1
|
Warren JL, Mariotto AB, Stevens J, Davidoff AJ, Shankaran V, Ward KC, Wu XC, Schwartz SM, Penberthy L, Yabroff KR. Association of Major Adverse Financial Events and Later-Stage Cancer Diagnosis in the United States. J Clin Oncol 2024; 42:1001-1010. [PMID: 38320222 PMCID: PMC10950180 DOI: 10.1200/jco.23.01067] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/16/2023] [Revised: 10/25/2023] [Accepted: 11/14/2023] [Indexed: 02/08/2024] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE This study assessed the prevalence of specific major adverse financial events (AFEs)-bankruptcies, liens, and evictions-before a cancer diagnosis and their association with later-stage cancer at diagnosis. METHODS Patients age 20-69 years diagnosed with cancer during 2014-2015 were identified from the Seattle, Louisiana, and Georgia SEER population-based cancer registries. Registry data were linked with LexisNexis consumer data to identify patients with a history of court-documented AFEs before cancer diagnosis. The association of AFEs and later-stage cancer diagnoses (stages III/IV) was assessed using separate sex-specific multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS Among 101,649 patients with cancer linked to LexisNexis data, 36,791 (36.2%) had a major AFE reported before diagnosis. The mean and median timing of the AFE closest to diagnosis were 93 and 77 months, respectively. AFEs were most common among non-Hispanic Black, unmarried, and low-income patients. Individuals with previous AFEs were more likely to be diagnosed with later-stage cancer than individuals with no AFE (males-odds ratio [OR], 1.09 [95% CI, 1.03 to 1.14]; P < .001; females-OR, 1.18 [95% CI, 1.13 to 1.24]; P < .0001) after adjusting for age, race, marital status, income, registry, and cancer type. Associations between AFEs prediagnosis and later-stage disease did not vary by AFE timing. CONCLUSION One third of newly diagnosed patients with cancer had a major AFE before their diagnosis. Patients with AFEs were more likely to have later-stage diagnosis, even accounting for traditional measures of socioeconomic status that influence the stage at diagnosis. The prevalence of prediagnosis AFEs underscores financial vulnerability of patients with cancer before their diagnosis, before any subsequent financial burden associated with cancer treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Joan L. Warren
- Division of Cancer Control and Population Science, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD
| | - Angela B. Mariotto
- Division of Cancer Control and Population Science, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD
| | | | - Amy J. Davidoff
- Division of Cancer Control and Population Science, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD
| | - Veena Shankaran
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
| | - Kevin C. Ward
- Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA
| | - Xiao-Cheng Wu
- School of Public Health, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA
| | - Stephen M. Schwartz
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
| | - Lynne Penberthy
- Division of Cancer Control and Population Science, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD
| | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Bell-Brown A, Hopkins T, Watabayashi K, Overstreet K, Leahy A, Bradshaw E, Gallagher K, Obenchain J, Padron A, Scott B, Flores B, Shankaran V. A proactive financial navigation intervention in patients with newly diagnosed gastric and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma. Support Care Cancer 2024; 32:189. [PMID: 38400905 PMCID: PMC10894103 DOI: 10.1007/s00520-024-08399-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/02/2023] [Accepted: 02/19/2024] [Indexed: 02/26/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE Many cancer patients and caregivers experience financial hardship, leading to poor outcomes. Gastric and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer patients are particularly at risk for financial hardship given the intensity of treatment. This pilot randomized study among gastric/GEJ cancer patients and caregivers tested a proactive financial navigation (FN) intervention to obtain a signal of efficacy to inform a larger, more rigorous randomized study. METHODS We tested a 3-month proactive FN intervention among gastric/GEJ cancer patients and caregivers compared to usual care. Caregiver participation was optional. The primary endpoint was incidence of financial hardship, defined as follows: accrual of debt, income decline of ≥ 20%, or taking loans to pay for treatment. Data from participant surveys and documentation by partner organizations delivering the FN intervention was analyzed and outcomes were compared between study arms. RESULTS Nineteen patients and 12 caregivers consented. Primary FN resources provided included insurance navigation, budget planning, and help with out-of-pocket medical expenses. Usual care patients were more likely to experience financial hardship (50% vs 40%) and declines in quality of life (37.5% vs 0%) compared to intervention patients. Caregivers in both arms reported increased financial stress and poorer quality of life over the study period. CONCLUSIONS Proactive financial navigation has potentially positive impacts on financial hardship and quality of life for cancer patients and more large-scale randomized interventions should be conducted to rigorously explore the impact of similar interventions. Interventions that have the potential to lessen caregiver financial stress and burden need further exploration. TRIAL REGISTRATION TRN: NCT03986502, June 14, 2019.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ari Bell-Brown
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, 1100 Fairview Ave N., Mailstop M3-B232, Seattle, WA, 98109, USA.
| | - Talor Hopkins
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, 1100 Fairview Ave N., Mailstop M3-B232, Seattle, WA, 98109, USA
| | - Kate Watabayashi
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, 1100 Fairview Ave N., Mailstop M3-B232, Seattle, WA, 98109, USA
| | | | - Anthony Leahy
- Consumer Education and Training Services, Seattle, WA, USA
| | | | | | | | - Amber Padron
- Patient Advocate Foundation, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Beth Scott
- Patient Advocate Foundation, Washington, DC, USA
| | | | - Veena Shankaran
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, 1100 Fairview Ave N., Mailstop M3-B232, Seattle, WA, 98109, USA
- Division of Medical Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Banerjee R, Cowan AJ, Ortega M, Missimer C, Carpenter PA, Oshima MU, Salit RB, Vo PT, Lee CJ, Mehta RS, Kuderer NM, Shankaran V, Lee SJ, Su CT. Financial Toxicity, Time Toxicity, and Quality of Life in Multiple Myeloma. Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk 2024:S2152-2650(24)00090-9. [PMID: 38521640 DOI: 10.1016/j.clml.2024.02.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/28/2023] [Accepted: 02/21/2024] [Indexed: 03/25/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Patients with multiple myeloma (MM) may be on therapy for years, which can lead to financial toxicity (FinTox) or time toxicity (TimeTox). The prevalence, predictors, and quality of life (QOL) impacts of FinTox and TimeTox during different phases of MM treatment have not been characterized. PATIENTS AND METHODS We conducted a single-center cross-sectional survey of patients with MM who had undergone transplantation. FinTox+ was defined as a COST-FACIT score <23, TimeTox+ as MM-related interactions (including phone calls) ≥1x weekly or ≥1x monthly in-person among far-residing patients, QOL using PROMIS Global Health, and functional status using patient-reported Karnofsky performance status (KPS). RESULTS Of 252 patients, 22% and 40% met FinTox+ and TimeTox+ criteria respectively. Respective FinTox+ and TimeTox+ proportions were 22%/37% for patients on maintenance, 22%/82% with active therapy, and 20%/14% with observation. FinTox+ predictors included annual income (P < .01) and out-of-pocket costs (P < .01). TimeTox+ predictors included disease status (P < .001), caregiver status (P = .01), far-residing status (P < .001), and out-of-pocket costs (P = .03). FinTox+ was associated with a clinically meaningful decrease in mental QOL, while TimeTox+ patients were more likely to have KPS ≤ 80. CONCLUSIONS In our large study, monetary status but not disease status predicted FinTox. Over a third of patients on maintenance reported TimeTox. FinTox+ was associated with decreased mental health, while TimeTox+ was associated with worse performance status. These two toxicities may negatively impact patient wellbeing, and studies of strategies to mitigate their impact are in development.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rahul Banerjee
- Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA; Clinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA.
| | - Andrew J Cowan
- Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA; Clinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Marivel Ortega
- Clinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA
| | | | - Paul A Carpenter
- Clinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Masumi Ueda Oshima
- Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA; Clinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Rachel B Salit
- Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA; Clinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Phuong T Vo
- Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA; Clinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Catherine J Lee
- Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA; Clinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Rohtesh S Mehta
- Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA; Clinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA
| | | | - Veena Shankaran
- Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA; Clinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Stephanie J Lee
- Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA; Clinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Christopher T Su
- Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA; Clinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Su CT, Shankaran V. Digital symptom assessment tools: the next frontier in financial toxicity screening. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2024; 21:85-86. [PMID: 37880408 DOI: 10.1038/s41571-023-00833-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/27/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Christopher T Su
- Division of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, USA.
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcome Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA, USA.
| | - Veena Shankaran
- Division of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, USA
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcome Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Rodriguez PJ, Heagerty PJ, Clark S, Khor S, Chen Y, Haupt E, Hahn EE, Shankaran V, Bansal A. Using Machine Learning to Leverage Biomarker Change and Predict Colorectal Cancer Recurrence. JCO Clin Cancer Inform 2023; 7:e2300066. [PMID: 37963310 PMCID: PMC10681492 DOI: 10.1200/cci.23.00066] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/14/2023] [Revised: 06/12/2023] [Accepted: 07/12/2023] [Indexed: 11/16/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE The risk of colorectal cancer (CRC) recurrence after primary treatment varies across individuals and over time. Using patients' most up-to-date information, including carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) biomarker profiles, to predict risk could improve personalized decision making. METHODS We used electronic health record data from an integrated health system on a cohort of patients diagnosed with American Joint Committee on Cancer stage I-III CRC between 2008 and 2013 (N = 3,970) and monitored until recurrence or end of follow-up. We addressed missingness in recurrence outcomes and longitudinal CEA measures, and engineered CEA features using current and past biomarker values for inclusion in a risk prediction model. We used a discrete time Superlearner model to evaluate various algorithms for predicting recurrence. We evaluated the time-varying discrimination and calibration of the algorithms and assessed the role of individual predictors. RESULTS Recurrence was documented in 448 (11.3%) patients. XGBoost with depth = 1 (XGB-D1) predicted recurrence substantially better than all other algorithms at all time points, with AUC ranging from 0.87 (95% CI, 0.86 to 0.88) at 6 months to 0.94 (95% CI, 0.92 to 0.96) at 54 months. The only variable used by XGB-D1 was 6-month change in log CEA. Predicted 1-year risk of recurrence was nearly zero for patients whose log CEA did not increase in the last 6 months, between 12.2% and 34.1% for patients whose log CEA increased between 0.10 and 0.40, and 43.6% for those with a log CEA increase >0.40. Compared with XGB, penalized regression approaches (lasso, ridge, and elastic net) performed poorly, with AUCs ranging from 0.58 to 0.69. CONCLUSION A flexible, machine learning approach that incorporated longitudinal CEA information yielded a simple and high-performing model for predicting recurrence on the basis of 6-month change in log CEA.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Patricia J. Rodriguez
- The Comparative Health Outcomes, Policy & Economics (CHOICE) Institute, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
| | | | - Samantha Clark
- The Comparative Health Outcomes, Policy & Economics (CHOICE) Institute, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
| | - Sara Khor
- The Comparative Health Outcomes, Policy & Economics (CHOICE) Institute, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
| | - Yilin Chen
- The Comparative Health Outcomes, Policy & Economics (CHOICE) Institute, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
| | - Eric Haupt
- Department of Research and Evaluation, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, Pasadena, CA
| | - Erin E. Hahn
- Department of Research and Evaluation, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, Pasadena, CA
- Department of Health Systems Science, Kaiser Permanente Bernard J. Tyson School of Medicine, Pasadena, CA
| | | | - Aasthaa Bansal
- The Comparative Health Outcomes, Policy & Economics (CHOICE) Institute, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Bell-Brown A, Watabayashi K, Delaney D, Carlos RC, Langer SL, Unger JM, Vaidya RR, Darke AK, Hershman DL, Ramsey SD, Shankaran V. Assessment of financial screening and navigation capabilities at National Cancer Institute community oncology clinics. JNCI Cancer Spectr 2023; 7:pkad055. [PMID: 37561111 PMCID: PMC10471524 DOI: 10.1093/jncics/pkad055] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/24/2023] [Revised: 07/24/2023] [Accepted: 08/02/2023] [Indexed: 08/11/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Cancer-related financial hardship is a side effect of cancer diagnosis and treatment, and affects both patients and caregivers. Although many oncology clinics have increased financial navigation services, few have resources to proactively provide financial counseling and assistance to families affected by cancer before financial hardship occurs. As part of an ongoing randomized study testing a proactive financial navigation intervention, S1912CD, among sites of the National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP), we conducted a baseline survey to learn more about existing financial resources available to patients and caregivers. METHODS The NCORP sites participating in the S1912CD study completed a required 10-question survey about their available financial resources and an optional 5-question survey that focused on financial screening and navigation workflow and challenges prior to starting recruitment. The proportion of NCORP sites offering financial navigation services was calculated and responses to the optional survey were reviewed to determine current screening and navigation practices and identify any challenges. RESULTS Most sites (96%) reported offering financial navigation for cancer patients. Sites primarily identified patients needing financial assistance through social work evaluations (78%) or distress screening tools (76%). Sites revealed challenges in addressing financial needs at the outset and through diagnosis, including lack of proactive screening and referral to financial navigation services as well as staffing challenges. CONCLUSIONS Although most participating NCORP sites offer some form of financial assistance, the survey data enabled identification of gaps and challenges in providing services. Utilizing community partners to deliver comprehensive financial navigation guidance to cancer patients and caregivers may help meet needs while reducing site burden.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ari Bell-Brown
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA, United States
| | - Kate Watabayashi
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA, United States
| | - Debbie Delaney
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA, United States
| | - Ruth C Carlos
- Department of Radiology, University of Michigan Medical Center, Ann Arbor, MI, United States
| | - Shelby L Langer
- Center for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention, Edson College of Nursing and Health Innovation, AZ State University, Phoenix, AZ, United States
| | - Joseph M Unger
- Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA, United States
- SWOG Statistics and Data Management Center, Seattle, WA, United States
| | - Riha R Vaidya
- Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA, United States
- SWOG Statistics and Data Management Center, Seattle, WA, United States
| | - Amy K Darke
- SWOG Statistics and Data Management Center, Seattle, WA, United States
| | - Dawn L Hershman
- Division of Hematology/Oncology, Columbia University, New York, NY, United States
| | - Scott D Ramsey
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA, United States
| | - Veena Shankaran
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA, United States
- Division of Hematology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA, United States
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Cohen SA, Veleber S, Siman J, Guthrie KA, McMillen K, Heit M, Wadhera S, Daniels J, Hansen K, Jacoby M, Taromina K, Chin S, Romeo M, Langley BO, Coveler AL, Hannan LM, King G, Purcell T, Safyan RA, Shankaran V, Zhen DB, Chiorean EG, Greenlee H. Use of acupuncture with acupressure in addition to standard-of-care cryotherapy to decrease chemotherapy-associated neuropathy in patients with gastrointestinal malignancies receiving oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy: Study protocol for a randomized, controlled pilot and feasibility study. Contemp Clin Trials 2023; 131:107273. [PMID: 37380021 PMCID: PMC10527487 DOI: 10.1016/j.cct.2023.107273] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/01/2023] [Revised: 05/30/2023] [Accepted: 06/25/2023] [Indexed: 06/30/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Oxaliplatin is a key chemotherapeutic agent in the treatment of local and metastatic gastrointestinal (GI) malignancies. Dose density and treatment adherence can be limited by chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN). Early research suggests CIPN incidence and severity may be mitigated by acupuncture, but rigorous data in GI oncology patients is limited. Here, we describe the protocol of a randomized, waitlist-controlled pilot study testing the use of preemptive of acupuncture plus acupressure to decrease CIPN and chemotherapy-related toxicities. METHODS Patients with a GI malignancy (n = 56) with planned 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and oxaliplatin IV (FOLFOX, FOLFIRINOX) every 2 weeks are being recruited. Additional concurrent anti-neoplastic agents may be used. Enrolled patients are randomized 1:1 to a 3-month intervention of Arm A: acupuncture with acupressure and standard-of-care treatment, or Arm B: standard-of-care alone. In Arm A, on days 1 and 3 of each chemotherapy cycle a standardized acupuncture protocol is administered and patients are taught self-acupressure to perform daily between chemotherapy treatments. Patients in both arms are given standard-of-care oral and peripheral (hands/feet) ice chip cryotherapy during oxaliplatin administration. CIPN and other symptoms are assessed at baseline, 6 weeks, and 3 months from registration. The primary endpoint is CIPN severity at 3 months (EORTC-CIPN 20). Additional endpoints evaluate CIPN incidence (CTCAE, Neuropen, tuning fork); incidence of pain, fatigue, nausea, oral dysesthesia, and anxiety; and feasibility (recruitment, retention, adherence, acceptability). If warranted, trial results will inform the design of a multi-center trial to expand testing of the intervention to a larger patient cohort.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stacey A Cohen
- Clinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, 825 Eastlake Ave E, Seattle, WA 98109, USA; Division of Medical Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine, USA.
| | - Susan Veleber
- Integrative Medicine Program, Division of Supportive Care, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, USA; Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, USA
| | - Jonathan Siman
- Integrative Medicine Program, Division of Supportive Care, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, USA; Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, USA
| | | | - Kerry McMillen
- Clinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, 825 Eastlake Ave E, Seattle, WA 98109, USA
| | - Madilyn Heit
- Clinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, 825 Eastlake Ave E, Seattle, WA 98109, USA; Division of Medical Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine, USA
| | - Sonia Wadhera
- Clinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, 825 Eastlake Ave E, Seattle, WA 98109, USA; Division of Medical Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine, USA
| | - Jonathan Daniels
- Clinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, 825 Eastlake Ave E, Seattle, WA 98109, USA; Division of Medical Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine, USA
| | - Kjell Hansen
- Clinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, 825 Eastlake Ave E, Seattle, WA 98109, USA; Division of Medical Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine, USA
| | - Madeline Jacoby
- Clinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, 825 Eastlake Ave E, Seattle, WA 98109, USA; Division of Medical Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine, USA
| | - Katherine Taromina
- Integrative Medicine Program, Division of Supportive Care, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, USA
| | - Samantha Chin
- Integrative Medicine Program, Division of Supportive Care, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, USA
| | - Melissa Romeo
- Integrative Medicine Program, Division of Supportive Care, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, USA
| | - Blake O Langley
- Integrative Medicine Program, Division of Supportive Care, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, USA; Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, USA; Department of Child, Family, and Population Health Nursing, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA
| | - Andrew L Coveler
- Clinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, 825 Eastlake Ave E, Seattle, WA 98109, USA; Division of Medical Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine, USA
| | - Lindsay M Hannan
- Division of Medical Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine, USA
| | - Gentry King
- Clinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, 825 Eastlake Ave E, Seattle, WA 98109, USA; Division of Medical Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine, USA
| | - Tom Purcell
- Clinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, 825 Eastlake Ave E, Seattle, WA 98109, USA; Division of Medical Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine, USA
| | - Rachael A Safyan
- Clinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, 825 Eastlake Ave E, Seattle, WA 98109, USA; Division of Medical Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine, USA
| | - Veena Shankaran
- Clinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, 825 Eastlake Ave E, Seattle, WA 98109, USA; Division of Medical Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine, USA
| | - David B Zhen
- Clinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, 825 Eastlake Ave E, Seattle, WA 98109, USA; Division of Medical Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine, USA
| | - E Gabriela Chiorean
- Clinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, 825 Eastlake Ave E, Seattle, WA 98109, USA; Division of Medical Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine, USA
| | - Heather Greenlee
- Clinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, 825 Eastlake Ave E, Seattle, WA 98109, USA; Division of Medical Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine, USA; Integrative Medicine Program, Division of Supportive Care, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, USA; Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, USA
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Khor S, Haupt EC, Hahn EE, Lyons LJL, Shankaran V, Bansal A. Racial and Ethnic Bias in Risk Prediction Models for Colorectal Cancer Recurrence When Race and Ethnicity Are Omitted as Predictors. JAMA Netw Open 2023; 6:e2318495. [PMID: 37318804 PMCID: PMC10273018 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.18495] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/08/2022] [Accepted: 04/28/2023] [Indexed: 06/16/2023] Open
Abstract
Importance Including race and ethnicity as a predictor in clinical risk prediction algorithms has received increased scrutiny, but there continues to be a lack of empirical studies addressing whether simply omitting race and ethnicity from the algorithms will ultimately affect decision-making for patients of minoritized racial and ethnic groups. Objective To examine whether including race and ethnicity as a predictor in a colorectal cancer recurrence risk algorithm is associated with racial bias, defined as racial and ethnic differences in model accuracy that could potentially lead to unequal treatment. Design, Setting, and Participants This retrospective prognostic study was conducted using data from a large integrated health care system in Southern California for patients with colorectal cancer who received primary treatment between 2008 and 2013 and follow-up until December 31, 2018. Data were analyzed from January 2021 to June 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures Four Cox proportional hazards regression prediction models were fitted to predict time from surveillance start to cancer recurrence: (1) a race-neutral model that explicitly excluded race and ethnicity as a predictor, (2) a race-sensitive model that included race and ethnicity, (3) a model with 2-way interactions between clinical predictors and race and ethnicity, and (4) separate models by race and ethnicity. Algorithmic fairness was assessed using model calibration, discriminative ability, false-positive and false-negative rates, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV). Results The study cohort included 4230 patients (mean [SD] age, 65.3 [12.5] years; 2034 [48.1%] female; 490 [11.6%] Asian, Hawaiian, or Pacific Islander; 554 [13.1%] Black or African American; 937 [22.1%] Hispanic; and 2249 [53.1%] non-Hispanic White). The race-neutral model had worse calibration, NPV, and false-negative rates among racial and ethnic minority subgroups than non-Hispanic White individuals (eg, false-negative rate for Hispanic patients: 12.0% [95% CI, 6.0%-18.6%]; for non-Hispanic White patients: 3.1% [95% CI, 0.8%-6.2%]). Adding race and ethnicity as a predictor improved algorithmic fairness in calibration slope, discriminative ability, PPV, and false-negative rates (eg, false-negative rate for Hispanic patients: 9.2% [95% CI, 3.9%-14.9%]; for non-Hispanic White patients: 7.9% [95% CI, 4.3%-11.9%]). Inclusion of race interaction terms or using race-stratified models did not improve model fairness, likely due to small sample sizes in subgroups. Conclusions and Relevance In this prognostic study of the racial bias in a cancer recurrence risk algorithm, removing race and ethnicity as a predictor worsened algorithmic fairness in multiple measures, which could lead to inappropriate care recommendations for patients who belong to minoritized racial and ethnic groups. Clinical algorithm development should include evaluation of fairness criteria to understand the potential consequences of removing race and ethnicity for health inequities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sara Khor
- Comparative Health Outcomes, Policy, and Economics (CHOICE) Institute, University of Washington
| | - Eric C. Haupt
- Department of Research and Evaluation, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, Pasadena
| | - Erin E. Hahn
- Department of Research and Evaluation, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, Pasadena
| | - Lindsay Joe L. Lyons
- Department of Research and Evaluation, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, Pasadena
| | - Veena Shankaran
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, Washington
- Division of Medical Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle
| | - Aasthaa Bansal
- Comparative Health Outcomes, Policy, and Economics (CHOICE) Institute, University of Washington
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, Washington
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Chen Y, Shankaran V, Hahn EE, Haupt EC, Bansal A. Underutilization or appropriate care? Assessing adjuvant chemotherapy use and survival in 3 heterogenous subpopulations with stage II/III colorectal cancer within a large integrated health system. J Manag Care Spec Pharm 2023; 29:635-646. [PMID: 37276035 PMCID: PMC10387960 DOI: 10.18553/jmcp.2023.29.6.635] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/07/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Clinical guidelines have recommended adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT) for patients with high-risk stage II colon cancer, although the survival benefit is unclear. ACT is also recommended for patients with stage III colon cancer to reduce the risk of recurrence and mortality. For stage II/III rectal cancer, however, the role of perioperative chemotherapy (PCT, adjuvant or neoadjuvant) remains controversial, resulting in substantial variation in its use in clinical practice. OBJECTIVES: To understand real-world use and predictors of ACT or PCT use and survival outcomes in 3 heterogeneous patient groups with colorectal cancer (CRC), and to inform the evidence gap between guideline-based care and clinical practice. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included patients with an initial stage II/III CRC diagnosis between 2008 and 2013 identified from Kaiser Permanente Southern California electronic health record databases. Patients were eligible if they were aged 18-74 years at diagnosis and received primary curative surgery. We fitted mixed effects logistic regression models to evaluate predictors of ACT receipt and Cox proportional hazards models on propensity score-matched (PS-matched) samples to assess the association between ACT/PCT receipt and survival. RESULTS: We included 1,690 patients with colon cancer (stage II: 820 and stage III: 870) and 587 patients with rectal cancer (stage II: 241 and stage III: 346). We found that 65% of patients with high-risk stage II colon cancer, 15% of those with stage III colon, and 15% of those with stage II/III rectal cancer did not receive ACT/PCT. Patients with stage II colon cancer with T4 stage (odds ratio [OR] = 5.79, 95% CI = 3.33 - 10.06) and a lower comorbidity score were more likely to receive ACT (high vs low Charlson score: OR = 0.69, 95% CI = 0.55 - 0.87). Patients with stage III rectal cancer were more likely to receive PCT than those with stage II disease (OR = 7.85, 95% CI = 2.07 - 29.74). Patients with another cancer diagnosis prior to CRC diagnosis were less likely to receive PCT (OR = 0.37, 95% CI = 0.16 - 0.85). ACT/PCT use was associated with improved overall survival among patients with high-risk stage II colon cancer (PS-matched hazard ratio [HR] = 0.42, 95% CI = 0.25 - 0.70) and those with stage III CRC (stage III colon: PS-matched HR = 0.3, 95% CI = 0.25 - 0.36; stage III rectal: PS-matched HR = 0.2, 95% CI = 0.13 - 0.31). CONCLUSIONS: We found potential underuse of appropriate chemotherapy treatment in patients with high-risk stage II colon cancer and stage III CRC. Clinicians' and providers' decisions on ACT administration may not be fully guided by the risk of recurrence and 5-year survival benefits in stage II colon cancer. DISCLOSURES: This research was supported by the National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) (under R37-CA218413). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yilin Chen
- CHOICE Institute, School of Pharmacy, University of Washington, Seattle
| | - Veena Shankaran
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, and Division of Medical Oncology, University of Washington, Seattle
| | - Erin E Hahn
- Department of Health Systems Sciences, Bernard J. Tyson School of Medicine, Kaiser Permanente, Pasadena, CA
- Department of Research and Evaluation, Kaiser Permanente, Pasadena, CA
| | - Eric C Haupt
- Department of Research and Evaluation, Kaiser Permanente, Pasadena, CA
| | - Aasthaa Bansal
- CHOICE Institute, School of Pharmacy, University of Washington, Seattle
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Savage T, Sun Q, Bell-Brown A, Katta A, Shankaran V, Fedorenko C, Ramsey SD, Issaka RB. Association between patient, clinic, and geographical-level factors and 1-year surveillance colonoscopy adherence. Clin Transl Gastroenterol 2023; Publish Ahead of Print:01720094-990000000-00157. [PMID: 37224302 PMCID: PMC10371320 DOI: 10.14309/ctg.0000000000000600] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/28/2022] [Accepted: 05/08/2023] [Indexed: 05/26/2023] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Surveillance colonoscopy 1-year after surgical resection for patients with stages I-III colorectal cancer (CRC) is suboptimal and data on factors associated with lack of adherence are limited. Using surveillance colonoscopy data from Washington state, we aimed to determine the patient, clinic, and geographical factors associated with adherence. METHODS Using administrative insurance claims linked to Washington (WA) cancer registry data we conducted a retrospective cohort study of adult patients diagnosed with stage I-III CRC between 2011 and 2018 with continuous insurance for at least 18 months after diagnosis. We determined the adherence rate to 1-year surveillance colonoscopy and conducted logistic regression analysis to identify factors associated with completion. RESULTS Of 4,481 stage I-III CRC patients identified, 55.8% completed a 1-year surveillance colonoscopy. The median time to colonoscopy completion was 370 days. On multivariate analysis, older age, higher stage CRC, Medicare insurance or multiple insurance carriers, higher Charlson Comorbidity Index score and living without a partner were significantly associated with decreased adherence to 1-year surveillance colonoscopy. Among 29 eligible clinics, 51% (n=15) reported lower than expected surveillance colonoscopy rates based on patient mix. CONCLUSION Surveillance colonoscopy 1-year after surgical resection is sub-optimal in WA state. Patient and clinic factors, but not geographic factors (Area Deprivation Index), were significantly associated with surveillance colonoscopy completion. This data will inform the development of patient and clinic level interventions to address an important quality of care issue across Washington.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Talicia Savage
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of Washington. Seattle, WA
| | - Qin Sun
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center. Seattle, WA
| | - Ari Bell-Brown
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center. Seattle, WA
| | - Anjali Katta
- Department of Engineering, University of Washington. Seattle, WA
| | - Veena Shankaran
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center. Seattle, WA
| | - Catherine Fedorenko
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center. Seattle, WA
| | - Scott D Ramsey
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center. Seattle, WA
| | - Rachel B Issaka
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center. Seattle, WA
- Department of Engineering, University of Washington. Seattle, WA
- Public Health Sciences & Clinical Research Divisions, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center. Seattle, WA
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Khan HM, Ramsey S, Shankaran V. Financial Toxicity in Cancer Care: Implications for Clinical Care and Potential Practice Solutions. J Clin Oncol 2023; 41:3051-3058. [PMID: 37071839 DOI: 10.1200/jco.22.01799] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 04/20/2023] Open
Abstract
Patients with cancer face an array of financial consequences as a result of their diagnosis and treatment, collectively referred to as financial toxicity (FT). In the past 10 years, the body of literature on this subject has grown tremendously, with a recent focus on interventions and mitigation strategies. In this review, we will briefly summarize the FT literature, focusing on the contributing factors and downstream consequences on patient outcomes. In addition, we will put FT into context with our emerging understanding of the role of social determinants of health and provide a framework for understanding FT across the cancer care continuum. We will then discuss the role of the oncology community in addressing FT and outline potential strategies that oncologists and health systems can implement to reduce this undue burden on patients with cancer and their families.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hiba M Khan
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Scott Ramsey
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Veena Shankaran
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA
- Division of Medical Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Panattoni LE, McDermott CL, Li L, Sun Q, Fedorenko CR, Sanchez HA, Kreizenbeck KL, Shankaran V, Ramsey SD. Effect of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Place of Death Among Medicaid and Commercially Insured Patients With Cancer in Washington State. J Clin Oncol 2023; 41:1610-1617. [PMID: 36417688 PMCID: PMC10489265 DOI: 10.1200/jco.22.00070] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/12/2022] [Revised: 08/15/2022] [Accepted: 10/04/2022] [Indexed: 11/24/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE The COVID-19 pandemic-related disruptions in health care delivery might have affected end-of-life care in patients with cancer. We examined changes in place of death and hospice support for Medicaid and commercially insured patients during the pandemic. PATIENTS AND METHODS We linked Washington State cancer registry records with claims from Medicaid and two commercial insurers for patients with solid tumor age 18-64 years. The study included 322 Medicaid and 162 commercial patients who died between March 2017 and June 2019 (pre-COVID-19), along with 90 Medicaid and 47 commercial patients who died between March and June 2020 (COVID-19). Place of death was categorized as hospital, hospice (home or nonhospital facility), and home without hospice. Place of death was compared using adjusted multinomial logistic regressions stratified by payer and time period (pre-COVID-19 v COVID-19). The clinical and sociodemographic factors associated with dying at home without hospice were examined, and adjusted marginal effects (ME) are reported. RESULTS In the adjusted pre-COVID-19 analysis, Medicaid patients were more likely than commercially insured patients to die in hospital (48% v 36%; adjusted ME, 11%; P = .02). In the pre-COVID-19/COVID-19 analysis, Medicaid patients' place of death shifted from hospital (48% v 32%; ME, -16%; P < .01) to home without hospice (19.9% v 38.0%; ME, 16.5%; P < .01). However, there were no statistically significant changes pre-COVID-19/COVID-19 for commercial patients. As a result, during COVID-19, Medicaid patients were more likely than commercial patients to die at home without hospice (38% v 22%; ME, 16%; P = .04) as were male versus female patients (ME, 16%; P < .01). CONCLUSION The pandemic might have disproportionately worsened the end-of-life experience for Medicaid enrollees with cancer. Attention should be paid to societal and health system factors that decrease access to care for Medicaid patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Laura E. Panattoni
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
- PRECISIONheor, Los Angeles, CA
| | - Cara L. McDermott
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
- Cambia Palliative Care Center of Excellence, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
| | - Li Li
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Qin Sun
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Catherine R. Fedorenko
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Hayley A. Sanchez
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Karma L. Kreizenbeck
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Veena Shankaran
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Scott D. Ramsey
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Manohar P, Linden H, Shankaran V, Fedorenko C, Voutsinas J, Sun Q, Wu V. Abstract P4-07-47: Real-world practice patterns in the management of metastatic breast cancer in Washington State. Cancer Res 2023. [DOI: 10.1158/1538-7445.sabcs22-p4-07-47] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/06/2023]
Abstract
Abstract
Background: Evidence-based recommendations for the management of metastatic breast cancer (MBC) endorse confirmation of recurrence with biopsy and reassessment of biomarker status. National guidelines support numerous treatment options and do not capture the nuances of real-world practice. Real world data may demonstrate disparities in adherence to guidelines.
Methods: We collaborated with Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research (HICOR) to link enrollment and insurance claims records with Washington State cancer registries from 2008-2017. Our cohort comprised of women > 18 years old with MBC who met enrollment criteria in one of four payors (Premara, Regence, Medicare, or Medicaid). We identified receipt of biopsy and biomarker re-assessment at time of recurrence, receipt of first line treatment, categorized as CDK4/6 inhibitors (CDKi), chemotherapy (CT), or hormone therapy (HT) and examined factors influencing these practice patterns.
Results: We identified 1,101 patients with MBC (recurrent MBC, N = 715; de novo MBC, N = 386) with a median age of 66 (range 54 – 74). Of the patients with MBC, there were a total of 677 patients with ER+/HER2- MBC. Table 1 shows demographic data. Most of the cohort were White (89%). Approximately 15% of patients lived in areas of high deprivation (area of deprivation index, ADI, 8-10). Patients had either Commercial (47%), Medicaid (4%), Medicare (35%) or multiple (13%) insurance. Of the patients with recurrent MBC, 49.5% received a biopsy to confirm metastatic diagnosis. Similarly, 48.7% of recurrent MBC patients underwent biomarker reassessment. Patients with highest co-morbidity index (2) were more likely to undergo biopsy confirmation (20.3% vs 13.0%, p = 0.02). Biopsy was more often performed at recurrence in patients receiving care at a high-volume center (74.3% vs 67.6%, p = 0.03) compared to low volume center (18.6% vs 26.6%, p = 0.03). First line treatment selection was directly associated with receipt of biopsy and biomarker testing. Hormone therapy only was more common in patients who did not undergo biopsy (62.3% vs 37.7%, p < 0.001) or biomarker reassessment (62.7% vs 37.3%, p < 0.001). Of the patients with ER+/HER2- MBC, the majority of patients received ET alone (69%), followed by chemotherapy (22%), and CDK4/6i + ET (9%). Dual agent CT was the more commonly prescribed compared to single agent in those who received CT (56% vs 44%). The majority of patients who received CDKi + ET were < 65 years old (65.2%, p < 0.02). Insurance influenced first line therapy selection and patients with commercial insurance were more likely to receive CDK4/6i + ET compared to those with Medicare/Medicaid. (60.9% vs 26.1%, p = 0.10). Patients with de novo MBC were more likely to receive CT (43.1% vs 13.4%, p < 0.001) and less likely to receive ET alone (47.9% vs 78.0%, p < 0.001). Almost all patients treated with CDK4/6i + ET received care a high-volume center (91.3%, p = 0.11).
Conclusion:Our findings highlight key gaps for future investigations in the management of MBC and serve as a launching point for new patient-centered and quality-promoting research initiatives.
Table 1: Baseline Demographics 1# of patients treated annually, high = >100, medium 25-100, low <25.
Citation Format: Poorni Manohar, Hannah Linden, Veena Shankaran, Catherine Fedorenko, Jenna Voutsinas, Qin Sun, Vicky Wu. Real-world practice patterns in the management of metastatic breast cancer in Washington State [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2022 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2022 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(5 Suppl):Abstract nr P4-07-47.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Hannah Linden
- 2University of Washington, Fred Hutchison Cancer Center, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | | | | | | | - Qin Sun
- 6Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center
| | - Vicky Wu
- 7Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Su CT, Shankaran V. Defining the Role of the Modern Oncology Provider in Mitigating Financial Toxicity. J Am Coll Radiol 2023; 20:51-56. [PMID: 36513257 PMCID: PMC9898149 DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2022.10.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/09/2022] [Revised: 10/19/2022] [Accepted: 10/20/2022] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
Financial toxicity, the cumulative financial hardships resulting from cancer diagnosis and treatment, is a growing problem in the United States. With the proliferation of costly novel therapeutics and improved cancer survival, financial toxicity will remain a major issue in cancer care delivery. Frontline oncology providers serve as gatekeepers in the medical system and, as such, could play essential roles in recognizing and addressing financial toxicity. Providers and health systems could help mitigate financial toxicity through routine financial toxicity screening, financial navigation, and advocacy. Specific strategies include developing and implementing financial screening instruments that can be integrated in electronic medical records and establishing team-based financial navigation programs to help patients with out-of-pocket medical costs, nonmedical spending, and insurance optimization. Finally, providers should continue to advocate for policies and legislation that decrease cost and promote value-based care. In this review, we examine opportunities for provider engagement in these areas and highlight gaps for future research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christopher T Su
- Division of Hematology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington; and Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcome Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, Washington.
| | - Veena Shankaran
- Division of Medical Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington; and Codirector, Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcome Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, Washington
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Diehl AC, Hannan LM, Zhen DB, Coveler AL, King G, Cohen SA, Harris WP, Shankaran V, Wong KM, Green S, Ng N, Pillarisetty VG, Sham JG, Park JO, Reddi D, Konnick EQ, Pritchard CC, Baker K, Redman M, Chiorean EG. KRAS Mutation Variants and Co-occurring PI3K Pathway Alterations Impact Survival for Patients with Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinomas. Oncologist 2022; 27:1025-1033. [PMID: 36124727 DOI: 10.1093/oncolo/oyac179] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/27/2022] [Accepted: 07/29/2022] [Indexed: 01/05/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND KRAS variant alleles may have differential biological properties which impact prognosis and therapeutic options in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas (PDA). MATERIALS AND METHODS We retrospectively identified patients with advanced PDA who received first-line therapy and underwent blood and/or tumor genomic sequencing at the University of Washington between 2013 and 2020. We examined the incidence of KRAS mutation variants with and without co-occurring PI3K or other genomic alterations and evaluated the association of these mutations with clinicopathological characteristics and survival using a Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS One hundred twenty-six patients had genomic sequencing data; KRAS mutations were identified in 111 PDA and included the following variants: G12D (43)/G12V (35)/G12R (23)/other (10). PI3K pathway mutations (26% vs. 8%) and homologous recombination DNA repair (HRR) defects (35% vs. 12.5%) were more common among KRAS G12R vs. non-G12R mutated cancers. Patients with KRAS G12R vs. non-G12R cancers had significantly longer overall survival (OS) (HR 0.55) and progression-free survival (PFS) (HR 0.58), adjusted for HRR pathway co-mutations among other covariates. Within the KRAS G12R group, co-occurring PI3K pathway mutations were associated with numerically shorter OS (HR 1.58), while no effect was observed on PFS. CONCLUSIONS Patients with PDA harboring KRAS G12R vs. non-G12R mutations have longer survival, but this advantage was offset by co-occurring PI3K alterations. The KRAS/PI3K genomic profile could inform therapeutic vulnerabilities in patients with PDA.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Adam C Diehl
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.,Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Lindsay M Hannan
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.,Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - David B Zhen
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.,Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Andrew L Coveler
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.,Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Gentry King
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.,Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Stacey A Cohen
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.,Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - William P Harris
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.,Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Veena Shankaran
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.,Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Kit M Wong
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.,Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | | | - Natasha Ng
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | | | - Jonathan G Sham
- Department of Surgery, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - James O Park
- Department of Surgery, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Deepti Reddi
- Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Eric Q Konnick
- Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Colin C Pritchard
- Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.,Brotman Baty Institute for Precision Medicine, Seattle, WA, USA
| | | | - Mary Redman
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - E Gabriela Chiorean
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.,Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Gutschenritter T, Post A, Bowen S, Nguyen B, Shankaran V, Zhen D, Farjah F, Oelschlager B, Zeng J, Apisarnthanarax S. Utilizing Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy with a Single Posterior-Anterior Beam for Esophageal Chemoradiation: Dosimetry and Long-Term Clinical Outcomes. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2022. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2022.07.1029] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
|
17
|
Ramsey SD, Shankaran V, Bansal A, Yu K, Glascock M, Kreizenbeck KL, Watabayashi K, Wilson R, Ittes A, Bilgin Keciciler C, Campinha-Bacote A, Yu W, Yu E. Patient (pt) experience with a smartphone application (app) and biosensor for remote symptom monitoring during systemic cancer therapy: Qualitative findings from initial testing. J Clin Oncol 2022. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2022.40.28_suppl.443] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
443 Background: Up to half of pts with cancer receiving systemic therapy have unplanned emergency department or hospital admission during treatment. ML41539 is a prospective observational study of an app to collect electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) and a wearable biosensor (Samsung Galaxy Watch3) to evaluate the use of a remote monitoring system to improve symptom management and reduce unplanned admissions (ISRCTN25569053). Here, we report the initial feasibility and usability results for the ePRO app and biosensor. Methods: The study includes a vanguard phase (n = 32) to obtain early feedback on pt experience of the app and biosensor. After 2 weeks of continuous biosensor monitoring and daily ePRO reporting, 10 pts participated in semi-structured telephone interviews conducted by trained study staff. Open-ended questions addressed usability and technology-driven facilitators and barriers. Pts were also asked about ease of use and biosensor comfort on a 10-point Likert scale (higher scores reflected better usability and comfort). Transcripts were summarized using a FITTE-adapted framework and coded in ATLAS.ti 22.0.11.0. Coded data were summarized and consolidated into matrices to identify areas for improvement in future study phases. Results: Participants were approached until the target of 10 completed interviews was met. Respondents resembled the overall study population with regards to gender, race, ethnicity, age, and adherence to wearing the sensor and completing daily ePROs. For ease of use, the average rating among participants was 9 for the app (range 8.5-10) and 9.5 for the biosensor (range 7-10). Biosensor comfort was rated 7 on average (range 3-9). The most common words used to describe the app were “easy,” “simple,” and “straightforward.” Sixty percent of pts said that the watch needed to be charged too often and that their experience could be improved by offering more sensor functions and allowing pts to view and track their ePRO responses and biometric data. Sixty percent of pts also supported using these technologies to monitor symptoms during cancer therapy, stating that it was a good idea or useful, especially if it prevented hospitalization or increased communication with their care team. Conclusions: Overall, pts reported positive experiences wearing the sensor and using the ePRO app to report their symptoms during the 2-week observation period. Ease of use was high for both the app and biosensor. A majority reported dissatisfaction with the battery life of the biosensor. Most stated that they would prefer more opportunities to interact directly with the devices and to monitor their own symptoms by viewing collected ePRO and biometric data. Building this type of functionality into the app and sensor for future study phases could help pts engage more with the devices and potentially improve adherence. Clinical trial information: ISRCTN25569053.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | - Kaiyue Yu
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | | | | | | | - Richa Wilson
- F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd., South San Francisco, CA
| | | | | | | | - Wei Yu
- Genentech, Inc., South San Francisco, CA
| | - Elaine Yu
- Genentech, Inc., South San Francisco, CA
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Ramsey SD, Shankaran V, Bansal A, Yu K, Glascock M, Kreizenbeck KL, Watabayashi K, Wilson R, Ittes A, Bilgin Keciciler C, Campinha-Bacote A, Yu W, Yu E. Feasibility and usability of an electronic patient (pt)-reported outcome (ePRO) smartphone application (app) and biosensor for pts with cancer undergoing systemic therapy. J Clin Oncol 2022. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2022.40.28_suppl.444] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
444 Background: Almost half of the nearly 370,000 pts with cancer who receive chemotherapy in the United States each year experience Emergency Department (ED) visits and unplanned inpatient (IP) stays during treatment, largely due to poorly controlled symptoms. Recent studies show that using PROs in oncology practice can improve symptom management and pt outcomes. This study examines the feasibility and usability of a PRO app paired with a biosensor to identify pts at high risk of ED and IP visits during systemic therapy. Methods: ML41539 is an ongoing prospective observational study evaluating the feasibility and usability of a clinic-provided app and smartwatch biosensor for monitoring pts undergoing systemic cancer therapy (ISRCTN25569053). Key inclusion criteria are 18–80 years old, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status 0–2, biopsy-proven solid tumor diagnosis (excluding non-melanoma skin cancer), and scheduled to receive a first dose of intravenous or oral cancer therapy as an initial or new line of therapy. Exclusion criteria include receiving radiation or hormone therapy only, residing in a skilled nursing facility, or participating in another clinical trial. The app collects 15 common treatment-related symptoms (PRO-CTCAE) daily. Usability and satisfaction were assessed with the modified mHealth App Usability Questionnaire (mMAUQ: score 1-7; higher score indicates better app usability and satisfaction) and the modified Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology (mQUEST 2.0: score 1-5; higher score indicates better sensor satisfaction). We report planned analysis results of the first 32 pts in the vanguard phase of the trial. Pts wore the biosensor and recorded symptoms on the app for 2 weeks. Results: Thirty-two pts from three Washington State community oncology clinics consented to the vanguard phase. One pt was not onboarded; two dropped out before completing the 2-week observation period. The mean age was 60 years; 68% were women. The most common cancer types were breast (41%), colorectal (13%), endometrial (9%), and melanoma (9%). Of the 29 pts, 59% completed all daily ePRO assessments and 55% wore the sensor every day during the 2-week period. The overall adherence rate was 91% (370/406 assessments) for ePRO and 86% (349/406 biosensor days) for the biosensor. The average mMAUQ score was 6.25 (n = 26); the average mQUEST score was 4.02 (n = 25). Conclusions: Pts receiving systemic cancer therapy had relatively high adherence to a daily digital monitoring system that included an ePRO app and biosensor. Participants expressed moderately high usability of the app and satisfaction with the biosensor. The results support the feasibility of monitoring pts with an app and biosensor. Future studies to assess adherence and data completeness for full courses of systemic therapy are needed. Clinical trial information: ISRCTN25569053.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | - Kaiyue Yu
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Wei Yu
- Genentech, Inc., South San Francisco, CA
| | - Elaine Yu
- Genentech, Inc., South San Francisco, CA
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Rivers Z, Shankaran V, Porter LS, Langer S. Discordance between patient with cancer and caregiving partner self-reported financial toxicity. J Clin Oncol 2022. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2022.40.28_suppl.182] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
182 Background: While financial toxicity (FT) is a well-documented problem facing cancer patients, few studies have simultaneously investigated the financial experiences of patients and their caregiving partners. Here, we report concordance and discordance in experiences of FT between cancer patients and their caregiving partners. Methods: Patients aged ≥18 with stage II-IV breast, lung, or colorectal cancer who had received treatment within the past two years and were married or in a committed, cohabitating relationship were enrolled along with their partners. Patient and caregiver responses to the FACIT-COST (lower scores indicating higher FT; score ≤ 26 meeting FT threshold) were calculated, and dyads were categorized as concordant or discordant in their experience of FT. Logistic regression models were used to explore patient and caregiver predictors of FT. Results: A total of 327 dyads (median patient age 53, 45% stage IV, 36% breast, 44% colorectal, 19% lung) were included in the analysis. Numeric COST scores were lower in patients (27, IQR: 19, 25) than in caregivers (30, IQR: 23,37) and more patients than caregivers met the threshold for FT (45% vs. 34%, p = 0.002). Both members of the dyad had similar FT experiences in 74% of cases (26% and 48% reported FT and no FT respectively) while 26% diverged in their experience of FT (8% of partners reported FT while the patient did not; 18% of patients reported FT while the caregiver did not.) Higher patient age was associated with a reduced odds of patient-reported FT (OR for each year: 0.92, 95% CI 0.86-0.98) while higher odds of FT was seen with increased patient comorbidities (OR: 1.56, 95% CI: 1.26-1.96 for each comorbidity) and patient race (Black OR: 1.41 - > 10 compared to White). Similarly, caregiver comorbidity, caregiver race, and female sex increased the odds of caregiver-reported FT. In addition, the odds of caregiver-reported FT were higher with lower annual household income ($60,000-$120,000: OR: 0.26, 95% CI: 0.09-0.73, > $120,000: OR 0.15, 95% CI 0.04-0.51 compared to less than $60,000), and the presence of children in the home (OR: 4.15, 95% CI: 1.88-9.67). Conclusions: More than a quarter of patients and caregivers had discordant experiences of FT. Assessing both members of a patient-caregiver dyad for FT is therefore critical to understanding the household financial impact of cancer diagnosis and treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zachary Rivers
- Department of Pharmacy Practice and Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Minnesota, College of Pharmacy, Minneapolis, MN
| | - Veena Shankaran
- Division of Medical Oncology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
| | | | - Shelby Langer
- Edson College of Nursing and Health Innovation, Arizona State University, Phoenix, AZ
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Rivers Z, Shankaran V, Porter LS, Langer S. Differences in patient and caregiving partner responses to individual items on the FACIT-COST questionnaire. J Clin Oncol 2022. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2022.40.28_suppl.183] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
183 Background: The financial impacts of cancer diagnosis and treatment extend beyond patients to affect intimate partners. Understanding how both members of the dyad experience financial toxicity (FT) can help inform dyadic interventions to address FT. We compare patient and partner responses to items on the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT)-COST, a patient-reported outcome measure of cancer-related financial distress. Methods: Adult patients with stage II-IV breast, lung, or colorectal cancer and their spouse/ cohabiting partner independently completed the 11-item FACIT-COST. Correlations between responses by both members were calculated using Pearson’s correlation coefficient. Results: There were 336 dyads (median patient age 53, 45% stage IV, 84% white) included in the analysis. Both members of the dyad had similar FT experiences in 74% of cases (26% and 48% reported FT and no FT respectively) while 26% diverged in their experience of FT. Responses to items 3, 6, 7, 10, and 11 (Table) were highly correlated (r > 0.6) while responses to questions 4 (I feel I have no choice about the amount of money we spend on care) and 5 (I am frustrated that I cannot work or contribute as much as I usually do) were weakly correlated (0.3 > r > 0), with patients generally reporting worse scores than partners on these items. Conclusions: Within-couple correlation between FACIT-COST items varies, with multiple responses weakly correlated. Future research should assess the impact of this variation on psychosocial functioning and explore approaches to facilitate dyadic communication around this important issue.[Table: see text]
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zachary Rivers
- Department of Pharmacy Practice and Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Minnesota, College of Pharmacy, Minneapolis, MN
| | - Veena Shankaran
- Division of Medical Oncology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
| | | | - Shelby Langer
- Edson College of Nursing and Health Innovation, Arizona State University, Phoenix, AZ
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Ko A, Noel M, Chao J, Sohal D, Crow M, Oberstein P, Scott A, McRee A, Rocha Lima C, Fong L, Keenan B, Filbert E, Hsu F, Shankaran V. 1229P A multicenter phase II study of sotigalimab (CD40 agonist) in combination with neoadjuvant chemoradiation for resectable esophageal and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancers. Ann Oncol 2022. [DOI: 10.1016/j.annonc.2022.07.1347] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/29/2022] Open
|
22
|
Smith GL, Banegas MP, Acquati C, Chang S, Chino F, Conti RM, Greenup RA, Kroll JL, Liang MI, Pisu M, Primm KM, Roth ME, Shankaran V, Yabroff KR. Navigating financial toxicity in patients with cancer: A multidisciplinary management approach. CA Cancer J Clin 2022; 72:437-453. [PMID: 35584404 DOI: 10.3322/caac.21730] [Citation(s) in RCA: 68] [Impact Index Per Article: 34.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/03/2022] [Revised: 03/15/2022] [Accepted: 04/13/2022] [Indexed: 12/21/2022] Open
Abstract
Approximately one-half of individuals with cancer face personal economic burdens associated with the disease and its treatment, a problem known as financial toxicity (FT). FT more frequently affects socioeconomically vulnerable individuals and leads to subsequent adverse economic and health outcomes. Whereas multilevel systemic factors at the policy, payer, and provider levels drive FT, there are also accompanying intervenable patient-level factors that exacerbate FT in the setting of clinical care delivery. The primary strategy to intervene on FT at the patient level is financial navigation. Financial navigation uses comprehensive assessment of patients' risk factors for FT, guidance toward support resources, and referrals to assist patient financial needs during cancer care. Social workers or nurse navigators most frequently lead financial navigation. Oncologists and clinical provider teams are multidisciplinary partners who can support optimal FT management in the context of their clinical roles. Oncologists and clinical provider teams can proactively assess patient concerns about the financial hardship and employment effects of disease and treatment. They can respond by streamlining clinical treatment and care delivery planning and incorporating FT concerns into comprehensive goals of care discussions and coordinated symptom and psychosocial care. By understanding how age and life stage, socioeconomic, and cultural factors modify FT trajectory, oncologists and multidisciplinary health care teams can be engaged and informative in patient-centered, tailored FT management. The case presentations in this report provide a practical context to summarize authors' recommendations for patient-level FT management, supported by a review of key supporting evidence and a discussion of challenges to mitigating FT in oncology care. CA Cancer J Clin. 2022;72:437-453.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Grace L Smith
- Department of Gastrointestinal Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
- Department of Health Services Research, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Matthew P Banegas
- Department of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, University of California San Diego, San Diego, California
| | - Chiara Acquati
- Graduate College of Social Work, University of Houston, Houston, Texas
- Department of Health Disparities Research, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Shine Chang
- Department of Epidemiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Fumiko Chino
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Affordability Working Group, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Rena M Conti
- Department of Markets, Public Policy, and Law, Boston University School of Business, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Rachel A Greenup
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut
| | - Juliet L Kroll
- Department of Behavioral Science, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Margaret I Liang
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama
| | - Maria Pisu
- Department of Internal Medicine, The University of Alabama, Birmingham, Alabama
| | - Kristin M Primm
- Department of Epidemiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Michael E Roth
- Department of Pediatrics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Veena Shankaran
- Seattle Cancer Care Alliance/University of Washington Medicine and Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington
| | - K Robin Yabroff
- Surveillance and Health Equity Science, American Cancer Society, Atlanta, Georgia
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Sanchez JI, Shankaran V, Unger JM, Madeleine MM, Espinoza N, Thompson B. Disparities in post-operative surveillance testing for metastatic recurrence among colorectal cancer survivors. J Cancer Surviv 2022; 16:638-649. [PMID: 34031803 PMCID: PMC10424733 DOI: 10.1007/s11764-021-01057-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/19/2021] [Accepted: 05/15/2021] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Among colorectal cancer (CRC) survivors, treatment for metastatic recurrence is most effective when malignancies are detected early through surveillance with carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) level test and computer tomography (CT) imaging. However, utilization of these tests is low, and many survivors fail to meet the recommended guidelines. This population-based study assesses individual- and neighborhood-level factors associated with receipt of CEA and CT surveillance testing. METHODS We used the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER)-Medicare data to identify Medicare beneficiaries diagnosed with CRC stages II-III between 2010 and 2013. We conducted multivariate logistic regression to estimate the effect of individual and neighborhood factors on receipt of CEA and CT tests within 18 months post-surgery. RESULTS Overall, 78% and 58% of CRC survivors received CEA and CT testing, respectively. We found significant within racial/ethnic differences in receipt of these surveillance tests. Medicare-Medicaid dual coverage was associated with 39% lower odds of receipt of CEA tests among non-Hispanic Whites, and Blacks with dual coverage had almost two times the odds of receiving CEA tests compared to Blacks without dual coverage. CONCLUSIONS Although this study did not find significant differences in receipt of initial CEA and CT surveillance testing across racial/ethnic groups, the assessment of the factors that measure access to care suggests differences in access to these procedures within racial/ethnic groups. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS Our findings have implications for developing targeted interventions focused on promoting surveillance for the early detection of metastatic recurrence among colorectal cancer survivors and improve their health outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Janeth I Sanchez
- School of Public Health, Department of Health Services, University of Washington, Box 357230, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA.
- Public Health Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, 1100 Fairview Ave. N., M3-B232, Seattle, WA, 98166, USA.
| | - Veena Shankaran
- Public Health Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, 1100 Fairview Ave. N., M3-B232, Seattle, WA, 98166, USA
| | - Joseph M Unger
- School of Public Health, Department of Health Services, University of Washington, Box 357230, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA
- Public Health Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, 1100 Fairview Ave. N., M3-B232, Seattle, WA, 98166, USA
| | - Margaret M Madeleine
- Public Health Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, 1100 Fairview Ave. N., M3-B232, Seattle, WA, 98166, USA
- School of Public Health, Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Box 357236, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA
| | - Noah Espinoza
- Clinical Analytics, Seattle Children's Hospital, 4800 Sand Point Way NE, Seattle, WA, 98105, USA
| | - Beti Thompson
- School of Public Health, Department of Health Services, University of Washington, Box 357230, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA
- Public Health Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, 1100 Fairview Ave. N., M3-B232, Seattle, WA, 98166, USA
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Manohar P, Fedorenko CR, Sun Q, Voutsinas JM, Wu V, Roth J, Linden HM, Shankaran V. Real-world practice patterns in the diagnosis of recurrent metastatic breast cancer in Washington state. J Clin Oncol 2022. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2022.40.16_suppl.e13640] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
e13640 Background: Evidence-based, national guidelines for the diagnosis of recurrent metastatic breast cancer (MBC) recommend confirmation of recurrence with biopsy and reassessment of biomarker status. Real world practice patterns may demonstrate disparities in adherence to guidelines with implications for patients and health systems. Methods: We utilized the Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research (HICOR) data repository that links Washington State cancer registry data to enrollment and claims from the major insurance payers in the state. We identified women > 18 years old diagnosed with recurrent MBC between 2008 and 2017 with evidence of enrollment in a commercial plan (Premera or Regence), Medicare, or Medicaid. Recurrence in Stage I-III patients was detected through identification of ICD 9/10 codes for metastatic disease or resumption of breast cancer systemic therapy (after minimum of 4 months from completion of early breast cancer therapy). Using claims, we identified receipt of and factors associated with biopsy, biomarker re-assessment, and treatment administered at recurrence. Results: We identified 715 patients with recurrent MBC (any ER or HER2 status) with median age of 62 (range 52-73). The majority of the cohort were Caucasian (89%) with the rest comprising of Asian, Black, American Indian, and Hispanic patients. Based on the Rural Urban Commuting Area (RUCA) classification, patients predominantly lived in metropolitan neighborhoods (97%). Approximately 13% of patients lived in areas of high deprivation (area of deprivation index, ADI, 8-10). Patients had either Commercial (53.1%), Medicaid (4.2%), Medicare (29.7%) or multiple (13.0%) insurance. Patients were primarily treated at high volume centers (70.9%), though 23% of patients were seen at low volume centers (<25 breast cancer patients/year). Of the patients with recurrent MBC, 49.5% received a biopsy to confirm metastatic diagnosis. Similarly, 48.7% of recurrent MBC patients underwent biomarker reassessment. Patients with highest co-morbidity index (>2) were more likely to undergo biopsy confirmation (20.3% vs 13.0%, p = 0.02). Biopsy was more often performed in patients receiving care at a high-volume center compared to low-volume center (74.3% vs 18.6%, p = 0.03). First line treatment selection was directly associated with receipt of biopsy and biomarker testing. Hormone therapy only was more common in patients who did not undergo biopsy (62.3% vs 37.7%, p <0.001) or biomarker reassessment (62.7% vs 37.3%, p <0.001). Conclusions: Our study shows there is variation across Washington state in biopsy and biomarker assessment in the diagnosis of recurrent metastatic breast cancer. Nearly half of cases had metastatic biopsy omitted. Our findings demonstrate downstream implications for treatment selection and support the need for quality initiatives to improve adherence to guidelines.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Poorni Manohar
- University of Washington/Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Catherine R. Fedorenko
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research (HICOR), Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Qin Sun
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | | | - Vicky Wu
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Josh Roth
- Genentech Inc., South San Francisco, CA
| | - Hannah M. Linden
- University of Washington, Fred Hutchison Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | | |
Collapse
|
25
|
Kreizenbeck KL, Ittes A, Shankaran V, Bansal A, Glascock M, Watabayashi K, Yu E, Wilson R, Chacon-Araya M, Ramsey SD. Evaluating the feasibility of using an electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) smartphone application (app) and biosensor by patients with cancer undergoing systemic treatments. J Clin Oncol 2022. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2022.40.16_suppl.tps1599] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
TPS1599 Background: Almost half of the nearly 370,000 patients with cancer who receive chemotherapy in the United States each year experience Emergency Department (ED) visits and unplanned hospital inpatient (IP) stays during treatment, largely due to poorly controlled symptoms. Recent studies have shown that utilizing PRO information in oncology practice can improve symptom management and patient outcomes. This study aims to examine the feasibility and usability of a PRO app paired with a biosensor to identify patients who are at high risk for ED and IP visits. Methods: This prospective, pragmatic, observational study will evaluate the feasibility and usability of a clinic-provided smartphone app and smartwatch biosensor for monitoring patients undergoing systemic cancer treatment. Eligible patients are 18–80 years old, ECOG PS 0–2, have a biopsy-proven solid tumor diagnosis of cancer (excluding non-melanoma skin cancer), and are scheduled to receive the first dose of intravenous (IV) or oral cancer therapy as an initial or new line of treatment. Patients should be able to provide informed consent, wear the biosensor daily, and complete the app ePRO survey and questionnaires in English. Study exclusion criteria include receiving radiation or hormone therapy only, residing in a skilled nursing facility, participating in another clinical trial, current pregnancy, and wearing pacemakers, implantable cardioverter defibrillators, cochlear implants, and/or neurostimulator devices. The app collects PROs (PRO-CTCAE), app usability and satisfaction (modified mHealth App Usability Questionnaire [mMAUQ]) and patient satisfaction with the biosensor (modified Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology [QUEST 2.0]). The study is divided into two phases: (1) vanguard (N = 30); (2) operational (N = 70). Patients will be asked to wear the biosensor and enter PROs into the app daily for a 2-week (vanguard) or 6-week period (operational). The vanguard sample size allows for the recruitment of ̃10 patients at each of the three participating oncology community clinics as is standard for initial device and software testing and development. Study endpoints for feasibility include: (1) vanguard – patient recruitment and protocol adherence, completeness of data capture, app usability, user satisfaction of biosensor; (2) operational – validity of self-reported hospital visits, feasibility of using electronic case report forms. Data collected from the vanguard will inform modifications to the app for the operational phase. The operational phase sample size is sufficient to assess data capture completion and clinical trial recruitment procedures in diverse practice settings (e.g., low volume vs. high volume, rural vs. urban). Clinical trial information: ISRCTN25569053.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Annika Ittes
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | | | | | | | | | - Elaine Yu
- Genentech, Inc., South San Francisco, CA
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
26
|
Suh K, Shankaran V, Bansal A. Assessing surveillance utilization and value in commercially insured patients with colorectal cancer. Am J Manag Care 2022; 28:e163-e169. [PMID: 35546589 PMCID: PMC9316744 DOI: 10.37765/ajmc.2022.89147] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/15/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Real-world patterns of surveillance testing in colorectal cancer (CRC) and the effects on health and cost outcomes are largely unknown. Our objectives were to (1) assess trends in carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) testing, CT scans, and colonoscopy utilization and (2) examine the value of CEA testing intensity by characterizing receipt of curative treatment for recurrence and measuring direct medical costs. STUDY DESIGN Prospective cohort study. METHODS We used an IBM MarketScan database to identify patients with a diagnosis of and treatment for CRC between 2008 and 2015. We used a negative binomial model to assess utilization of CEA testing and logistic models to assess utilization of CT scans and colonoscopies. We used a Cox proportional hazards model to assess surveillance intensity and time to curative treatment. We estimated direct medical costs using the Kaplan-Meier sample average estimator to account for censored costs. RESULTS We identified 3197 eligible patients. The mean numbers of CEA tests, CT scans, and colonoscopies remained relatively constant in the study period, but adherence to guidelines varied by surveillance. When categorizing individuals by their CEA utilization adherence to guidelines (perfect utilizers and overutilizers), overutilizers had an HR for curative treatment of 2.11 (95% CI, 1.46-3.05) relative to perfect utilizers. Although overutilizers underwent potentially curative procedures for recurrence at higher rates compared with perfect utilizers, direct medical costs were much higher in the overutilizer group. CONCLUSIONS Higher intensity of surveillance, beyond what is recommended by guidelines, may lead to earlier recurrence detection and subsequent treatment, but this is associated with significantly higher direct medical costs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Aasthaa Bansal
- University of Washington, 1959 NE Pacific St, 375-B, Seattle, WA 98195-7630.
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Offodile AC, Gallagher K, Angove R, Tucker-Seeley RD, Balch A, Shankaran V. Financial Navigation in Cancer Care Delivery: State of the Evidence, Opportunities for Research, and Future Directions. J Clin Oncol 2022; 40:2291-2294. [PMID: 35353552 DOI: 10.1200/jco.21.02184] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Anaeze C Offodile
- Department of Plastic Surgery, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.,Baker Institute for Public Policy, Rice University, Houston, TX
| | | | | | - Reginald D Tucker-Seeley
- Leonard Davis School of Gerontology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA.,University of Southern California, Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, Los Angeles, CA
| | - Alan Balch
- Patient Advocate Foundation, Hampton, VA
| | - Veena Shankaran
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Seattle, WA.,University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Shankaran V, Li L, Fedorenko C, Sanchez H, Du Y, Khor S, Kreizenbeck K, Ramsey S. Risk of Adverse Financial Events in Patients With Cancer: Evidence From a Novel Linkage Between Cancer Registry and Credit Records. J Clin Oncol 2022; 40:884-891. [PMID: 34995125 DOI: 10.1200/jco.21.01636] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/26/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Although financial toxicity is a growing cancer survivorship issue, no studies have used credit data to estimate the relative risk of financial hardship in patients with cancer versus individuals without cancer. We conducted a population-based retrospective matched cohort study using credit reports to investigate the impact of a cancer diagnosis on the risk of adverse financial events (AFEs). METHODS Western Washington SEER cancer registry (cases) and voter registry (controls) records from 2013 to 2018 were linked to quarterly credit records from TransUnion. Controls were age-, sex-, and zip code-matched to cancer cases and assigned an index date corresponding to the case's diagnosis date. Cases and controls experiencing past-due credit card payments and any of the following AFEs at 24 months from diagnosis or index were compared, using two-sample z tests: third-party collections, charge-offs, tax liens, delinquent mortgage payments, foreclosures, and repossessions. Multivariate logistic regression models were used to evaluate the association of cancer diagnosis with AFEs and past-due credit payments. RESULTS A total of 190,722 individuals (63,574 cases and 127,148 controls, mean age 66 years) were included. AFEs (4.3% v 2.4%, P < .0001) and past-due credit payments (2.6% v 1.9%, P < .0001) were more common in cases than in controls. After adjusting for age, sex, average baseline credit line, area deprivation index, and index/diagnosis year, patients with cancer had a higher risk of AFEs (odds ratio 1.71; 95% CI, 1.61 to 1.81; P < .0001) and past-due credit payments (odds ratio 1.28; 95% CI, 1.19 to 1.37; P < .0001) than controls. CONCLUSION Patients with cancer were at significantly increased risk of experiencing AFEs and past-due credit card payments relative to controls. Studies are needed to investigate the impact of these events on treatment decisions, quality of life, and clinical outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Veena Shankaran
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA.,Division of Medical Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA
| | - Li Li
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Catherine Fedorenko
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Hayley Sanchez
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | | | - Sara Khor
- The Comparative Health Outcomes, Policy, and Economics (CHOICE) Institute, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
| | - Karma Kreizenbeck
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Scott Ramsey
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Langer SL, Romano JM, Keefe F, Baucom DH, Strauman T, Syrjala KL, Bolger N, Burns J, Bricker JB, Todd M, Baucom BRW, Fischer MS, Ghosh N, Gralow J, Shankaran V, Zafar SY, Westbrook K, Leo K, Ramos K, Weber DM, Porter LS. Couple Communication in Cancer: Protocol for a Multi-Method Examination. Front Psychol 2022; 12:769407. [PMID: 35222142 PMCID: PMC8865086 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.769407] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/02/2021] [Accepted: 12/28/2021] [Indexed: 01/18/2023] Open
Abstract
Cancer and its treatment pose challenges that affect not only patients but also their significant others, including intimate partners. Accumulating evidence suggests that couples' ability to communicate effectively plays a major role in the psychological adjustment of both individuals and the quality of their relationship. Two key conceptual models have been proposed to account for how couple communication impacts psychological and relationship adjustment: the social-cognitive processing (SCP) model and the relationship intimacy (RI) model. These models posit different mechanisms and outcomes, and thus have different implications for intervention. The purpose of this project is to test and compare the utility of these models using comprehensive and methodologically rigorous methods. Aims are: (1) to examine the overall fit of the SCP and RI models in explaining patient and partner psychological and relationship adjustment as they occur on a day-to-day basis and over the course of 1 year; (2) to examine the fit of the models for different subgroups (males vs. females, and patients vs. partners); and (3) to examine the utility of various methods of assessing communication by examining the degree to which baseline indices from different measurement strategies predict self-reported adjustment at 1-year follow up. The study employs a longitudinal, multi-method approach to examining communication processes including: standard self-report questionnaires assessing process and outcome variables collected quarterly over the course of 1 year; smartphone-based ecological momentary assessments to sample participant reports in real time; and laboratory-based couple conversations from which we derive observational measures of communicative behavior and affective expression, as well as vocal indices of emotional arousal. Participants are patients with stage II-IV breast, colon, rectal, or lung cancer and their spouses/partners, recruited from two NCI-designated comprehensive cancer centers. Results will be published in scientific journals, presented at scientific conferences, and conveyed to a larger audience through infographics and social media outlets. Findings will inform theory, measurement, and the design and implementation of efficacious interventions aimed at optimizing both patient and partner well-being.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shelby L. Langer
- Center for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention, Edson College of Nursing and Health Innovation, Arizona State University, Phoenix, AZ, United States
| | - Joan M. Romano
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, United States
| | - Francis Keefe
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, United States
| | - Donald H. Baucom
- Department of Psychology and Neuroscience, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
| | - Timothy Strauman
- Department of Psychology and Neuroscience, Duke University, Durham, NC, United States
| | - Karen L. Syrjala
- Clinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, United States
| | - Niall Bolger
- Department of Psychology, Columbia University, New York, NY, United States
| | - John Burns
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL, United States
| | - Jonathan B. Bricker
- Public Health Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, United States
- Department of Psychology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States
| | - Michael Todd
- Edson College of Nursing and Health Innovation, Arizona State University, Phoenix, AZ, United States
| | - Brian R. W. Baucom
- Department of Psychology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, United States
| | - Melanie S. Fischer
- Institute of Medical Psychology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Neeta Ghosh
- Clinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, United States
| | - Julie Gralow
- Division of Medical Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, United States
| | - Veena Shankaran
- Division of Medical Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, United States
| | - S. Yousuf Zafar
- Duke Cancer Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, United States
| | - Kelly Westbrook
- Duke Cancer Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, United States
| | - Karena Leo
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, United States
| | - Katherine Ramos
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, United States
| | - Danielle M. Weber
- Department of Psychology and Neuroscience, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
| | - Laura S. Porter
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, United States
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Shankaran V, Unger JM, Darke AK, Suga JM, Wade JL, Kourlas PJ, Chandana SR, O’Rourke MA, Satti S, Liggett D, Hershman DL, Ramsey SD. S1417CD: A Prospective Multicenter Cooperative Group-Led Study of Financial Hardship in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Patients. J Natl Cancer Inst 2022; 114:372-380. [PMID: 34981117 PMCID: PMC8902339 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djab210] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 12.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/19/2021] [Revised: 08/19/2021] [Accepted: 10/15/2021] [Indexed: 01/07/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Financial toxicity is a growing problem in oncology, but no prior studies have prospectively measured the financial impact of cancer treatment in a diverse national cohort of newly diagnosed cancer patients. S1417CD was the first cooperative group-led multicenter prospective cohort study to evaluate financial hardship in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients. METHODS Patients aged 18 years or older within 120 days of mCRC diagnosis completed quarterly questionnaires for 12 months. We estimated the cumulative incidence of major financial hardship (MFH), defined as 1 or more of increased debt, new loans from family and/or friends, selling or refinancing home, or 20% or more income decline. We evaluated the association between patient characteristics and MFH using multivariate cox regression and the association between MFH and quality of life using linear regression. RESULTS A total of 380 patients (median age = 59.9 years) were enrolled; 77.7% were White, 98.0% insured, and 56.5% had annual income of $50 000 or less. Cumulative incidence of MFH at 12 months was 71.3% (95% confidence interval = 65.7% to 76.1%). Age, race, marital status, and income (split at $50 000 per year) were not statistically significantly associated with MFH. However, income less than $100 000 and total assets less than $100 000 were both associated with greater MFH. MFH at 3 months was associated with decreased social functioning and quality of life at 6 months. CONCLUSIONS Nearly 3 out of 4 mCRC patients experienced MFH despite access to health insurance. These findings underscore the need for clinic and policy solutions that protect cancer patients from financial harm.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Veena Shankaran
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA,Division of Medical Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, USA,Correspondence to: Veena Shankaran, MD, MS, Division of Medical Oncology, Associate Member, Clinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, University of Washington, 825 Eastlake Ave E, MS LG-465, Seattle, WA 98109, USA (e-mail: )
| | - Joseph M Unger
- SWOG Statistics and Data Management Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Amy K Darke
- SWOG Statistics and Data Management Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | | | - James L Wade
- Cancer Care Specialists of Illinois/Heartland NCORP, Decatur, IL, USA
| | - Peter J Kourlas
- Columbus Oncology Associates, Columbus/Columbus NCORP, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Sreenivasa R Chandana
- Cancer and Hematology Centers of Western Michigan/Cancer Research Consortium of West Michigan NCORP, Grand Rapids, MI, USA
| | - Mark A O’Rourke
- Prisma Health Cancer Institute/NCORP of the Carolinas (Prisma Health), Greenville, SC, USA
| | - Suma Satti
- Ochsner Cancer Institute, New Orleans, LA, USA
| | - Diane Liggett
- SWOG Data Operations Center/Cancer Research and Biostatistics (CRAB), Seattle, WA, USA
| | | | - Scott D Ramsey
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Shankaran V, Chennupati S, Sanchez H, Sun Q, Li L, Fedorenko C, Aly A, Healey M, Seal B. Clinical Characteristics, Treatment Patterns, and Healthcare Costs and Utilization for Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC) Patients Treated at a Large Referral Center in Washington State 2007-2018. J Hepatocell Carcinoma 2021; 8:1597-1606. [PMID: 34938673 PMCID: PMC8685386 DOI: 10.2147/jhc.s328274] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/22/2021] [Accepted: 11/25/2021] [Indexed: 01/14/2023] Open
Abstract
Introduction Though the treatment landscape for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has evolved significantly with the refinement of liver-directed therapy techniques and the introduction of new drugs, few studies have investigated the impact of the changing treatment landscape on lifetime treatment costs, particularly in Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stage C disease. We sought to investigate real-world clinical characteristics, treatment patterns, and healthcare costs in a cohort of HCC patients treated at a single high-volume institution in Washington (WA) state. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients diagnosed with HCC between 2007 and 2018 using abstracted electronic medical record (EMR) data linked to cancer registry data and health claims from commercial plans, Medicare, and Medicaid. We described clinical and treatment characteristics, including BCLC stage and Child Pugh score. We investigated median survival and mean lifetime treatment costs by BCLC stage using Kaplan-Meier cost estimator methods. A multivariate Cox proportional hazards model was used to investigate factors associated with overall survival. Results The final cohort included 215 patients, the majority of whom were white (71%), male (68%), and with underlying hepatitis C (61%). Mean per patient lifetime costs were highest in BCLC A and BCLC C patients. Mean lifetime costs in BCLC A patients ($292,134) was driven by surgery, hospital, pharmacy, imaging, and outpatient costs. Chemotherapy costs were highest in BCLC C patients, though not the predominant area of spending. Median survival was highest in patients with BCLC 0 and A disease; BCLC stage C and higher area deprivation index (ADI) were associated with poorer survival. Conclusion In a cohort of WA state HCC patients, mean lifetime costs were highest in patients with BCLC A disease, attributable to surgery and hospital costs. As increased utilization of newer and less toxic therapies improves survival in BCLC C patients, mean lifetime costs in this group may also rise.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Veena Shankaran
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA.,Division of Medical Oncology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Shasank Chennupati
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Hayley Sanchez
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Qin Sun
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Li Li
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Catherine Fedorenko
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
32
|
Fedorenko CR, Kreizenbeck KL, Li L, Panattoni LE, Shankaran V, Ramsey SD. Stage at cancer diagnosis during the COVID-19 pandemic in western Washington state. J Clin Oncol 2021. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2020.39.28_suppl.145] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
145 Background: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted medical care, including routine cancer screening for breast, colorectal, lung and cervical cancers. We aimed to investigate the impact of the pandemic on stage at diagnosis for cancer patients. Methods: Using data from the Washington State SEER records we compared AJCC stage for patients diagnosed with cancer in 2017-2019 to 2020 for two time periods, March to June (initial pandemic months) and July to December (later pandemic months). Patients were included if they were age 18+, diagnosed with a solid tumor, and not diagnosed at autopsy. Results: In the early phase of the pandemic, March – June 2020, there was a shift to cancers being diagnosed at a later stage compared to the same time period in 2017-2019 (Stage III: 13.5% to 14.9%, Stage IV: 16.2% to 19.7%). There was also a decrease in cancer diagnoses for cancers that are often detected through routine screening. As a percentage of all cancer diagnoses, both melanoma (13.2% to 9.8%) and colon cancer diagnoses (7.2% to. 6.7%) decreased during the early pandemic. In the later phase of the pandemic, July to December 2020, the stage at diagnosis showed an indication of returning to pre-pandemic levels with an increase in the proportion of early stage cancers (In situ: 16.6% to 19.3%, Stage I: 38.8% to 41.1%). Stage at diagnosis trends varied by tumor type. For colorectal cancer, the overall number of diagnoses decreased during the initial pandemic months. Stage I diagnoses decreased and Stage IV cancer diagnoses increased in both early and late stages of the pandemic. Conclusions: In Washington State, the COVID-19 pandemic had an impact on stage at diagnosis potentially caused by delays or interruptions in medical care. Additional studies are needed to understand how this shift in stage at diagnosis impacted treatment and outcomes for patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Catherine R. Fedorenko
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research (HICOR), Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | | | - Li Li
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | | | - Veena Shankaran
- Division of Medical Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA
| | | |
Collapse
|
33
|
Van Cutsem E, Valderrama A, Bang YJ, Fuchs CS, Shitara K, Janjigian YY, Qin S, Larson TG, Shankaran V, Stein S, Norquist JM, Kher U, Shah S, Alsina M. Quality of life with first-line pembrolizumab for PD-L1-positive advanced gastric/gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma: results from the randomised phase III KEYNOTE-062 study. ESMO Open 2021; 6:100189. [PMID: 34371381 PMCID: PMC8358416 DOI: 10.1016/j.esmoop.2021.100189] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/08/2021] [Revised: 05/20/2021] [Accepted: 05/24/2021] [Indexed: 12/30/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND In the randomised phase III KEYNOTE-062 study, pembrolizumab was non-inferior to chemotherapy for overall survival in patients with programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive [combined positive score (CPS) ≥1] advanced gastric/gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer. We present findings of prespecified health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL) analyses for pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy in this population. MATERIALS AND METHODS HRQOL, a secondary endpoint, was measured in patients who received ≥1 dose of study treatment and completed ≥1 HRQOL questionnaire [European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) 30-question quality-of-life (QLQ-C30), EORTC 22-question quality-of-life gastric-cancer-specific module (QLQ-STO22)]. Least squares mean (LSM) change (baseline to week 18) in global health status/quality of life (GHS/QOL; EORTC QLQ-C30) and time to deterioration (TTD) in GHS/QOL, nausea/vomiting and appetite loss scores (EORTC QLQ-C30) and abdominal pain/discomfort scores (EORTC QLQ-STO22) were evaluated. RESULTS The HRQOL population comprised 495 patients with CPS ≥1 (pembrolizumab, 252; chemotherapy, 243). Compliance rates at week 18 were similar for pembrolizumab and chemotherapy (EORTC QLQ-C30, 87.9% and 81.9%; EORTC QLQ-STO22, 87.9% and 81.3%, respectively). There was no between-arm difference in LSM score change in GHS/QOL [-0.16; 95% confidence interval (CI) -5.01 to 4.69; P = 0.948]. The LSM score change for most subscales showed comparable worsening in both arms. TTD for GHS/QOL [hazard ratio (HR), 0.96; 95% CI, 0.67-1.38; P = 0.826], appetite loss (HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.58-1.20; P = 0.314) and pain (HR, 1.22; 95% CI, 0.78-1.91; P = 0.381) were similar between arms. Longer TTD was observed for pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy for nausea/vomiting (HR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.44-0.85; P = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS HRQOL was maintained with first-line treatment with pembrolizumab in patients with PD-L1-positive advanced gastric/GEJ cancer and was similar between pembrolizumab and chemotherapy in this population.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- E Van Cutsem
- Department of Digestive Oncology, University Hospital Gasthuisberg Leuven and KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
| | - A Valderrama
- Center for Observational and Real-World Evidence, Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, USA
| | - Y-J Bang
- Department of Biomedical Research, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | - C S Fuchs
- Department of Internal Medicine: Hematology, Medical Oncology, Gastro-oncology, Yale University Cancer Center, Smilow Cancer Hospital, New Haven, USA
| | - K Shitara
- Department of Gastroenterology and Gastrointestinal Oncology, National Cancer Center Hospital East, Kashiwa, Japan
| | - Y Y Janjigian
- Department of Gastrointestinal Oncology, Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA
| | - S Qin
- Cancer Center, PLA Cancer Centre of Nanjing Bayi Hospital, Nanjing, China
| | - T G Larson
- Department of Hematology/Oncology, Minnesota Oncology Hematology, Minneapolis
| | - V Shankaran
- Department of Medical Oncology, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle
| | - S Stein
- Department of Internal Medicine: Hematology, Medical Oncology, Gastro-oncology, Yale University Cancer Center, Smilow Cancer Hospital, New Haven, USA
| | - J M Norquist
- Center for Observational and Real-World Evidence, Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, USA
| | - U Kher
- Department of Medical Oncology, Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, USA
| | - S Shah
- Department of Medical Oncology, Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, USA
| | - M Alsina
- Department of Medical Oncology, Vall d'Hebron University Hospital and Institute of Oncology, Barcelona; University Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Abstract
At JADPRO Live Virtual 2020, Veena Shankaran, MD, MS, reviewed data around the prevalence and risk factors for financial toxicity, discussed potential downstream consequences of financial toxicity in cancer care, and outlined four key strategies to mitigate it.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Veena Shankaran
- Seattle Cancer Care Alliance/University of Washington Medicine and Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington
| |
Collapse
|
35
|
Khaki AR, Li A, Diamantopoulos LN, Miller NJ, Carril-Ajuria L, Castellano D, De Kouchkovsky I, Koshkin V, Park J, Alva A, Bilen MA, Stewart T, Santos V, Agarwal N, Jain J, Zakharia Y, Morales-Barrera R, Devitt M, Nelson A, Hoimes CJ, Shreck E, Gartrell BA, Sankin A, Tripathi A, Zakopoulou R, Bamias A, Rodriguez-Vida A, Drakaki A, Liu S, Kumar V, Lythgoe MP, Pinato DJ, Murgic J, Fröbe A, Joshi M, Isaacsson Velho P, Hahn N, Alonso Buznego L, Duran I, Moses M, Barata P, Galsky MD, Sonpavde G, Yu EY, Shankaran V, Lyman GH, Grivas P. A New Prognostic Model in Patients with Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma Treated with First-line Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors. Eur Urol Oncol 2021; 4:464-472. [PMID: 33423945 PMCID: PMC8169524 DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2020.12.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/28/2020] [Revised: 11/25/2020] [Accepted: 12/03/2020] [Indexed: 01/16/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND While immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are approved in the first-line (1L) setting for cisplatin-unfit patients with programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)-high tumors or for platinum (cisplatin/carboplatin)-unfit patients, response rates remain modest and outcomes vary with no clinically useful biomarkers (except for PD-L1). OBJECTIVE We aimed to develop a prognostic model for overall survival (OS) in patients receiving 1L ICIs for advanced urothelial cancer (aUC) in a multicenter cohort study. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Patients treated with 1L ICIs for aUC across 24 institutions and five countries (in the USA and Europe) outside clinical trials were included in this study. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS We used a stepwise, hypothesis-driven approach using clinician-selected covariates to develop a new risk score for patients receiving ICIs in the 1L setting. Demographics, clinicopathologic data, treatment patterns, and OS were collected uniformly. Univariate Cox regression was performed on 18 covariates hypothesized to be associated with OS based on published data. Variables were retained for multivariate analysis (MVA) if they correlated with OS (p < 0.2) and were included in the final model if p < 0.05 on MVA. Retained covariates were assigned points based on the beta coefficient to create a risk score. Stratified median OS and C-statistic were calculated. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS Among 984 patients, 357 with a mean age of 71 yr were included in the analysis, 27% were female, 68% had pure UC, and 13% had upper tract UC. Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≥2, albumin <3.5 g/dl, neutrophil:lymphocyte ratio >5, and liver metastases were significant prognostic factors on MVA and were included in the risk score. C index for new 1L risk score was 0.68 (95% confidence interval 0.65-0.71). Limitations include retrospective nature and lack of external validation. CONCLUSIONS We developed a new 1L ICI risk score for OS based on data from patients with aUC treated with ICIs in the USA and Europe outside of clinical trials. The score components highlight readily available factors related to tumor biology and treatment response. External validation is being pursued. PATIENT SUMMARY With multiple new treatments under development and approved for advanced urothelial carcinoma, it can be difficult to identify the best treatment sequence for each patient. The risk score may help inform treatment discussions and estimate outcomes in patients treated with first-line immune checkpoint inhibitors, while it can also impact clinical trial design and endpoints. TAKE HOME MESSAGE: A new risk score was developed for advanced urothelial carcinoma treated with first-line immune checkpoint inhibitors. The score assigned Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≥2, albumin <3.5 g/dl, neutrophil:lymphocyte ratio >5, and liver metastases each one point, with a higher score being associated with worse overall survival.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ali Raza Khaki
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Ang Li
- Section of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA
| | | | - Natalie J Miller
- Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | | | | | - Ivan De Kouchkovsky
- Division of Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Vadim Koshkin
- Division of Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Joseph Park
- Division of Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Ajjai Alva
- Division of Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Mehmet A Bilen
- Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Tyler Stewart
- Division of Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA
| | - Victor Santos
- Division of Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
| | - Neeraj Agarwal
- Division of Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
| | - Jayanshu Jain
- Department of Medicine, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA
| | - Yousef Zakharia
- Division of Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA
| | - Rafael Morales-Barrera
- Vall d'Hebron Institute of Oncology, Vall d' Hebron University Hospital, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Michael Devitt
- Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, VA, USA
| | - Ariel Nelson
- Division of Medical Oncology, Seidman Cancer Center at Case Comprehensive Cancer Center, Cleveland, OH, USA; Division of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA
| | - Christopher J Hoimes
- Division of Medical Oncology, Seidman Cancer Center at Case Comprehensive Cancer Center, Cleveland, OH, USA; Division of Medical Oncology, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Evan Shreck
- Departments of Medical Oncology and Urology, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY, USA
| | - Benjamin A Gartrell
- Departments of Medical Oncology and Urology, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY, USA
| | - Alex Sankin
- Departments of Medical Oncology and Urology, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY, USA
| | - Abhishek Tripathi
- Stephenson Cancer Center, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, USA
| | - Roubini Zakopoulou
- Department of Clinical Therapeutics, Alexandra General Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, School of Medicine, Athens, Greece
| | - Aristotelis Bamias
- 2nd Propaedeutic Department of Internal Medicine, ATTIKON University Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, School of Medicine, Athens, Greece
| | - Alejo Rodriguez-Vida
- Medical Oncology Department, Hospital del Mar Research Institute, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Alexandra Drakaki
- Division of Hematology/Oncology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Sandy Liu
- Division of Hematology/Oncology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Vivek Kumar
- Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Mark P Lythgoe
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - David J Pinato
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Jure Murgic
- Department of Oncology and Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Center Sestre Milosrdnice, School of Dental Medicine, Zagreb, Croatia
| | - Ana Fröbe
- Department of Oncology and Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Center Sestre Milosrdnice, School of Dental Medicine, Zagreb, Croatia
| | - Monika Joshi
- Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, Penn State Cancer Institute, Hershey, PA, USA
| | - Pedro Isaacsson Velho
- Department of Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Noah Hahn
- Department of Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | | | - Ignacio Duran
- Hospital Universitario Marques de Valdecilla, IDIVAL, Santander, Spain
| | - Marcus Moses
- Department of Medicine, Section of Hematology/Oncology, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, USA
| | - Pedro Barata
- Department of Medicine, Section of Hematology/Oncology, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, USA
| | - Matthew D Galsky
- Division of Oncology, Department of Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA
| | - Guru Sonpavde
- Genitourinary Oncology Program, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Evan Y Yu
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Veena Shankaran
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Gary H Lyman
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Petros Grivas
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
Panattoni LE, Li L, Sun Q, Fedorenko CR, Sanchez H, Kreizenbeck KL, Shankaran V, Ramsey SD. Medicaid patients more likely to die at home without hospice during the pandemic versus before, exacerbating disparities with commercially insured patients. J Clin Oncol 2021. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2021.39.15_suppl.6502] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
6502 Background: The COVID-19 pandemic dramatically reduced family access to hospitals and created new barriers to home hospice care, raising concerns about how the pandemic has impacted cancer patients’ place of death and end of life home hospice support. Hypothesizing that Medicaid-enrolled cancer patients may be at greater risk of disruptions in end-of-life care compared to commercially insured patients, we examined changes in place of death and home hospice support for Medicaid and Commercial enrollees following the pandemic. Methods: We linked WA State cancer registry records with claims from Medicaid and approximately 75% of commercially insured cancer patients in the state. Patients ages 18-64 with solid-tumor malignancies who died March-June 2020 (COVID) were compared to those who died March-June 2017-2019 (Pre-COVID). Place of death was categorized as hospital, home with hospice, and home without hospice; nursing home deaths were excluded. Given our sample size, we examined differences in the likelihood of place of death with Fisher’s exact tests and multinomial logistic regressions stratified by payer and by COVID period, controlling for age, gender, race, stage, cancer type, and census tract-level neighborhood deprivation. We report marginal effects. Results: In Fisher’s exact analyses, Medicaid but not commercial patients were significantly less like to die in hospital and more likely to die at home without hospice during COVID (Table). In pre-post adjusted analysis of Medicaid patients, the probability of dying in the hospital was 12.3% (p=0.03) percentage points lower during the pandemic versus before, while the probability of dying at home without hospice was 11.1% (p=0.04) greater. Place of death did not change significantly pre-post for commercial patients. In addition, Pre-COVID, the probability of dying in the hospital was 10.7% (p=0.03) greater for Medicaid than commercial patients. During COVID, the probability of dying at home without hospice was 15.8% (p=0.04) greater for Medicaid versus commercial patients but lower for women (ME=20.2%; p=0.01) and colorectal versus breast cancer patients (ME=39.2%; p=0.01). Conclusions: Following COVID, Medicaid patients place of death shifted from hospital to homes, but without an increase in the use of home hospice services. In contrast, place of death and hospice use among commercial patients did not significantly change. This widening disparity in home deaths without hospice services raises concerns that the pandemic disproportionately worsened end of life experience for low income patients with cancer.[Table: see text]
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Li Li
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Qin Sun
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Catherine R. Fedorenko
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research (HICOR), Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | | | | | - Veena Shankaran
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research (HICOR), Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | | |
Collapse
|
37
|
Shankaran V, Chennupati S, Sanchez H, Sun Q, Aly A, Marcus H, Seal BS. Healthcare utilization and costs in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients treated at a large referral center in Washington (WA) State. J Clin Oncol 2021. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2021.39.15_suppl.e16149] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
e16149 Background: Though the treatment landscape for HCC has changed significantly in the last several years with the refinement of liver-directed therapy techniques and the introduction of multiple new drugs, few studies have investigated the impact of the changing treatment landscape on lifetime treatment costs, particularly in Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stage C disease. We therefore sought to investigate real-world clinical characteristics, treatment patterns, healthcare use, and costs in patients with HCC treated at a single high-volume institution in WA. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients diagnosed with HCC between 2007 and 2018 at a single clinical cancer center using a database containing abstracted data from the electronic medical record (EMR) linked to cancer registry data and health claims from commercial insurance plans, Medicare, and Medicaid. We described clinical characteristics, including BCLC stage and Child Pugh score, and treatment patterns. We investigated the mean per patient lifetime treatment costs by BCLC stage using Kaplan-Meier cost estimator methods. Results: The final cohort included 215 patients, majority white (71%), male (68%), and with underlying hepatitis C (61%). Most patients had either Child Pugh A (76%) or B (20%) liver disease and BCLC A (45%), B (20%), or C (19%) stage HCC. Only 40% of BCLC C patients received systemic chemotherapy. Mean per patient lifetime costs were highest in BCLC A ($289,318) and BCLC C ($255,430) patients and lowest in BCLC D ($123,701) patients (Table). Surgical costs, hospital costs, imaging, and outpatient visits were the major contributors to total lifetime costs in BCLC A patients. Chemotherapy costs were highest in BCLC C patients, but still were not the predominant area of spending. Conclusions: In a WA state cohort of HCC patients, mean lifetime costs were highest in patients with BCLC A disease, largely driven by surgery and hospital costs. As utilization of newer and less toxic therapies in BCLC C patients increases, mean lifetime costs in this group may surpass other stages.[Table: see text]
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Veena Shankaran
- Division of Medical Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA
| | | | | | - Qin Sun
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
38
|
Ramsey SD, Panattoni LE, Li L, Sun Q, Fedorenko CR, Sanchez H, Kreizenbeck KL, Shankaran V. Disparity in telehealth and emergency department use among Medicaid and commercially insured patients receiving systemic therapy for cancer in Washington State following the COVID-19 Pandemic. J Clin Oncol 2021. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2021.39.15_suppl.6546] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
6546 Background: Washington was the first US state to experience the COVID-19 pandemic. Transmission risks and patient fears of visiting oncology practices during its onset resulted in rapid adoption of telehealth services. We hypothesized that the pandemic would widen disparities in oncology practice visits between Medicaid and commercially insured patients, resulting higher rates of emergency department (ED) visits during initial treatment. Methods: Linking Washington State SEER records with Medicaid and commercial insurance enrollment and claims records, we compared adults age <65 with new solid tumor malignancies who received systemic treatment at academic and community oncology practices. Persons starting therapy March – June 2020 (COVID) were compared with those starting therapy March-June 2017-2019 (Pre-COVID). Poisson regressions were used to evaluate differences in oncology practice office visits and telehealth visits. Logistic regressions were used to evaluate the likelihood of at least one ED admission among patients starting systemic therapy pre- and post-COVID. Results: Among patients who met inclusion criteria (652 Commercial, 349 Medicaid), Medicaid enrollees had more advanced disease and more comorbidity versus commercial enrollees. In unadjusted analysis of E&M and telehealth service visit codes, office-based visits fell for both insurance groups (Table) while telehealth service visits (negligible pre-COVID) were higher for commercial versus Medicaid enrollees post-COVID. The proportion of persons with ≥ 1 ED visit during therapy fell for both insurance groups. In Poisson models, Medicaid enrollees had significantly fewer total visits (P=0.001) and fewer telehealth visits (p<0.001) compared commercial enrollees during the COVID period. In the logit models, ED visits trended lower for both groups after COVID (OR 0.53 95% CI 0.279 to 1.008). Among Medicaid enrollees, persons ages 40-49 and breast cancer patients were more likely to visit the ED. Among the commercially insured, persons with 2 or more comorbidities were more likely to visit the ED. The pre-post COVID change in likelihood of an ED visit was not significantly different between insurance groups (p=0.355). Conclusions: In Washington State, the COVID-19 pandemic created a substantial disparity in access to office-based and telehealth care for low-income patients receiving systemic therapy for new cancers. Reduced oncology practice visits among Medicaid patients did not widen existing disparities in utilization of emergency care.[Table: see text]
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Li Li
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Qin Sun
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Catherine R. Fedorenko
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research (HICOR), Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | | | | | - Veena Shankaran
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research (HICOR), Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| |
Collapse
|
39
|
Shankaran V, Li L, Fedorenko CR, Sanchez H, Du Y, Khor S, Kreizenbeck KL, Ramsey SD. Cancer diagnosis and adverse financial events: Evidence from credit reports. J Clin Oncol 2021. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2021.39.15_suppl.6504] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
6504 Background: Increasing evidence shows that cancer patients (pts) experience financial hardships after diagnosis. Few studies, however, have used objective financial data to estimate the relative risk of adverse financial events (AFEs) in cancer pts versus individuals without cancer. Using a retrospective case-control design, we investigated whether cancer pts are at increased risk of new AFEs, as measured by their credit reports. Methods: Western Washington Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) cancer registry (cases) and voter registry (controls) records from 2013 to 2018 were linked to quarterly credit records from TransUnion (2012-2020), one of the 3 largest national credit agencies. Controls were age and sex matched to cases and assigned an index date corresponding to the diagnosis (dx) date of the matched case. Individuals with evidence of any AFE in the credit report closest to index/dx date or did not survive to 24 months were excluded. Cases and controls experiencing any of the following AFEs within 24 months were compared, using two-sample z tests: severe (3rd party collections, charge-offs), more severe (tax liens, delinquent mortgage payments), and most severe (foreclosures, repossessions). Multivariate logistic regression models were used to evaluate the association between cancer dx and AFE, adjusting for age, sex, dx year, and available credit 6 months before the index/dx date. Results: A total of 332,825 individuals (84,185 cases and 248,640 controls, mean age 66 (SD 13), 52.7% female) were included. The mean available line of credit in the year before index/dx date was $12,303. AFEs were more common in cases versus controls (Table). After adjusting for age, sex, available credit above or below $12,303, and dx year, cancer dx was significantly associated with any AFE (OR 1.77, 95% CI 1.7-1.85, p<0.0001), severe AFEs (OR 1.94, 95% CI 1.85-2.03, p<0.0001), more severe AFEs (OR 1.23, 95% CI 1.12-1.36, p<0.0001), and most severe AFEs (OR 1.46, 95% CI 1.16-1.86, p=0.0016). Age >65 and higher available baseline credit were associated with decreased risk of any and each category of AFE. Conclusions: Within 24 months from dx, significantly higher proportions of cancer pts experienced AFEs relative to controls. Such events on credit reports have serious and long-lasting consequences on financial status. Studies that link clinical and financial data to investigate the impacts of these events on treatment decisions, quality of life, and clinical outcomes are needed.[Table: see text]
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Veena Shankaran
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research (HICOR), Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Li Li
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research (HICOR), Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Catherine R. Fedorenko
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research (HICOR), Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | | | | | - Sara Khor
- The Comparative Health Outcomes, Policy, and Economics (CHOICE) Institute, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
40
|
Khaki AR, Chennupati S, Fedorenko C, Li L, Sun Q, Grivas P, Ramsey SD, Schwartz SM, Shankaran V. Utilization of Systemic Therapy in Patients With Cancer Near the End of Life in the Pre- Versus Postimmune Checkpoint Inhibitor Eras. JCO Oncol Pract 2021; 17:e1728-e1737. [PMID: 34010026 DOI: 10.1200/op.20.01050] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Systemic therapy use in the last 30 days of life (DOL) for patients with advanced cancer is a low-value medical practice. We hypothesized that systemic therapy use in the last 30 DOL increased after approval of antiprogrammed cell death protein 1 immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and has contributed to increased health care utilization and spending. METHODS We investigated the change in prevalence of any systemic therapy use in the last 30 DOL among patients with advanced solid tumors in the 4 years before and after antiprogrammed cell death protein 1 ICI approval in 2014. We used cases from the Western Washington Cancer Surveillance System linked to commercial and Medicare insurance. We calculated the difference in prevalence between the pre- and post-ICI periods. We also calculated the annual prevalence of any systemic therapy and ICI use in the last 30 DOL and measured health care utilization (emergency department visits and hospitalizations) and costs during the last 30 DOL. RESULTS Eight thousand eight hundred seventy-one patients (median age 73 years) were included; 34% and 66% in the pre-and post-ICI period, respectively. Systemic therapy use in the last 30 DOL was lower in the post-ICI versus pre-ICI period (12.4% v 14.4%; difference -2.0% [95% CI, -3.5 to -0.5]). The annual prevalence of systemic therapy use in the last 30 DOL also declined, although ICI use rose. Patients treated with ICIs in last 30 DOL had more emergency department visits, hospitalizations, and higher costs. CONCLUSION Systemic therapy use in the last 30 DOL was lower in the period after ICI approval. However, ICI use rose over time and had higher utilization and costs in the last 30 DOL. Systemic therapy use in the last 30 DOL warrants monitoring, especially as more ICI indications are approved.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ali Raza Khaki
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA.,Clinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA.,Division of Oncology, Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, CA
| | - Shasank Chennupati
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Seattle, WA
| | - Catherine Fedorenko
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Seattle, WA
| | - Li Li
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Seattle, WA
| | - Qin Sun
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Seattle, WA
| | - Petros Grivas
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA.,Clinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Scott D Ramsey
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA.,Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Seattle, WA
| | - Stephen M Schwartz
- Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Veena Shankaran
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA.,Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Seattle, WA
| |
Collapse
|
41
|
Jones SMW, Henrikson NB, Panattoni L, Syrjala KL, Shankaran V. A theoretical model of financial burden after cancer diagnosis. Future Oncol 2020; 16:3095-3105. [PMID: 32976048 PMCID: PMC7787147 DOI: 10.2217/fon-2020-0547] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/27/2020] [Accepted: 08/10/2020] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
Abstract
Current models of financial burden after cancer do not adequately define types of financial burden, moderators or causes. We propose a new theoretical model to address these gaps. This model delineates the components of financial burden as material and psychological as well as healthcare-specific (affording treatment) versus general (affording necessities). Psychological financial burden is further divided into worry about future costs and rumination about past and current financial burden. The model hypothesizes costs and employment changes as causes, and moderators include precancer socioeconomic status and post-diagnosis factors. The model outlines outcomes affected by financial burden, including depression and mortality. Theoretically derived measures of financial burden, interventions and policy changes to address the causes of financial burden in cancer are needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Salene MW Jones
- Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, King County, Washington 98109, USA
| | - Nora B Henrikson
- Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, King County, Washington 98101, USA
| | - Laura Panattoni
- Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, King County, Washington 98109, USA
| | - Karen L Syrjala
- Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, King County, Washington 98109, USA
| | - Veena Shankaran
- Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, King County, Washington 98109, USA
| |
Collapse
|
42
|
Shankaran V. Financial hardship in metastatic colorectal cancer patients. Colorectal Cancer 2020. [DOI: 10.2217/crc-2020-0023] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/21/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Veena Shankaran
- University of Washington, Department of Medicine, Division of Oncology, Seattle, WA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
43
|
Sanchez JI, Shankaran V, Unger JM, Madeleine MM, Selukar SR, Thompson B. Inequitable access to surveillance colonoscopy among Medicare beneficiaries with surgically resected colorectal cancer. Cancer 2020; 127:412-421. [PMID: 33095916 DOI: 10.1002/cncr.33262] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/26/2020] [Revised: 08/14/2020] [Accepted: 09/03/2020] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND After colorectal cancer (CRC) surgery, surveillance with colonoscopy is an important step for the early detection of local recurrence. Unfortunately, surveillance colonoscopy is underused, especially among racial/ethnic minorities. This study assesses the association between patient and neighborhood factors and receipt of surveillance colonoscopy. METHODS This retrospective, population-based cohort study used Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare linked data (2009-2014). Beneficiaries with surgically resected stage II or III CRC between the ages of 66 and 85 years were identified, and multivariable logistic regression was used to assess the effect of factors on receipt of colonoscopy. RESULTS Overall, 57.5% of the patients received initial surveillance colonoscopy. After adjustments for all factors, Blacks and Hispanics had lower odds of receiving colonoscopy than non-Hispanic Whites (NHWs; 29.6% for Blacks; P = .002; 12.9% for Hispanics; P > .05). NHWs with Medicaid coverage had 35% lower odds of surveillance colonoscopy than NHWs without Medicaid coverage. Minority patients with Medicaid were more likely to receive colonoscopy than their racial/ethnic counterparts without Medicaid coverage (P > .05). Hispanics residing in neighborhoods with incomes of ≥$90,000 had significantly lower odds of surveillance colonoscopy than Hispanics residing in neighborhoods with incomes of $0 to $30,000. CONCLUSIONS Receipt of initial surveillance colonoscopy remains low, and there are acute disparities between Black and NHW patients. The association between factors that assess a patient's ability to access colonoscopy and actual receipt of colonoscopy suggests inequitable access to surveillance colonoscopy within and across racial/ethnic groups.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Janeth I Sanchez
- Department of Health Services, School of Public Health, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.,Public Health Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington
| | - Veena Shankaran
- Public Health Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington
| | - Joseph M Unger
- Department of Health Services, School of Public Health, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.,Public Health Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington
| | - Margaret M Madeleine
- Public Health Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington.,Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington
| | - Subodh R Selukar
- Department of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington
| | - Beti Thompson
- Department of Health Services, School of Public Health, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.,Public Health Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington
| |
Collapse
|
44
|
Shankaran V, Unger JM, Darke A, Suga JM, Wade JL, Kourlas P, Chandana SR, O'Rourke MA, Satti S, Liggett D, Hershman DL, Ramsey SD. Cumulative incidence of financial hardship in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients (pts): Primary endpoint results for SWOG S1417CD. J Clin Oncol 2020. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2020.38.29_suppl.137] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
137 Background: Despite evidence that rising cancer care costs contribute to “financial toxicity” in cancer pts, no studies, to our knowledge, have prospectively assessed the financial impact of cancer diagnosis (dx) using both self-reported and objective financial measures. S1417CD, led by the SWOG Cancer Research Network and conducted in the NCI Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP), was the first national prospective cohort study to evaluate time-to-first evidence of major financial hardship (MFH) in pts with newly diagnosed mCRC. We present results of the primary endpoint analysis. Methods: Pts age ≥ 18 within 120 days of mCRC dx receiving systemic treatment completed surveys every 3 months (mo) for 12 mo. MFH was defined as ≥ 1 occurrence of self-reported increase in debt, new loans, selling home, refinancing home, or ≥ 20% income decline during the 12 mo study period. Cumulative incidence (CI) of MFH was estimated to account for competing risk of death. Multivariate logistic regression was used to evaluate the association between pt characteristics with development of MFH. Results: 380 pts (median age 59.9) across 126 clinic sites were enrolled. Most pts were white (78%), male (61%), and insured (98%), with annual income ≤ $50,000 (56%). Cumulative incidence of MFH at 12 mo was 71.5% (95% CI: 65.9%-76.3%), with 24.6%, 52.4%, and 61.8% at 3, 6, and 9 mo; 104 (41%) pts reported ≥ 2 elements of MFH. Age, race, marital status, employment, and annual income (≤ vs. > $50K) were not significantly associated with MFH. In a post hoc analysis, income <$100,000 and total assets <$100,000 were both adversely associated with MFH. Each increase in number of these 2 risk factors from 0 to 1 and 1 to 2 was associated with a 49% increased risk of MFH (p<.001). Conclusions: In a national sample of mCRC pts on systemic tx, financial hardship, most commonly in the form of increased debt, accumulates progressively over time. Nearly 3 out of 4 pts experiencing MFH at 12 mo despite access to health insurance coverage. These findings underscore the need for clinic and policy solutions such as early financial navigation and elimination of cost sharing to protect pts from financial devastation as they continue with tx. [Table: see text]
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Amy Darke
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Diane Liggett
- SWOG Data Operations Center, Cancer Research and Biostatistics (CRAB), Seattle, WA
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
45
|
Watabayashi K, Steelquist J, Overstreet KA, Leahy A, Bradshaw E, Gallagher KD, Balch AJ, Lobb R, Lavell L, Linden H, Ramsey SD, Shankaran V. A Pilot Study of a Comprehensive Financial Navigation Program in Patients With Cancer and Caregivers. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2020; 18:1366-1373. [DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2020.7581] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/14/2019] [Accepted: 04/28/2020] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
Background: Few studies have engaged patients and caregivers in interventions to alleviate financial hardship. We collaborated with Consumer Education and Training Services (CENTS), Patient Advocate Foundation (PAF), and Family Reach (FR) to assess the feasibility of enrolling patient–caregiver dyads in a program that provides financial counseling, insurance navigation, and assistance with medical and cost of living expenses. Methods: Patients with solid tumors aged ≥18 years and their primary caregiver received a financial education video, monthly contact with a CENTS counselor and PAF case manager for 6 months, and referral to FR for help with unpaid cost of living bills (eg, transportation or housing). Patient financial hardship and caregiver burden were measured using the Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity–Patient-Reported Outcomes (COST-PRO) and Caregiver Strain Index (CSI) measures, respectively, at baseline and follow-up. Results: Thirty patients (median age, 59.5 years; 40% commercially insured) and 18 caregivers (67% spouses) consented (78% dyad participation rate). Many participants faced cancer-related financial hardships prior to enrollment, such as work change or loss (45% of patients; 39% of caregivers) and debt (64% of patients); 39% of caregivers reported high levels of financial burden at enrollment. Subjects received $11,000 in assistance (mean, $772 per household); 66% of subjects with income ≤$50,000 received cost-of-living assistance. COST-PRO and CSI scores did not change significantly. Conclusions: Patient–caregiver dyads were willing to participate in a financial navigation program that addresses various financial issues, particularly cost of living expenses in lower income participants. Future work should address financial concerns at diagnosis and determine whether doing so improves patient and caregiver outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kate Watabayashi
- 1Hutchinson Institute for Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington
| | - Jordan Steelquist
- 1Hutchinson Institute for Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington
| | | | - Anthony Leahy
- 2Consumer Education and Training Services, Seattle, Washington
| | | | | | | | | | - Laura Lavell
- 5Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, Washington; and
| | - Hannah Linden
- 6Division of Medical Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington
| | - Scott D. Ramsey
- 1Hutchinson Institute for Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington
| | - Veena Shankaran
- 1Hutchinson Institute for Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington
- 6Division of Medical Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington
| |
Collapse
|
46
|
Khaki AR, Xu Y, Cheung WY, Li L, Fedorenko C, Grivas P, Ramsey S, Shankaran V. Comparison of Health Care Utilization at the End of Life Among Patients With Cancer in Alberta, Canada, Versus Washington State. JCO Oncol Pract 2020; 16:e1543-e1552. [PMID: 32804586 DOI: 10.1200/op.20.00217] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Aggressive care at the end of life (EOL) can lead to unnecessary suffering and health care costs for patients with cancer. Despite geographic proximity and cultural similarities, we hypothesize that EOL care is more intense in the United States multipayer system versus the Canadian single-payer system. We compared health care utilization at EOL among patients with cancer in Alberta, Canada, with those in Washington state in the United States. METHODS Adult patients with American Joint Committee on Cancer stage II to IV solid tumors who died between 2014 and 2016 in Alberta and between 2015 and 2017 in Washington were identified from regional population-based cancer registries linked to treatment and hospitalization records (Alberta) and health claims from major regional insurance plans (Washington). The proportion of patients receiving chemotherapy and having multiple emergency department (ED) visits, or intensive care unit (ICU) admissions in the last 30, 60, and 90 days of life (DOL) in Alberta and Washington were determined and compared using two-sample z-test and multivariable logistic regression (α = .006 after Bonferroni correction). RESULTS Of patients, 11,177 in Alberta and 12,807 in Washington were included. Patients were similar in age (median, 71 v 72 year), with more patients in Washington with no comorbidities. More patients in Washington were treated with chemotherapy (12.6% v 6.6%; adjusted OR [aOR], 2.74), had multiple ED visits (16.2% v 12.1%; aOR, 1.40), and ICU admissions (23.7% v 3.9%; aOR, 14.27) in the last 30 DOL. Utilization was also higher in Washington in the last 60 and 90 DOL and among those with stage IV disease and those age 65 years and older. CONCLUSION Utilization of chemotherapy, ED visits, and ICU admissions near EOL was higher in Washington versus Alberta. Future studies to characterize drivers of aggressive EOL care may help improve cancer care for patients in the United States and Canada.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ali Raza Khaki
- Division of Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA.,Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Yuan Xu
- Department of Community health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.,Department of Surgery, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.,Department of Medicine, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Winson Y Cheung
- Department of Community health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.,Department of Surgery, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.,Department of Medicine, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Li Li
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Catherine Fedorenko
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Petros Grivas
- Division of Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
| | - Scott Ramsey
- Division of Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA.,Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| | - Veena Shankaran
- Division of Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA.,Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA
| |
Collapse
|
47
|
Hohl SD, Shankaran V, Bell-Brown A, Issaka RB. Text Message Preferences for Surveillance Colonoscopy Reminders Among Colorectal Cancer Survivors. Health Educ Behav 2020; 47:581-591. [PMID: 32449386 PMCID: PMC7398620 DOI: 10.1177/1090198120925413] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/15/2022]
Abstract
Background. Surveillance colonoscopy 1-year after colorectal cancer (CRC) surgery effectively reduces CRC mortality, yet less than half of survivors undergo this procedure. Text message reminders can improve CRC screening and other health behaviors, but use of this strategy to address barriers to CRC surveillance has not been reported. Objectives. The goal of this qualitative study was to assess CRC survivor perspectives on barriers to colonoscopy to inform the design of a theory-based, short message service (SMS) intervention to increase surveillance colonoscopy utilization. Method. CRC survivors in Western Washington participated in one of two focus groups to explore perceived barriers to completing surveillance colonoscopy and preferences for SMS communication. Content analysis using codes representative of the health belief model and prospect theory constructs were applied to qualitative data. Results. Thirteen CRC survivors reported individual-, interpersonal-, and system-level barriers to surveillance colonoscopy completion. Participants were receptive to receiving SMS reminders to mitigate these barriers. They suggested that reminders offer supportive, loss-framed messaging; include educational content; and be personalized to communication preferences. Finally, they recommended that reminders begin no earlier than 9 months following CRC surgery and not include response prompts. Conclusions. Our study demonstrates that CRC survivors perceive SMS reminders as an acceptable, valuable tool for CRC surveillance. Furthermore, there may be value in integrating theoretical frameworks to design, implement, and evaluate SMS interventions to address barriers to CRC surveillance. As physicians play a key role in CRC surveillance, provider- and system-level interventions that could additively improve the impact of SMS interventions are also worth exploring.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarah D. Hohl
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA
- University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Veena Shankaran
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA
- University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Ari Bell-Brown
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Rachel B. Issaka
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA
- University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
48
|
Vaughn JE, Shankaran V, Walter RB. Trends in Clinical Benefits and Costs of Novel Therapeutics in AML: at What Price Does Progress Come? Curr Hematol Malig Rep 2020; 14:171-178. [PMID: 31079354 DOI: 10.1007/s11899-019-00510-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW Since 2017, eight novel agents have been approved for the treatment of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in the USA. Here, we review the clinical benefits and costs associated with these drugs. RECENT FINDINGS For some of the newly-approved drugs, clinical benefit has been documented in randomized trials. Others received accelerated approval based on surrogate endpoints in early phase trials. All, however, carry significant costs and toxicities. Cost-effectiveness analyses are so far only available for midostaurin, CPX-351, and gemtuzumab ozogamicin. Recently approved drugs for AML have varying levels of evidence for clinical effectiveness and because of associated high costs may further increase the overall economic burden of AML care. This issue is complex and whether novel AML drugs will cost-effective will depend on multiple factors, including their ability to improve survival and quality of life while simultaneously reducing the costs of healthcare resource utilization.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jennifer E Vaughn
- Department of Medicine, Virginia Tech Carilion School of Medicine, 2 Riverside Dr., Roanoke, VA, 24016, USA.
| | - Veena Shankaran
- Clinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA.,Public Health Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA.,Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, USA.,Department of Pharmacy, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, USA.,Department of Pharmacy, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Roland B Walter
- Clinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA.,Division of Hematology, Department of Medicine, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, USA.,Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington School of Public Health, Seattle, WA, USA.,Department of Pathology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
49
|
Abraham P, Gricar J, Zhang Y, Shankaran V. Real-World Treatment Patterns and Outcomes in Patients Receiving Second-Line Therapy for Advanced/Metastatic Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma. Adv Ther 2020; 37:3392-3403. [PMID: 32533533 PMCID: PMC7467430 DOI: 10.1007/s12325-020-01394-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/08/2020] [Indexed: 12/27/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Currently available second-line (2L) therapies for advanced/metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (adv/met ESCC) include the taxanes paclitaxel and docetaxel. In clinical trials, such therapies have provided only modest improvements in survival. Few studies have assessed outcomes in routine clinical practice in the USA. We compared real-world clinical outcomes in the US for patients receiving taxane or non-taxane 2L therapy for adv/met ESCC. METHODS The Flatiron Health database was used to identify patients diagnosed with adv/met ESCC (1 January 2011-31 January 2019) who received 2L therapy; index date was date of adv/met diagnosis. Baseline variables and treatment regimens received were identified. Overall survival (OS; 2L start until death or last recorded medical activity) and duration of therapy (DoT; start of 2L therapy until last administration date of 2L therapy) in patients receiving taxane vs. non-taxane-based therapies in the 2L setting were estimated by Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS There were no clear differences in baseline characteristics between patients who received 2L taxane therapy (n = 37) and 2L non-taxane therapy (n = 49). Median (95% CI) 2L OS was significantly longer with 2L taxanes (7.3 [5.9-11.5] months) vs. 2L non-taxanes (5.1 [2.9-7.6] months); median (95% CI) 2L DoT was 2.1 (1.8-3.0) months vs. 3.3 (2.6-6.7) months, respectively. CONCLUSION Survival was generally poor in patients receiving 2L therapy for adv/met ESCC and was longer in patients receiving 2L taxanes than 2L non-taxane therapy. Efficacious, tolerable therapies for ESCC in the 2L setting are urgently needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Joe Gricar
- Bristol-Myers Squibb, Lawrenceville, NJ, USA
| | - Ying Zhang
- Bristol-Myers Squibb, Lawrenceville, NJ, USA
| | - Veena Shankaran
- Division of Oncology, Department of Medicine, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
50
|
Lou E, Beg MS, Bergsland E, Eng C, Khorana AA, Kopetz S, Lubner S, Saltz L, Shankaran V, Zafar SY. Reply to S. Boutayeb et al. JCO Oncol Pract 2020; 16:525. [PMID: 32574129 DOI: 10.1200/op.20.00394] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Emil Lou
- Emil Lou, MD, PhD, Masonic Cancer Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN; Muhammad Shaalan Beg, MD, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX; Emily Bergsland, MD, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA; Cathy Eng, MD, Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN; Alok A. Khorana, MD, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; Scott Kopetz, MD, PhD, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Sam Lubner, MD, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI; Leonard Saltz, MD, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; Veena Shankaran, MD, MS, University of Washington, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; and S. Yousuf Zafar, MD, MHS, Duke Cancer Institute, Durham, NC
| | - Muhammad Shaalan Beg
- Emil Lou, MD, PhD, Masonic Cancer Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN; Muhammad Shaalan Beg, MD, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX; Emily Bergsland, MD, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA; Cathy Eng, MD, Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN; Alok A. Khorana, MD, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; Scott Kopetz, MD, PhD, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Sam Lubner, MD, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI; Leonard Saltz, MD, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; Veena Shankaran, MD, MS, University of Washington, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; and S. Yousuf Zafar, MD, MHS, Duke Cancer Institute, Durham, NC
| | - Emily Bergsland
- Emil Lou, MD, PhD, Masonic Cancer Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN; Muhammad Shaalan Beg, MD, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX; Emily Bergsland, MD, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA; Cathy Eng, MD, Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN; Alok A. Khorana, MD, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; Scott Kopetz, MD, PhD, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Sam Lubner, MD, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI; Leonard Saltz, MD, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; Veena Shankaran, MD, MS, University of Washington, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; and S. Yousuf Zafar, MD, MHS, Duke Cancer Institute, Durham, NC
| | - Cathy Eng
- Emil Lou, MD, PhD, Masonic Cancer Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN; Muhammad Shaalan Beg, MD, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX; Emily Bergsland, MD, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA; Cathy Eng, MD, Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN; Alok A. Khorana, MD, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; Scott Kopetz, MD, PhD, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Sam Lubner, MD, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI; Leonard Saltz, MD, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; Veena Shankaran, MD, MS, University of Washington, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; and S. Yousuf Zafar, MD, MHS, Duke Cancer Institute, Durham, NC
| | - Alok A Khorana
- Emil Lou, MD, PhD, Masonic Cancer Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN; Muhammad Shaalan Beg, MD, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX; Emily Bergsland, MD, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA; Cathy Eng, MD, Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN; Alok A. Khorana, MD, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; Scott Kopetz, MD, PhD, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Sam Lubner, MD, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI; Leonard Saltz, MD, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; Veena Shankaran, MD, MS, University of Washington, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; and S. Yousuf Zafar, MD, MHS, Duke Cancer Institute, Durham, NC
| | - Scott Kopetz
- Emil Lou, MD, PhD, Masonic Cancer Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN; Muhammad Shaalan Beg, MD, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX; Emily Bergsland, MD, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA; Cathy Eng, MD, Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN; Alok A. Khorana, MD, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; Scott Kopetz, MD, PhD, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Sam Lubner, MD, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI; Leonard Saltz, MD, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; Veena Shankaran, MD, MS, University of Washington, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; and S. Yousuf Zafar, MD, MHS, Duke Cancer Institute, Durham, NC
| | - Sam Lubner
- Emil Lou, MD, PhD, Masonic Cancer Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN; Muhammad Shaalan Beg, MD, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX; Emily Bergsland, MD, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA; Cathy Eng, MD, Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN; Alok A. Khorana, MD, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; Scott Kopetz, MD, PhD, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Sam Lubner, MD, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI; Leonard Saltz, MD, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; Veena Shankaran, MD, MS, University of Washington, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; and S. Yousuf Zafar, MD, MHS, Duke Cancer Institute, Durham, NC
| | - Leonard Saltz
- Emil Lou, MD, PhD, Masonic Cancer Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN; Muhammad Shaalan Beg, MD, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX; Emily Bergsland, MD, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA; Cathy Eng, MD, Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN; Alok A. Khorana, MD, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; Scott Kopetz, MD, PhD, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Sam Lubner, MD, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI; Leonard Saltz, MD, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; Veena Shankaran, MD, MS, University of Washington, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; and S. Yousuf Zafar, MD, MHS, Duke Cancer Institute, Durham, NC
| | - Veena Shankaran
- Emil Lou, MD, PhD, Masonic Cancer Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN; Muhammad Shaalan Beg, MD, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX; Emily Bergsland, MD, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA; Cathy Eng, MD, Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN; Alok A. Khorana, MD, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; Scott Kopetz, MD, PhD, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Sam Lubner, MD, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI; Leonard Saltz, MD, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; Veena Shankaran, MD, MS, University of Washington, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; and S. Yousuf Zafar, MD, MHS, Duke Cancer Institute, Durham, NC
| | - S Yousuf Zafar
- Emil Lou, MD, PhD, Masonic Cancer Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN; Muhammad Shaalan Beg, MD, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX; Emily Bergsland, MD, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA; Cathy Eng, MD, Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN; Alok A. Khorana, MD, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; Scott Kopetz, MD, PhD, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Sam Lubner, MD, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI; Leonard Saltz, MD, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; Veena Shankaran, MD, MS, University of Washington, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; and S. Yousuf Zafar, MD, MHS, Duke Cancer Institute, Durham, NC
| |
Collapse
|