Costs and mortality of recurrent versus de novo hormone receptor-positive/HER2(-) metastatic breast cancer

An evaluation of the healthcare costs of metastatic breast cancer: A retrospective matched cohort study

To determine the economic burden of metastatic breast cancer (MBC) in Taiwan, we conducted a national retrospective claim database analysis to evaluate the incremental healthcare costs and utilization of MBC patients as compared to their breast cancer (BC) and breast cancer free (BCF) counterparts.Data were obtained from the National Health Insurance Claim Database and the Taiwan Cancer Registry database between 2012 and 2015. All healthcare utilization and costs were calculated on a per-patient-per-month (PPPM) basis and were compared among groups using the generalized linear model adjusting for age group, residential area, and Charlson comorbidity index group.A total of 1,606 MBC patients were matched to 6,424 BC patients and 6,424 BCF patients. The majority of overall MBC healthcare costs were attributed to outpatient costs (75.1%), followed by inpatient (23.2%) and emergency room costs (1.7%). The PPPM total healthcare costs of the MBC, BC, and BCF groups were TWD 7,422, 14,425, and 2,114, respectively. The adjusted PPPM total healthcare cost ratio of MBC to BCF was 4.1. Compared to BCF patients, the patients receiving both human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-targeted therapy and endocrine therapy incurred 28.1 times PPPM total costs. The adjusted PPPM total healthcare cost ratio of recurrent MBC to BCF was 2.3, while the ratio was 12.2 in the de novo MBC group.Patients with MBC are associated with substantial economic burden, particularly in outpatient costs. The study findings could be useful for MBC-related economic evaluations and health resource allocation.

Spending for Advanced Cancer Diagnoses: Comparing Recurrent Versus De Novo Stage IV Disease

PURPOSE

Spending for patients with advanced cancer is substantial. Past efforts to characterize this spending usually have not included patients with recurrence (who may differ from those with de novo stage IV disease) or described which services drive spending.

METHODS

Using SEER-Medicare data from 2008 to 2013, we identified patients with breast, colorectal, and lung cancer with either de novo stage IV or recurrent advanced cancer. Mean spending/patient/month (2012 US dollars) was estimated from 12 months before to 11 months after diagnosis for all services and by the type of service. We describe the absolute difference in mean monthly spending for de novo versus recurrent patients, and we estimate differences after controlling for type of advanced cancer, year of diagnosis, age, sex, comorbidity, and other factors.

RESULTS

We identified 54,982 patients with advanced cancer. Before diagnosis, mean monthly spending was higher for recurrent patients (absolute difference: breast, $1,412; colorectal, $3,002; lung, $2,805; all P < .001), whereas after the diagnosis, it was higher for de novo patients (absolute difference: breast, $2,443; colorectal, $4,844; lung, $2,356; all P < .001). Spending differences were driven by inpatient, physician, and hospice services. Across the 2-year period around the advanced cancer diagnosis, adjusted mean monthly spending was higher for de novo versus recurrent patients (spending ratio: breast, 2.39 [95% CI, 2.05 to 2.77]; colorectal, 2.64 [95% CI, 2.31 to 3.01]; lung, 1.46 [95% CI, 1.30 to 1.65]).

CONCLUSION

Spending for de novo cancer was greater than spending for recurrent advanced cancer. Understanding the patterns and drivers of spending is necessary to design alternative payment models and to improve value.

U.S. prevalence of endocrine therapy-naïve locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer

Background

Variations in treatment choice, or late stage at first diagnosis, mean that, despite guideline recommendations, not all patients with hormone receptor (hr)-positive locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer (la/mbca) will have received endocrine therapy before disease progression. In the present study, we aimed to estimate the proportion of women with postmenopausal hr-positive la/mbca in the United States who are endocrine therapy-naïve.

Methods

Women in the Optum Electronic Health Record (ehr) database with a breast cancer (bca) diagnosis (January 2008-March 2015) were included. Patient and malignancy characteristics were identified using structured data fields and natural-language processing of free-text clinical notes. The proportion of women with postmenopausal hr-positive, human epidermal growth factor 2 (her2)-negative (or unknown) la/mbca who had not received prior endocrine therapy was determined. Results were extrapolated to the entire U.S. population using the U.S. National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Results are presented descriptively.

Results

In the ehr database, 11,831 women with bca had discernible information on postmenopausal status, hr status, and disease stage. Of those women, 1923 (16.3%) had postmenopausal hr-positive, her2-negative (or unknown) la/mbca, and 70.7% of those 1923 patients (n = 1360) had not received prior endocrine therapy, accounting for 11.5% of the overall population. Extrapolating those estimates nationally suggests an annual incidence of 14,784 cases, and a 5-year limited duration prevalence of 50,638 cases.

Conclusions

A substantial proportion of women with postmenopausal hr-positive la/mbca in the United States could be endocrine therapy-naïve.

Medical Care Costs for Recurrent versus De Novo Stage IV Cancer by Age at Diagnosis

OBJECTIVE

To address the knowledge gap regarding medical care costs for advanced cancer patients, we compared costs for recurrent versus de novo stage IV breast, colorectal, and lung cancer patients.

DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING

Virtual Data Warehouse (VDW) information from three Kaiser Permanente regions: Colorado, Northwest, and Washington.

STUDY DESIGN

We identified patients aged ≥21 with de novo or recurrent breast (nde novo  = 352; nrecurrent  = 765), colorectal (nde novo  = 1,072; nrecurrent  = 542), and lung (nde novo  = 4,041; nrecurrent  = 340) cancers diagnosed 2000-2012. We estimated average total monthly and annual costs in the 12 months preceding, month of, and 12 months following the index de novo/recurrence date, stratified by age at diagnosis (<65, ≥65). Generalized linear repeated-measures models controlled for demographics and comorbidity.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

In the pre-index period, monthly costs were higher for recurrent than for de novo breast (<65: +$2,431; ≥65: +$1,360), colorectal (<65: +$3,219; ≥65: +$2,247), and lung cancer (<65: +$3,086; ≥65: +$2,260) patients. Conversely, during the index and post-index periods, costs were higher for de novo patients. Average total annual pre-index costs were five- to ninefold higher for recurrent versus de novo patients <65.

CONCLUSIONS

Cost differences by type of advanced cancer and by age suggest heterogeneous patterns of care that merit further investigation.

Costs of cancer along the care continuum: What we can expect based on recent literature

BACKGROUND

Cancer costs should be discussed by patients and providers, but information is not readily available. Results from recently published studies (in the last 5 years) on direct and indirect cancer costs may help guide these discussions.

METHODS

The authors reviewed studies published between 2013 and 2017 that reported direct health care costs and indirect (productivity losses) costs. The annual mean total and net costs of cancer were summarized for all payers and for survivors only by age (ages 18-64 and ≥65 years), by phase of care (initial [ie, 12 months from diagnosis], continuing, and end-of-life [ie, 12 months before death]), or for recently diagnosed (within 1-2 years of diagnosis) and longer term survivors.

RESULTS

For all payers combined, costs for cancers like breast, prostate, colorectal, and lung cancers were $20,000 to $100,000 in the initial phase, $1000 to $30,000 annually in the continuing phase, and ≥$60,000 in the end-of-life phase. Annual out-of-pocket costs to recently diagnosed survivors were >$1000 for medical care and time costs, approximately $2000 for productivity losses, and from $2500 to >$4000 for employment disability, depending on age. For longer term survivors, the cost of medical care was approximately $1500 for older survivors and $747 for younger survivors, time costs were $831 to $955 for older survivors and $459 to $630 for younger survivors, and productivity losses were approximately $800. Disability among long-term survivors was similar to that among short-term survivors. Limitations of the reviewed studies included older data and under-representation of higher cost cancers.

CONCLUSIONS

Frequently updated cost information for all cancer types is needed to guide discussions of anticipated short-term and long-term cancer-related costs with survivors. Cancer 2018;000:000-000. © 2018 American Cancer Society.

Comparing Survival After Recurrent vs De Novo Stage IV Advanced Breast, Lung, and Colorectal Cancer

The treatments provided to and survival of patients with recurrent vs de novo stage IV advanced breast, lung, and colorectal cancer may differ but have not been well studied. Using population-based data from the Cancer Research Network for 4510 patients with advanced breast, lung, or colorectal cancer, we matched recurrent/de novo patients on demographic factors. We found longer survival for recurrent vs de novo lung cancer (182 matched pairs); no significant difference for colorectal cancer (332 matched pairs); and shorter survival for recurrent vs de novo breast cancer (219 matched pairs). Compared with recurrent cases, chemotherapy use and radiation therapy use were more common among de novo cases. Differences in treatment and survival between recurrent and de novo advanced cancer patients could inform prognostic estimates and clinical trial design.