduce medication utilization in practice, and these requirements may impose unnecessary burdens on patient care. The goals and requirements for PAs should be readdressed.

For Working-Age Cancer Survivors, Medical Debt And Bankruptcy Create Financial Hardships

The rising medical costs associated with cancer have led to considerable financial hardship for patients and their families in the United States. Using data from the LIVESTRONG 2012 survey of 4,719 cancer survivors ages 18-64, we examined the proportions of survivors who reported going into debt or filing for bankruptcy as a result of cancer, as well as the amount of debt incurred. Approximately one-third of the survivors had gone into debt, and 3 percent had filed for bankruptcy. Of those who had gone into debt, 55 percent incurred obligations of $10,000 or more. Cancer survivors who were younger, had lower incomes, and had public health insurance were more likely to go into debt or file for bankruptcy, compared to those who were older, had higher incomes, and had private insurance, respectively. Future longitudinal population-based studies are needed to improve understanding of financial hardship among US working-age cancer survivors throughout the cancer care trajectory and, ultimately, to help stakeholders develop evidence-based interventions and policies to reduce the financial hardship of cancer.

Financial Burden for Patients With Chronic Myeloid Leukemia Enrolled in Medicare Part D Taking Targeted Oral Anticancer Medications

PURPOSE

The number of targeted oral anticancer medications (TOAMs) has grown rapidly in the past decade. The high cost of TOAMs raises concerns about the financial aspect of treatment, especially for patients enrolled in Medicare Part D plans because of the coverage gap.

METHODS

We identified patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) who were new TOAM users from the SEER registry data linked with Medicare Part D data, from years 2007 to 2012. We followed these patients throughout the calendar year when they started taking the TOAMs and examined their out-of-pocket (OOP) payments and gross drug costs, taking into account their benefit phase, plan type, and cost share group.

RESULTS

We found that 726 (81%) of the 898 patients with CML who received TOAMs had reached the catastrophic phase of their Medicare Part D benefit within the year of medication initiation, with a large majority of patients reaching this phase in less than a month. Patients without subsidies showed a clear pattern of a spike in OOP payments when they began treatment with TOAMs. The OOP payment for patients with subsidies was substantially lower. The monthly gross drug costs were similar between patients with and without subsidies.

CONCLUSION

Patients experience quick entry and exit from the coverage gap (also called the donut hole) as a result of the high price of TOAMs. Closing the donut hole will provide financial relief during the initial month(s) of treatment but will not completely eliminate the financial burden.

Surgeon-, pathologist-, and hospital-level variation in suboptimal lymph node examination after colectomy: Compartmentalizing quality improvement strategies

BACKGROUND

The goals of this study were to characterize the variation in suboptimal lymph node examination for patients with colon cancer across individual surgeons, pathologists, and hospitals and to examine if this variation affects 5-year, disease-specific survival.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted by merging the New York State Cancer Registry with the Statewide Planning & Research Cooperative System, Medicaid, and Medicare claims to identify resections for stages I-III colon cancer from 2004-2011. Multilevel logistic regression models characterized variation in suboptimal lymph node examination (<12 lymph nodes). Multilevel competing-risks Cox models were used for survival analyses.

RESULTS

The overall rate of suboptimal lymph node examination was 32% in 12,332 patients treated by 1,503 surgeons and 814 pathologists at 187 hospitals. Patient-level predictors of suboptimal lymph node examination were older age, male sex, nonscheduled admission, lesser stage, and left colectomy procedure. Hospital-level predictors of suboptimal lymph node examination were a nonacademic status, a rural setting, and a low annual number of resections for colon cancer. The percent of the total clustering variance attributed to surgeons, pathologists, and hospitals was 8%, 23%, and 70%, respectively. Increasing the pathologist and hospital-specific rates of suboptimal lymph node examination were associated with worse 5-year, disease-specific survival.

CONCLUSION

There was a large variation in suboptimal lymph node examination between surgeons, pathologists, and hospitals. Collaborative efforts that promote optimal examination of lymph nodes may improve prognosis for colon cancer patients. Given that 93% of the variation was attributable to pathologists and hospitals, endeavors in quality improvement should focus on these 2 settings.

Value-Based Medicine and Integration of Tumor Biology

Clinical oncology is in the midst of a genomic revolution, as molecular insights redefine our understanding of cancer biology. Greater awareness of the distinct aberrations that drive carcinogenesis is also contributing to a growing armamentarium of genomically targeted therapies. Although much work remains to better understand how to combine and sequence these therapies, improved outcomes for patients are becoming manifest. As we welcome this genomic revolution in cancer care, oncologists also must grapple with a number of practical problems. Costs of cancer care continue to grow, with targeted therapies responsible for an increasing proportion of spending. Rising costs are bringing the concept of value into sharper focus and challenging the oncology community with implementation of value-based cancer care. This article explores the ways that the genomic revolution is transforming cancer care, describes various frameworks for considering the value of genomically targeted therapies, and outlines key challenges for delivering on the promise of personalized cancer care. It highlights practical solutions for the implementation of value-based care, including investment in biomarker development and clinical trials to improve the efficacy of targeted therapy, the use of evidence-based clinical pathways, team-based care, computerized clinical decision support, and value-based payment approaches.

A Nationwide Medical Student Assessment of Oncology Education

Cancer is the second leading cause of death in the USA, but there is minimal data on how oncology is taught to medical students. The purpose of this study is to characterize oncology education at US medical schools. An electronic survey was sent between December 2014 and February 2015 to a convenience sample of medical students who either attended the American Society for Radiation Oncology annual meeting or serve as delegates to the American Association of Medical Colleges. Information on various aspects of oncology instruction at participants' medical schools was collected. Seventy-six responses from students in 28 states were received. Among the six most common causes of death in the USA, cancer reportedly received the fourth most curricular time. During the first, second, and third years of medical school, participants most commonly reported 6-10, 16-20, and 6-10 h of oncology teaching, respectively. Participants were less confident in their understanding of cancer treatment than workup/diagnosis or basic science/natural history of cancer (p < 0.01). During the preclinical years, pathologists, scientists/Ph.D.'s, and medical oncologists reportedly performed the majority of teaching, whereas during the clinical clerkships, medical and surgical oncologists reportedly performed the majority of teaching. Radiation oncologists were significantly less involved during both periods (p < 0.01). Most schools did not require any oncology-oriented clerkship. During each mandatory rotation, <20 % of patients had a primary diagnosis of cancer. Oncology education is often underemphasized and fragmented with wide variability in content and structure between medical schools, suggesting a need for reform.

Choosing Wisely: Opportunities for Improving Value in Cancer Care Delivery?

INTRODUCTION

Patients, providers, and payers are striving to identify where value in cancer care can be increased. As part of the Choosing Wisely (CW) campaign, ASCO and the American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology have recommended against specific, yet commonly performed, treatments and procedures.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of Medicare claims data to examine concordance with CW recommendations across 12 cancer centers in the southeastern United States. Variability for each measure was evaluated on the basis of patient characteristics and site of care. Hierarchical linear modeling was used to examine differences in average costs per patient by concordance status. Potential cost savings were estimated on the basis of a potential 95% adherence rate and average cost difference.

RESULTS

The analysis included 37,686 patients with cancer with Fee-for-Service Medicare insurance. Concordance varied by CW recommendation from 39% to 94%. Patient characteristics were similar for patients receiving concordant and nonconcordant care. Significant variability was noted across centers for all recommendations, with as much as an 89% difference. Nonconcordance was associated with higher costs for every measure. If concordance were to increase to 95% for all measures, we would estimate a $19 million difference in total cost of care per quarter.

CONCLUSION

These results demonstrate ample room for reduction of low-value care and corresponding costs associated with the CW recommendations. Because variability in concordance was driven primarily by site of care, rather than by patient factors, continued education about these low-value services is needed to improve the value of cancer care.

Moving Toward Improved Teamwork in Cancer Care: The Role of Psychological Safety in Team Communication

Effective communication is a requirement in the teamwork necessary for improved coordination to deliver patient-centered, value-based cancer care. Communication is particularly important when care providers are geographically distributed or work across organizations. We review organizational and teams research on communication to highlight psychological safety as a key determinant of high-quality communication within teams. We first present the concept of psychological safety, findings about its communication effects for teamwork, and factors that affect it. We focus on five factors applicable to cancer care delivery: familiarity, clinical hierarchy–related status differences, geographic dispersion, boundary spanning, and leader behavior. To illustrate how these factors facilitate or hinder psychologically safe communication and teamwork in cancer care, we review the case of a patient as she experiences the treatment-planning process for early-stage breast cancer in a community setting. Our analysis is summarized in a key principle: Teamwork in cancer care requires high-quality communication, which depends on psychological safety for all team members, clinicians and patients alike. We conclude with a discussion of the implications of psychological safety in clinical care and suggestions for future research.

Strategies in functional proteomics: Unveiling the pathways to precision oncology

Personalised strategies in cancer care are required to overcome the therapeutic challenges posed by variability between patients and disease subsets. To this end, enhanced precision tools must be developed to describe the molecular drivers of malignant proliferation. Such tools must also identify druggable targets and biomarkers in order to provide essential information regarding drug development and therapeutic outcome. Here we discuss how proteomics-based approaches provide a set of viable methodologies capable of delivering quantitative information throughout the main stages of personalised oncology and a ratiometric platform that delivers systems-wide methods for drug evaluation.

Measures of Appropriateness and Value for Breast Surgeons and Their Patients: The American Society of Breast Surgeons Choosing Wisely (®) Initiative

BACKGROUND

Current breast cancer care is based on high-level evidence from randomized, controlled trials. Despite these data, there continues to be variability of breast cancer care, including overutilization of some tests and operations. To reduce overutilization, the American Board of Internal Medicine Choosing Wisely (®) Campaign recommends that professional organizations provide patients and providers with a list of care practices that may not be necessary. Shared decision making regarding these services is encouraged.

METHODS

The Patient Safety and Quality Committee of the American Society of Breast Surgeons (ASBrS) solicited candidate measures for the Choosing Wisely (®) Campaign. The resulting list of "appropriateness" measures of care was ranked by a modified Delphi appropriateness methodology. The highest-ranked measures were submitted to and later approved by the ASBrS Board of Directors. They are listed below.

RESULTS

(1) Don't routinely order breast magnetic resonance imaging in new breast cancer patients. (2) Don't routinely excise all the lymph nodes beneath the arm in patients having lumpectomy for breast cancer. (3) Don't routinely order specialized tumor gene testing in all new breast cancer patients. (4) Don't routinely reoperate on patients with invasive cancer if the cancer is close to the edge of the excised lumpectomy tissue. (5) Don't routinely perform a double mastectomy in patients who have a single breast with cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

The ASBrS list for the Choosing Wisely (®) campaign is easily accessible to breast cancer patients online. These measures provide surgeons and their patients with a starting point for shared decision making regarding potentially unnecessary testing and operations.

Variations in Oncologist Recommendations for Chemotherapy for Stage IV Lung Cancer: What Is the Role of Performance Status?

PURPOSE

Chemotherapy prolongs survival in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. However, few studies have included patients with poor performance status. This study examined rates of oncologists' recommendations for chemotherapy by patient performance status and symptoms and how physician characteristics influence chemotherapy recommendations.

METHODS

We surveyed medical oncologists involved in the care of a population-based cohort of patients with lung cancer from the CanCORS (Cancer Care Outcomes Research and Surveillance) study. Physicians were queried about their likelihood to recommend chemotherapy to patients with stage IV lung cancer with varying performance status (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 [good] v 3 [poor]) and presence or absence of tumor-related pain. Repeated measures logistic regression was used to estimate the independent associations of patients' performance status and symptoms and physicians' demographic and practice characteristics with chemotherapy recommendations.

RESULTS

Nearly all physicians (adjusted rate, 97% to 99%) recommended chemotherapy for patients with good performance status, and approximately half (adjusted rate, 38% to 53%) recommended chemotherapy for patients with poor performance status (P < .001). Compared with patient factors, physician and practice characteristics were less strongly associated with chemotherapy recommendations in adjusted analyses.

CONCLUSION

Strong consensus among oncologists exists for chemotherapy in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer and good performance status. However, the relatively high rate of chemotherapy recommendations for patients with poor performance status despite the unfavorable risk-benefit profile highlights the need for ongoing work to define high-value care in oncology and to implement and evaluate strategies to align incentives for such care.