tbuckley/cabot-search huggingface dataset:
Assessing the true cost of cancer screening: Comparing hospital prices to claims remittance data for common cancer screening tests at top-ranked US hospitals.
Authors: Mason Alford, Austin Triana, Katherine Baker, Yash Trivedi, Samyukta Mullangi, Larry Van Horn
Journal: Journal of Clinical Oncology (2024)

11055 Background: Patients in the United States often lack information about the price of common cancer screening services across hospitals and payers. Recent legislation in the US, including the 2021 Hospital Price Transparency Final Rule and the No Surprises Act of 2022, require hospitals to post payer-specific negotiated prices for all services, creating a unique opportunity to understand variation in hospital pricing. While there has been much study regarding the wide variations in prices for healthcare screening services, little is known about the relationship between the prices for screening made publicly available by hospitals and the actual claims remittance recorded for those same services. Methods: We extracted payer-specific prices for four common cancer screening tests among 20 top-ranked US hospitals: colonoscopy, low-dose helical computed tomography (CT) scan, mammography, and prostate-specific antigen (PSA). Additionally, we extracted the cash prices published by these same hospitals and determined the median cash price for each screening service. To evaluate price variation for these screening tests, we determined the median and inter-quartile range (IQR) across all payers for these 20 hospitals. We compared this hospital pricing data to the 835 claims remittance data from December 1, 2021 to January 15, 2022. Results: Across 20 top US hospitals, the median hospital price for colonoscopy was $1597 (IQR $1780) and median claims price was $806 (IQR $788). The median hospital price for low-dose CT was $315 (IQR $472) and median claims price was $126 (IQR $83). The median hospital price for mammogram was $300 (IQR $351) and median claims price was $72 (IQR $83). The median hospital price for PSA was $85 (IQR $113) and median claims price was $29 (IQR $10). For all four screening tests, the median cash price was greater than the median negotiated price by an average of 27%. Conclusions: For common cancer screening tests, the distribution of hospital prices is wider than the actual prices reflected in claims data for the same screening services. Median cash prices published by hospitals were greater than the median negotiated rates for all cancer screening services, consistent with trends observed among large academic centers in metropolitan areas. Policies that improve precision in price estimates may help improve adherence in the United States for uninsured patients by providing more accurate information about prices for common cancer screening services. [Table: see text]
Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and symptoms in LIBRETTO-431 patients with <i>RET</i> fusion-positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).
Authors: Caicun Zhou, Silvia Novello, Pilar Garrido, Christophe Alfons Dooms, Jorge Arturo Alatorre Alexander, Niels Reinmuth, Adrienne M. Gilligan, Nalin Payakachat, Kim Cocks, Gill Worthy, Koichi Goto
Journal: Journal of Clinical Oncology (2024)

11068 Background: LIBRETTO-431 (NCT04194944), a randomized phase 3 trial, compared first-line selpercatinib to platinum-based chemotherapy +/- pembrolizumab (pembro). Selpercatinib, a highly selective and potent CNS penetrant RET inhibitor, is approved for the treatment of advanced RET fusion+ NSCLC. This analysis reported NSCLC symptoms and HRQoL from LIBRETTO-431. Methods: This analysis used data (cut-off date: May 01, 2023) from the intent-to-treat (ITT) pembro subpopulation [selpercatinib (n=129); chemotherapy + pembro (control, n=83)] to assess time to confirmed deterioration (TTCD) of NSCLC symptoms (cough, dyspnea, pain, fatigue, poor appetite using NSCLC-Symptom Assessment Questionnaire [SAQ]). TTCD of NSCLC symptoms were defined as time from randomization to the first score that met the pre-specified meaningful within-patient change thresholds, confirmed at next assessment. TTCD was compared between treatment arms using log-rank test and Cox proportional hazards model. Changes of NSCLC-SAQ total score (meaningful important difference [MID] ≥2 points) and HRQoL (using EORTC QLQ-C30 Physical Function (MID ≥6 points) and Global Health Status (GHS)/QoL (MID ≥5 points)) up to 1 year were evaluated and compared between the arms using a growth curve model and mixed model for repeated measures. Results: Selpercatinib significantly (p &lt;.05) delayed TTCD of all individual symptoms with hazard ratio ranging from 0.41 (cough and pain) to 0.57 (dyspnea), compared to control (Table). Selpercatinib also showed a significant and clinically meaningful difference in the mean NSCLC-SAQ total score (difference = -2.0, p &lt;.001) and physical function (difference = 8.1, p =.003) at 1 year, compared to control. GHS/QoL was improved in both arms with no difference in the mean scores between the arms at 1 year. Conclusions: Selpercatinib significantly delayed TTCD of NSCLC symptoms and improved physical function compared to control in this patient population after 1 year of treatment. The findings were consistent with the favorable efficacy of selpercatinib compared with platinum-based chemotherapy + pembro and further support 1L use of selpercatinib in this population. [Table: see text]
Associations of symptom burden with patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and clinical outcomes among early-phase cancer clinical trial (EP-CT) participants.
Authors: Anh B. Lam, Debra Lundquist, Andrea Pelletier, Sienna Durbin, Laura A Petrillo, Rachel Jimenez, Victoria Turbini, Viola Bame, Kaitlyn Lynch, Vaishnavi Reddy Yalala, Nicholas Ollila, Benjamin Malowitz, Casandra McIntyre, Dejan Juric, Ryan David Nipp
Journal: Journal of Clinical Oncology (2024)

11101 Background: Individuals with cancer often endure a substantial physical and psychological symptom burden. However, little is known about the baseline symptom burden of patients with cancer participating in EP-CTs or the associations of this symptom burden with other PROs and clinical outcomes. Methods: We prospectively enrolled adults with cancer participating in EP-CTs at Massachusetts General Hospital from 4/2021-1/2023. Participants completed baseline surveys prior to EP-CT initiation that assessed symptoms (Edmonton Symptom Assessment System [ESAS]), quality of life (QOL; Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General), hope (Herth Hope Index), depression/anxiety symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire-4 [PHQ-4]), and financial wellbeing (COST tool, higher scores indicate greater financial wellbeing). We used regression models to explore associations of baseline symptom burden with other PROs (QOL, hope, depression/anxiety, financial wellbeing) and clinical outcomes (time on trial, hospitalizations, overall survival). Results: Among 205 participants (median age=63.3 [range: 31.8-88.6], 57.1% female), the most common cancer types were gastrointestinal (34.6%), breast (20.0%), and head and neck (10.2%). Based on the ESAS, approximately half of participants reported moderate/severe fatigue (50.2%) and poor wellbeing (49.5%). Under half reported moderate/severe drowsiness (35.7%), pain (25.9%), lack of appetite (25.4%), shortness of breath (20.0%), anxiety (18.0%), depression (15.4%), and nausea (9.2%). Higher baseline ESAS total, physical, and psychological scores were associated with worse QOL, lower hope, greater PHQ-4 depression/anxiety symptoms, and worse financial wellbeing (see Table). Higher baseline ESAS scores were associated with decreased time on trial and worse overall survival. Conclusions: In this study of EP-CT participants, we found associations of baseline symptom burden with other important PROs and clinical outcomes. Specifically, higher baseline symptom burden was associated with decreased QOL, lower hope, increased depression/anxiety symptoms, and diminished financial wellbeing as well as greater risk for shorter time on trial and worse survival. Interventions seeking to enhance care delivery and outcomes for EP-CT participants should strive to address the symptom burden of this population. [Table: see text]
Association of cancer survivors’ experience of care with financial toxicity: Results from a national survey.
Authors: Michael T. Halpern, Reegan Kate Knowles, Carla Thamm, Raymond J Chan
Journal: Journal of Clinical Oncology (2024)

11099 Background: Financial Toxicity (FT), negative economic impacts resulting from cancer or cancer treatment, can adversely affect quality of life, treatment adherence, and clinical outcomes. Patient experience of care (EoC) captures information from patient’s perspectives on interactions with healthcare providers and systems and receipt of medical care services. While EoC is used to evaluate health care system and provider quality, the impacts of EoC on FT are unknown. Methods: To examine associations of EoC and FT, we used data from the from the 2016-2017 Experience of Cancer Survivorship Supplement of the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS), the most recent years available of this national U.S. household survey. EoC was assessed using patient-reported frequencies (rated “never/sometimes”, “usually”, or “always”) of their health professionals explaining things in a way that was easy to understand; listening carefully; showing respect; and spending enough time with the patient in the past 12 months. FT was based on 9 MEPS items and classified as material FT (borrowing money, making financial sacrifices due to cancer), psychologic FT (worry about paying medical bills or financial stability), and behavioral FT (delaying/forgoing cancer care due to costs). Analyses were performed using multivariable logistic regressions controlling for patient sociodemographic and clinical characteristics and weighted to produce nationally representative estimates and address survey non-response. Results: Data included 1068 individuals diagnosed with cancer at age 18 or older; 30% reported material FT, 35% psychologic FT, and 27% behavioral FT. Examining EoC, 64% of respondents indicated their health professionals always explained things; 60% that they always listened; 66% that they always showed respect; and 57% that they always spent enough time with the patient. In multivariable regressions, the odds of psychologic FT were significantly (p&lt;0.05) lower among patients reporting their health professionals always (vs. never/sometimes) listened (odds ratio [OR] 0.37, 95% CI 0.19-0.70), showed respect (OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.16-0.81), and spent enough time with the patient (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.26-0.86). Significant associations with EoC were also found with individual psychologic FT questions from the MEPS on worry about paying bills, financial stability, and keeping job/income. Conclusions: Worry/anxiety regarding costs can be a major factor affecting individuals with cancer. Improving patient-provider interactions to enhance patient EoC may help reduce this aspect of FT.
Inpatient burden and clinical outcomes of cytokine release syndrome in patients with cancer: A National Inpatient Sample study.
Authors: Sarah Makhani, Waqas Azhar, Ejaz Shah, Mohammad Junaid Hussain, Ruchika Goel
Journal: Journal of Clinical Oncology (2024)

11067 Background: Cytokine release syndrome (CRS) is a potentially life-threatening complication commonly seen in patients receiving chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T cell therapy, allogeneic stem cell transplant, or immunotherapies. This study aims to evaluate the inpatient burden outcomes of CRS leading to hospitalization in patients diagnosed with cancer. Methods: Hospitalizations for cytokine release syndrome (CRS) were identified using ICD-10 coding from the 2020 National Inpatient Sample (NIS), the largest all-payer inpatient database in the US. Only CRS patients with a co-diagnosis of cancer (identified using the Clinical Classification Software (CCS) coding) were included in this study. The underlying severity of illness index was used to verify CRS grading. Sampling weights were applied to generate nationally representative estimates. Results: In 2020, there were 4,765 hospitalizations coded with CRS. 27.2% of these admissions had a co-diagnosis of cancer (n=1,295) and were included in the final analysis. The top co-diagnoses in the patients with CRS without cancer were COVID-19 infection and sepsis. Hematologic malignancies had the highest incidence amongst cancer types (75.7%), the distribution was as follows: 29.6% with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, 19.9% with acute lymphoblastic leukemia, 12.8% with multiple myeloma, 12.2% with acute myeloid leukemia, and 7.7% with mantle cell lymphoma. The most common procedures in oncology patients hospitalized with CRS were CAR-T cell therapy (29.3%), chemotherapy (28.6%), stem cell transplant (8.5%), or Blinatumomab bispecific antibody (5.4%). 11.4% of patients with CRS received tocilizumab. Of those that received tocilizumab, 10% were CRS grade 2, 56.7% were grade 3, 33.3% were grade 4. 51.7% of tocilizumab was given in the first 48 hours of admission. A minority of CRS patients required critical care interventions: 12.0% requiring intubation, 5.8% requiring vasopressor support, and 2.7% received dialysis. Overall, 10.4% of all oncology admissions with CRS resulted in death during hospitalization (n=135). Of these deaths, 92.6% were in the extreme severity of illness and 63.0% were CRS grade 4. Those with CRS who died during hospitalization had a significantly longer length of stay (24.6 vs 13.6 days, p&lt;0.001). The overall median hospital charges of a CRS-related admission were $531,692. Conclusions: This study represents the inpatient burden of CRS-related admissions in patients diagnosed with cancer. CRS admissions are commonly seen in patients with hematologic malignancies, those undergoing CAR-T cell or immunotherapies (bispecific antibodies). CRS poses a significant healthcare burden, with average hospital charges being greater than 0.5 million US dollars per admission. About 1 in 10 patients with CRS died during hospitalization with higher mortality likely with severe CRS grades and longer length of stay.
Multilevel factors associated with delays to neoadjuvant chemotherapy among young adults with operable breast cancer.
Authors: Melissa Beauchemin, Margaux Wooster, David DeStephano, Sarah Harkins, Shikun Wang, Jason Dennis Wright, Justine Kahn, Melissa Kate Accordino, Dawn L. Hershman
Journal: Journal of Clinical Oncology (2024)

11091 Background: Breast cancer (BC) rates are increasing in young adults (YAs: age 18-39) and this population may experience unique barriers to treatment initiation. We identified factors associated with treatment initiation delays in a cohort of YAs with operable BC who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT). Methods: Using the National Cancer Database, we identified YAs diagnosed with non-metastatic BC from 2010-2020 who received NACT. We grouped patients by receptor status and clinical stage: 1) Hormone Receptor positive/HER-2 negative (HR+/HER2-) and were lymph node (LN) LN+; 2) HER-2 positive (HER2+) cT2+ or LN+; and 3) triple negative BC (TNBC) cT2+ or LN+. Primary outcome was delayed treatment initiation, defined as &gt; 60 days from diagnosis date to NACT. Multivariable (MV) logistic regression was used to model factors associated with delay and adjusted for sociodemographic, clinical, and facility-level factors. We also examined factors associated with delays by tumor type. Results: Of 23,078 included patients, 62% were non-Hispanic White (NHW) and 74% had private insurance. By tumor type, 28% (n=6,350) were ER/PR+, 39% (n=8,921) were HER2+, and 34% (n=7,807) had TNBC. Most patients were treated at academic comprehensive cancer programs (ACCP) or comprehensive community cancer programs (CCCP) (40% and 34%). Treatment delays were observed among 7% of patients (n=1,638) across all tumor types. In MV analysis, non-Hispanic Black (NHB) and Hispanic YAs had 2-fold higher odds of delays compared with NHW YAs. YAs with low-income had higher odds of delays compared with higher income (OR=1.41), and YAs with private insurance had lower odds of delays compared with Medicaid (OR=0.54). YAs treated at any non-ACCP facility were less likely to experience delays. The results were similar for each tumor type. Conclusions: While the overall incidence of delays was low, significant racial, ethnic, and institutional-level treatment initiation disparities were observed among YAs receiving NACT for BC. [Table: see text]
Evaluating the feasibility of a Mobile Audio Companion (Elly) to reduce anxiety and to improve patient-reported outcomes among patients with cancer.
Authors: Tyra Nguyen, Nima Nikravesh, Tailyr Monette, Bianca Luna-Lupercio, Sarah-Jeanne Salvy, Stephen J. Freedland, Arash Asher, Scott A. Irwin, Celina H. Shirazipour, Gillian Gresham
Journal: Journal of Clinical Oncology (2024)

11120 Background: Anxiety is one of the most commonly reported symptoms among cancer patients, and is a known risk factor for reduced health-related quality of life and other negative patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Mobile health applications (apps) are tools that can be used flexibly in patients’ preferred environments with the potential to reduce anxiety and improve quality of life. The current study sought to examine the feasibility and preliminary efficacy of a mobile audio companion app, Elly, to improve anxiety and other critical PROs among cancer patients. Methods: This was a single-site, single-arm pilot study conducted over 6-months. Adults 18 years or older with a diagnosis of cancer of any type, received treatment within 6 months of consent, and had access to an iPhone were eligible. The primary outcome was change in mean anxiety t-scores (NIH PROMIS anxiety short form (8a)) administered electronically via REDCap at baseline, 1 (primary timepoint), 3, and 6 months. Secondary outcomes included changes in NIH PROMIS depression, loneliness, social support, and perceived stress scores from baseline to 6 months. Changes in NIH PROMIS T-scores at each time point were calculated and analyzed using paired t-tests. Results: Of 53 patients who consented for the study, 38 patients (72%) were included in the analysis ( M age : 52.8 years, SD: 11.7, 84.2% female). Most participants reported a history of breast cancer (50%), followed by ovarian (16%), hematologic (11%), and other cancer types (24%) Phone incompatibility and technological challenges were the most common reasons for screen-fails (n=15). All participants downloaded and used the app at least once, with an average of 154 app usage events across participants recorded over the study period (median: 64, range 11-1186 times). The mean baseline anxiety T-score was 63.5 (SD: 2.1). Anxiety levels decreased among participants over time, with a mean difference in anxiety T-scores of -1.9 at 30 days, -3.3 at 90 days, and -3.0 at 6 months from baseline, which was statistically (p&lt;0.05) and clinically significant. Participants also reported improvements in perceived stress, depression symptomatology, social support, and loneliness, although statistical significance was not reached. Conclusions: Mobile apps, such as Elly, may feasibly be used to support patient-reported anxiety as well as other PROs, especially among those who present with high levels of anxiety at baseline. Efforts to increase access to mobile health apps and provide technical support for patients should be made increase equity across the cancer survivor population. Larger, multi-center randomized controlled trials are needed to build on these findings.
Effect of multi-cancer early detection screening on late-stage cancers: A modeling study.
Authors: Jagpreet Chhatwal, Jade Xiao, Selin Merdan, Andrew ElHabr, Christopher Tyson, Xiting Cao, Sana Raoof, A. Mark Fendrick, Burak Burak Ozbay, Paul J. Limburg, Tomasz M. Beer, Ashish Deshmukh, Andrew Briggs
Journal: Journal of Clinical Oncology (2024)

11076 Background: Emerging blood-based multi-cancer early detection (MCED) tests can revolutionize early cancer detection. We evaluated the potential impact of MCED screening in reducing risk of late-stage diagnosis of 12 specific cancers which represent 70% of all cancer incidence in the US. Methods: We developed Simulation Model for MCED (SiMCED), a microsimulation model of 12 solid tumor cancer types: breast, colorectal, endometrial, esophageal, gastric, kidney, liver, lung, ovarian, pancreatic, prostate, and urinary bladder. Transitions between cancer stages (I-IV) were driven by cancer type- and stage-specific dwell times, which were synthesized from published literature and empirical estimates. MCED test sensitivity was derived from the PRE-ASCEND study on average-risk American adults. The model was calibrated to reproduce yearly observed cancer incidence diagnosed symptomatically or through screening as captured in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database, while accounting for unobserved cancer incidence by age, sex, and cancer type and stage. Using a 50-year time horizon, we simulated 100,000 individuals aged 50 to 84 years. Diagnosis of cancer could arise from usual care (UC) or annual MCED screening. Results: Over the 50-year horizon, MCED screening of 100,000 individuals resulted in 1,323 fewer Stage IV (24%) diagnoses relative to UC, with 38% of Stage IV reductions attributed to non-screening-detectable cancer types (i.e., those without recommended screening guidelines). The table displays absolute and percentage reductions in Stage IV diagnoses for the 8 cancer types with the highest absolute reduction in Stage IV diagnoses. The percentage of Stage IV reduction was 21% for screening-detectable cancers and 29% for non-screening-detectable cancers. Conclusions: Our study suggests that MCED screening could be effective for reducing the incidence of Stage IV cancer, which is associated with the worst survival and quality of life. Of note, MCED has the potential to reduce Stage IV cancer incidence for cancers without recommended screening guidelines. However, the real-world impact of MCED tests and their cost-effectiveness require further investigation. [Table: see text]