Use of 18F-FDG PET/CT as an Initial Staging Procedure for Stage II-III Breast Cancer: A Multicenter Value Analysis

BACKGROUND

Metastatic staging imaging is not recommended for asymptomatic patients with stage I-II breast cancer. Greater distant metastatic disease risk may warrant baseline imaging in patients with stage II-III with high-risk biologic subtypes. NCCN Guidelines recommend considering CT of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis (CT CAP) and bone scan in appropriate patients. CT CAP and bone scan are considered standard of care (SoC), although PET/CT is a patient-centered alternative.

METHODS

Data were available for 799 high-risk patients with clinical stage II-III disease who initiated screening for the I-SPY2 trial at 4 institutions. A total of 564 complete records were reviewed to compare PET/CT versus SoC. Costs were determined from the payer perspective using the national 2018 Medicare Physician Fee Schedule and representative reimbursements to the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) measured cost of using PET/CT per percent of patients who avoided a false-positive (FP).

RESULTS

The de novo metastatic disease rate was 4.6%. Imaging varied across the 4 institutions (P<.0001). The FP rate was higher using SoC versus PET/CT (22.1% vs 11.1%; P=.0009). Mean time between incidental finding on baseline imaging to FP determination was 10.8 days. Mean time from diagnosis to chemotherapy initiation was 44.3 days with SoC versus 37.5 days with PET/CT (P=.0001). Mean cost per patient was $1,132 (SoC) versus $1,477 (PET/CT) using the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule, with an ICER of $31. Using representative reimbursements to UCSF, mean cost per patient was $1,236 (SoC) versus $1,073 (PET/CT) for Medicare, and $3,083 (SoC) versus $1,656 (PET/CT) for a private payer, with ICERs of -$15 and -$130, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Considerable variation exists in metastatic staging practices. PET/CT reduced FP risk by half and decreased workup of incidental findings, allowing for earlier treatment start. PET/CT may be cost-effective, and at one institution was shown to be cost-saving. Better alignment is needed between hospital pricing strategies and payer coverage policies to deliver high-value care.

A quality improvement approach to optimizing infusion wait times

61

Background: Long wait times are a common and occasionally unavoidable experience for patients receiving chemotherapy infusions. It unfavorably impacts patient satisfaction and clinic efficiency. Our primary objective was to evaluate the impact of infusion clinic process changes on patient wait times within a Plan, Do, Study, Act (PSDA) framework. Methods: A multi-disciplinary team, consisting of oncology, nursing, pharmacy, quality improvement, and support staff, met to have brainstorming sessions, make surveys, and conduct time studies to analyze our current process (Plan). A Pareto chart created using survey results showed communication issues were likely causing the largest modifiable impact on our wait times. A common source of miscommunication was whether patients are waiting on labs results for treatment. Beginning March 2019, patients not requiring labs on the day of treatment were assigned to a separate scheduling title to designate them as priority for vital signs and review by pharmacy (Do). Upon clinic check-in, these patients now have vitals signs collected immediately and pharmacy is notified of their arrival to begin chemotherapy preparation. Results: Baseline as well as prospective wait time data was collected from 30 clinic days (360 patient wait times) from chart reviews and timestamp data available in the electronic medical record (EMR). Results were analyzed (Study) using Statistical Process Control (SPC) charts to allow for early detection of improvement. Pre-implementation wait times averaged 1 hour and 37 minutes. Post implementation wait times average 1 hour and 16 minutes (Act). This change was significant based on a shift visible on the SPC chart. Our balancing measure of wait times for all patients did not increase compared to baseline (2 hours and 15 minutes). No significant correlation was observed between average daily wait times and the day of the week or the number of patients treated that day at baseline. Conclusions: Implementation of a new clinic scheduling title and workflow reduced wait times for patients not requiring labs on the day of treatment without increasing wait times for patients requiring labs. Additional PDSA cycles will be conducted for further reductions in wait times for all patients at our site.

Abstract P5-15-01: The use of 18F-FDG PET/CT as an initial staging procedure for stage II-III breast cancer reduces false positives, costs, and time to treatment: A multicenter value analysis in the I-SPY2 trial

Introduction: Diagnostic metastatic staging imaging (SI) for asymptomatic stage I-II patients (pts) is not routinely recommended, but is warranted in stage II-III pts with high risk biological subtypes, where previous trials have shown up to a 15% rate of de novo metastatic disease. NCCN guidelines endorse CT CAP and bone scan (STD) for stage III pts, but not PET/CT, and PET/CT is not covered in most parts of the country. We present data on the performance and value of PET/CT.

Methods: Data were available for 799 high risk clinical stage II-III pts screened for I-SPY2 at UCSF, Uminn, UAB, and Georgetown. Of these, 564 pts ranging in age from 25-81 (median = 48) had complete records that were retrospectively reviewed for SI and potential false positives (FP), defined as incidental findings on SI proven benign by subsequent workup. Economic evaluation was conducted from the payer perspective using the mean national 2018 Medicare Physician Fee Schedule and representative costs from the UCSF billing department. The incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) measured the cost of using PET/CT per percent patient (pt) who avoided a FP.

Results: The rate of de novo metastatic disease was 4.8% (38/799), range 3.6-6.4%. Of the 564 pts with complete records, diagnostic SI varied significantly among the four sites (p &lt; 0.0001). STD was used for most pts at UAB (92.8%, 141/152) and Georgetown (85.7%, 54/63), while PET/CT was used for most pts at UCSF (86.6%, 226/261) and Uminn (63.6%, 56/88). Chest X-ray was used for 29.5% (26/88) at Uminn. There were significantly more pts with FP in the group that received STD (22.1%, 51/231) vs. PET/CT (11.1%, 33/298) (p &lt; 0.05). Mean time between incidental finding on SI to determination of FP was 10.8 days. When controlling for institution, mean time from cancer diagnosis to initiation of neoadjuvant chemotherapy was significantly different between STD (44.3 days) and PET/CT (37.5 days) groups (p &lt; 0.05). When aggregating the four sites using mean costs from the 2018 Medicare Physician Fee Schedule, the mean cost/pt was $1132 for STD vs. $1477 for PET/CT. The mean increase in price from baseline SI costs due to FP workup was $216 (23.6%) for STD vs. $65 (4.6%) for PET/CT. The ICER was $31 per percent pt who avoided a FP. When analyzing UCSF pts alone using representative reimbursements from Medicare, the mean cost/pt was $1236 for STD vs. $1081 for PET/CT; using representative reimbursements from Anthem Blue Cross, the mean cost/pt was $3080 for STD vs. $1662 for PET/CT. The ICERs were -$10 and -$95 per percent pt who avoided a FP, respectively.

Conclusion: As compared to STD metastatic staging workup, PET/CT added value by decreasing FP two-fold. This reduced direct costs of FP workup procedures that took a mean time of 10.8 days to resolve. PET/CT also accelerated treatment start. Reducing the chance of FP workup for metastatic disease is of enormous value to pts. Our data establish the value of PET/CT for staging in our high risk clinical stage II-III trial population and highlight the need for alignment between hospital pricing strategies and payer coverage policies in order to deliver high value care to pts.

Citation Format: Hyland CJ, Varghese F, Yau C, Beckwith H, Khoury K, Varnado W, Hirst G, Chien J, Yee D, Isaacs C, Forero-Torres A, Esserman L, Melisko M, I-SPY2 Consortium. The use of 18F-FDG PET/CT as an initial staging procedure for stage II-III breast cancer reduces false positives, costs, and time to treatment: A multicenter value analysis in the I-SPY2 trial [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2018 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2018 Dec 4-8; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P5-15-01.

Financial distress amongst older adults with gastrointestinal (GI) malignancies

517

Background: Many patients with cancer report financial distress (FD); however, the magnitude of FD in the growing number of older adults with cancer remains less clear, particularly in those with GI malignancies. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the proportion of older adults with GI malignancies reporting FD and to characterize geriatric assessment (GA) and cancer-related factors associated with FD. Methods: Older adults ( ≥ 60yrs) seen in the GI oncology clinic at the University of Alabama Birmingham (UAB) were asked to fill out a patient-reported GA, entitled the Cancer & Aging Resilience Evaluation (CARE), at their visit. The CARE includes questions pertaining to patient’s independence in Activities of Daily Living (ADLs), Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADLs), falls, physical function, polypharmacy, and comorbidity. A single item question regarding FD from the patient satisfaction questionnaire (PSQ-18) was included. FD was defined as agreement with the phrase “Do you have to pay for more medical care than you can afford.” Demographic and GA characteristics were compared between those with and without FD using Chi-square and t-tests. Results: 233 patients completed the CARE a median of 71 days after diagnosis. Median age 68y (60-96); 54.5% male and 76.0% non-Hispanic white. Most common cancer types included colorectal (39.1%) and pancreatic cancers (20.6%). A total of 62 patients (26.6%) had FD. Patients with FD were more likely to be younger (68.1 vs. 70.1y, p = 0.04), of black race (37.1% vs. 15.8%, p = 0.007), have low education ( ≤ high school: 74.2% vs. 59.6%, p = 0.02), have one or more falls (31.5% vs. 19.9%, p = 0.077), to be limited a lot in walking 1 block (54.4% vs. 27.4%, p = 0.0003), take more than 4 medications (88.3% vs. 70.8%, p = 0.007), to have more than one comorbid condition (93.1% vs. 82.6%, p = 0.052), to report impaired IADLs (61.3% vs. 43.9%, p = 0.055), and impaired ADL (27.4% vs. 14.6%, p = 0.069). No associations were found with GI cancer type or stage, marital status, time from diagnosis, or hearing/vision impairments. Conclusions: Over a quarter of the older adult population with GI malignancies report FD. Several GA and demographic factors were associated with FD that may help identify older patients at risk for FD.

FLIGHT ASSOCIATED DISSECTION

"Economy Class Stroke "is a term recognized in the literature pertaining to paradoxical strokes of patent foramen ovale. However, other central nervous system (CNS) processes should be considered with long distance fights. We present two cases of vascular dissection associated with long distance flights.

Clinical Case of the Month: Hypereosinophilia in a Young Woman with a History of Childhood Asthma

Hypereosinophillia is a rare clinical entity. It is associated with a wide differential diagnosis including neoplasm, infection, and allergic etiologies. Clinicians should have a well defined approach to hypereosinophilia in order to find treatable causes. We present a case of hypereosinophillia caused by parasitic infection with Toxocara canis. We also review epidemiology, transmission, microbiology, and management of Toxocara canis.