The cost of failed first-line cancer treatment related to continued smoking in Canada

Longitudinal Results From the Nationwide Just ASK Initiative to Promote Routine Smoking Assessment in American College of Surgeons-Accredited Cancer Programs

PURPOSE

Persistent smoking after cancer diagnosis causes adverse outcomes while smoking cessation can improve survival. Thus, integration of smoking assessment and cessation assistance into routine cancer care is critical. Aiming for incremental practice change that could be sustained and built upon through future quality improvement (QI) projects, the American College of Surgeons initiated Just ASK in 2022 to increase implementation of smoking assessment among its accredited Cancer Programs. This manuscript describes outcomes from Just ASK.

METHODS

Seven hundred sixty-two programs enrolled in this cohort study, followed Plan Do Study Act methodology, and used local QI teams to facilitate practice change. The primary outcome was the ask rate (ie, patients asked/patients seen). Programs completed three surveys across the 1-year study (89.8% retention), answering questions about their program plus organizational readiness, implementation barriers, implementation strategies, and clinical practices related to assessing smoking among patients newly diagnosed with cancer. Data analysis involved descriptive statistics and analysis of change over time (eg, McNemar chi-squares).

RESULTS

Programs (53.1% community-based) tended to report moderate organizational readiness, multiple implementation barriers, and adoption of 4.63 ± 1.49 of eight possible implementation strategies (eg, training staff/providers). Programs reported frequency of assessing smoking status, documenting it in the electronic health record, advising patients who smoke to quit, and documenting advice and treatment increased over time (all P < .001). The ask rate increased from baseline to mid to final survey (P < .01; 87.79% v 88.65% v 91.92%, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Just ASK is the latest, and by far the largest, endeavor to improve assessment of cancer patients' smoking status. Participants reported significant advances within a short time span and study results underscore the potential for national accreditation organizations to transform oncology practice.

Cost-effectiveness of point of care smoking cessation interventions in oncology clinics

BACKGROUND

We examined the cost-effectiveness of providing systematic smoking cessation interventions to oncology patients at point-of-care.

METHODS

A decision analytic model was completed from the healthcare payer's perspective and included all incident cancer cases involving patients who smoke in New Brunswick, Canada (n = 1040), cancer site stratifications, and risks of mortality, continued smoking, and cancer treatment failure over one year. Usual care (no cessation support) was compared to the standard Ottawa Model for Smoking Cessation (OMSC) intervention, and to OMSC plus unlimited cost-free stop smoking medication (OMSC + SSM), including nicotine replacement therapy, varenicline, or bupropion. Primary outcomes were incremental cost per quit (ICQ) and incremental cost per cancer treatment failure avoided (ICTFA).

RESULTS

The ICQ was $C143 and ICTFA $C1193 for standard OMSC. The ICQ was $C503 and ICTFA was $C5952 for OMSC + SSM. The number needed to treat (NNT) to produce one quit was 9 for standard OMSC and 4 for OMSC + SSM, and the NNT to avoid one first-line treatment failure was 78 for OMSC and 45 for OMSC + SSM. Both were cost-effective in 100% of 1000 simulations.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the high clinical benefits and low incremental costs, systematic smoking cessation interventions should be a standard component of first-line cancer treatment.

Implementation, enrollment, and engagement in an opt-out telehealth pharmacist-assisted tobacco treatment program for patients seen in oncology outpatient clinics

OBJECTIVE

To describe the workflow, reach, cost, and self-reported quit rates for an opt-out tobacco treatment program (TTP) for patients seen in 43 oncology outpatient clinics.

METHODS

Between May 25, 2021, and December 31, 2022, adult patients (≥18 years) visiting clinics affiliated with the Medical University of South Carolina Hollings Cancer Center were screened for smoking status. Those currently smoking were referred to a telehealth pharmacy-assisted TTP. An attempt was made to contact referred patients by phone. Patients reached were offered free smoking cessation counseling and a 2-week starter kit of nicotine replacement medication. A random sample of 420 patients enrolled in the TTP were selected to participate in a telephone survey to assess smoking status 4 to 12 months after enrollment.

RESULTS

During the reference period 35,756 patients were screened and 9.3% were identified as currently smoking. Among the 3319 patients referred to the TTP at least once, 2393 (72.1%) were reached by phone, of whom 426 (12.8%) were ineligible for treatment, 458 (13.8%) opted out of treatment, and 1509 (45.5%) received treatment. More than 90% of TTP enrollees smoked daily, with an average of 13.1 cigarettes per day. Follow-up surveys were completed on 167 of 420 patients, of whom 23.4% to 33.5% reported not smoking; if all nonresponders to the survey are counted as smoking, the range of quit rates is 9.3% to 13.3%.

CONCLUSION

The findings demonstrate the feasibility of reaching and delivering smoking cessation treatments to patients from a diverse set of geographically dispersed oncology clinics.

Examining the Association between Abstinence from Smoking and Healthcare Costs among Patients with Cancer

Continuous tobacco use in patients with cancer is linked to substantial healthcare costs due to increased risks and complications, whereas quitting smoking leads to improved treatment outcomes and cost reductions. Addressing the need for empirical evidence on the economic impact of smoking cessation, this study examined the association between smoking cessation and healthcare cost utilization among a sample of 930 patients with cancer treated at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center's Tobacco Research and Treatment Program (TRTP). Applying conditional quantile regression and propensity scores to address confounding, our findings revealed that abstinence achieved through the TRTP significantly reduced the median cost during a 3-month period post-quitting by $1,095 [β = -$1,095, P = 0.007, 95% confidence interval (CI), = (-$1,886 to -$304)]. Sensitivity analysis corroborated these conclusions, showing a pronounced cost reduction when outlier data were excluded. The long-term accrued cost savings from smoking cessation could potentially offset the cost of participation in the TRTP program, underscoring its cost effectiveness. An important implication of this study is that by reducing smoking rates, healthcare systems can more efficiently allocate resources, enhance patient health outcomes, and lessen the overall cancer burden.

PREVENTION RELEVANCE

This study emphasizes the dual impact of smoking cessation programs in patients with cancer: quitting smoking and reducing healthcare costs. It highlights the importance of integrating cessation programs into cancer prevention strategies, ensuring both individual health benefits and broader, system-wide economic efficiencies. See related Spotlight, p. 197.

Current Practices, Perceived Barriers, and Promising Implementation Strategies for Improving Quality of Smoking Cessation Support in Accredited Cancer Programs of the American College of Surgeons

PURPOSE

Persistent smoking is associated with poor outcomes in cancer care. It is strongly recommended that oncology care providers provide cessation support; however, there is limited information about smoking cessation assessment and treatment patterns in routine oncology practice.

METHODS

Leaders of the American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer (CoC) and National Accreditation Program for Breast Centers (National Accredited Program for Breast Cancer) elected to participate in a national quality improvement initiative (Just ASK) focused on smoking assessment/treatment in cancer care. Online baseline survey responses were received from 762 accredited programs.

RESULTS

Most programs reported regularly asking about smoking (89.9%), documenting smoking history and current use (85.8%), and advising patients to quit (71.2%). However, less than half of programs reported documenting a smoking cessation treatment plan (41.7%). Even fewer programs reported regularly assisting patients with quitting (41.3%), providing self-help information (27.2%), providing individual counseling (18.2%), and referring patients to an affiliated tobacco treatment program (26.1%) or external Quitline (28.5%). Very few programs reported regularly prescribing medications (17.6%). Principal barriers to tobacco treatment delivery were lack of staff training (68.8%), lack of designated specialists (61.9%), perceived patient resistance (58.3%), lack of available resources (53.3%), competing clinical priorities (50.9%), inadequate program funding (40.6%), insufficient staff time (42.4%), and inadequate reimbursement (31.0%).

CONCLUSION

Although programs reported a high rate of smoking assessment, critical gaps in advising and assisting patients with cessation were found. Improving equitable delivery of smoking assessment/treatment in cancer care will require addressing key organizational and provider barriers for implementation of best practices.

Lessons from Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Smoking Cessation Programs for Cancer Patients

BACKGROUND

Smoking among patients diagnosed with cancer poses important health and financial challenges including reduced effectiveness of expensive cancer therapies. This study explores the value of smoking cessation programs (SCPs) for patients already diagnosed with cancer. It also identifies conditions under which SPCs may be wise investments.

METHODS

Using a simplified decision analytic model combined with insights from a literature review, we explored the cost-effectiveness of SCPs.

RESULTS

The findings provide insights about the potential impact of cessation probabilities among cancer patients in SCPs and the potential impact of SCPs on cancer patients' lives.

CONCLUSION

The evidence suggests that there is good reason to believe that SCPs are an economically attractive way to improve outcomes for cancer patients when SCPs are offered in conjunction with standard cancer care.

Challenges and Adaptations for Providing Smoking Cessation for Patients with Cancer across Canada during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Smoking cessation after a cancer diagnosis can improve health outcomes, but the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic significantly altered healthcare patterns and strained resources, including for smoking cessation support for cancer patients. A Network that included all 13 provinces and territories (jurisdictions) in Canada received funding and coordinated support from a national organization to implement access to smoking cessation support in cancer care between 2016 and 2021, including throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. Descriptive analyses of meetings between the organization and jurisdictions between March of 2020 and August of 2021 demonstrated that all jurisdictions reported disruptions of existing smoking cessation approaches. Common challenges include staff redeployment, inability to deliver support in person, disruptions in travel, and loss of connections with other clinical resources. Common adaptations included budget and workflow adjustments, transition to virtual approaches, partnering with other community resources, and coupling awareness of the harms of smoking and COVID-19. All jurisdictions reported adaptations that maintained or improved access to smoking cessation services. Collectively, data suggest coordinated national efforts to address smoking cessation in cancer care could be crucial to maintaining access during an international healthcare crisis.