Trends in use of intensive care during hospitalizations at the end-of-life among older adults with advanced cancer.

BACKGROUND: High-intensity end-of-life (EOL) care, marked by admission to intensive care units (ICUs) or in-hospital death, can be costly and burdensome. Recent trends in use of ICUs, life-sustaining treatments (LSTs), and noninvasive ventilation (NIV) during EOL hospitalizations among older adults with advanced cancer and patterns of in-hospital death are unknown. METHODS: We used SEER-Medicare data (2003-2017) to identify beneficiaries with advanced solid cancer (summary stage 7) who died within 3 years of diagnosis. We identified EOL hospitalizations (within 30 days of death), classifying them by increasing intensity of care into: (1) without ICU; (2) with ICU but without LST (invasive mechanical ventilation, tracheostomy, gastrostomy, acute dialysis) or NIV; (3) with ICU and NIV but without LST; and (4) with ICU and LST use. We constructed a multinomial regression model to evaluate trends in risk-adjusted hospitalization, overall and across hospitalization categories, adjusting for sociodemographics, cancer characteristics, comorbidities, and frailty. We evaluated trends in in-hospital death across categories. RESULTS: Of 226,263 Medicare beneficiaries with advanced cancer, 138,305 (61.1%) were hospitalized at EOL [Age, Mean (SD):77.9(7.1) years; 45.5% female]. Overall, EOL hospitalizations remained high throughout, from 78.1% (95% CI: 77.4, 78.7) in 2004 to 75.5% (95% CI: 74.5, 76.2) in 2017. Hospitalizations without ICU use decreased from 49.3% (95% CI: 48.5, 50.2) to 35.0% (95% CI: 34.2, 35.9) while hospitalizations with more intensive care increased, from 23.7% (95% CI: 23.0, 24.4) to 28.7% (95% CI: 27.9, 29.5) for ICU without LST or NIV, 0.8% (95% CI: 0.6, 0.9) to 3.8% (95% CI: 3.4, 4.1) for ICU with NIV but without LST, and 4.3% (95% CI: 4.0, 4.7) to 8.0% (95% CI: 7.5, 8.5) for ICU with LST use. Among those who experienced in-hospital death, the proportion receiving ICU care increased from 46.5% to 65.0%. CONCLUSIONS: Among older adults with advanced cancer, EOL hospitalization rates remained stable from 2004-2017. However, intensity of care during EOL hospitalizations increased as evidenced by increasing use of ICUs, LSTs, and NIV.

Costs of care during chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy in relapsed or refractory B-cell lymphomas.

High upfront cost may be a barrier to adopting chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapy for relapsed or refractory B-cell lymphoma. Data on the real-world costs are limited. Using the Blue Cross Blue Shield Axis database, we evaluated 271 commercially insured patients who received CAR-T therapy for B-cell lymphoma (median age = 58 years; men = 68%; diffuse large B-cell lymphoma = 87%; inpatient CAR-T therapy = 85%). Our peri-CAR-T period of interest was from 41 days before to 154 days after CAR-T therapy index divided into seven 28-day intervals. Median total costs were $608 100 (interquartile range, IQR = $534 100-$732 800); 8.5% of patients had total costs exceeding $1 million. The median cost of CAR-T therapy products was $402 500, and the median out-of-pocket copayment was $510. Monthly costs were highest during the month of CAR-T therapy administration (median = $521 500), with median costs below $25 000 in all other 28-day intervals. Costs of CAR-T therapy use were substantial, largely driven by product acquisition. Future studies should examine the relationship between costs, access, and financial outcomes.

Cost trends of Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Therapy: the impact of oral anticancer agents and immunotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Immunotherapy (IO) and oral anticancer agents (OAA) have improved outcomes for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) but there is a need to understand real-world costs from the perspective of payers and patients. METHODS: We used retrospective fee-for-service Medicare 100% claims data to study patients diagnosed with mRCC in 2015-2019. We identified initial treatment type and costs (the year after diagnosis) and analyzed differences in monthly and 12-month costs over time and between OAA, IO, and combination groups and the association between OOP costs and adherence. RESULTS: We identified 15,407 patients with mRCC (61% male; 85% non-Hispanic white). 6,196 received OAA, IO or combination OAA/IO as initial treatment. OAA use decreased (from 31% to 11%) with a simultaneous rise in patients receiving IO (3% to 26%) or combination IO/OAA therapy (1% to 11%). Medicare payments for all patients with mRCC increased by 41%, from $60,320 (95% CI: 58,260-62,380) in 2015 to $85,130 (95% CI: 82,630-87,630) in 2019. Payments increased in patients who received OAA, IO or combination OAA/IO but were stable in those with other/no treatment. Initial higher OOP responsibility ($200-$1000) was associated with 13% decrease in percent days covered in patients receiving OAA in the first 90 days of treatment, compared to those whose OOP responsibility was <$200. CONCLUSION: From 2015-2019, costs for Medicare patients with mRCC rose substantially due to more patients receiving IO or IO/OAA combined therapy and increases in costs among those receiving those therapies. Increased OOP costs was associated with decreased adherence.

Area Vulnerability and Disparities in Therapy for Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma.

Importance: Area-level measures of sociodemographic disadvantage may be associated with racial and ethnic disparities with respect to receipt of treatment for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) but have not been investigated previously, to our knowledge. Objective: To assess the association between area-level measures of social vulnerability and racial and ethnic disparities in the treatment of US Medicare beneficiaries with mRCC from 2015 through 2019. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study included Medicare beneficiaries older than 65 years who were diagnosed with mRCC from January 2015 through December 2019 and were enrolled in fee-for-service Medicare Parts A, B, and D from 1 year before through 1 year after presumed diagnosis or until death. Data were analyzed from November 22, 2022, through January 26, 2024. Exposures: Five different county-level measures of disadvantage and 4 zip code-level measures of vulnerability or deprivation and segregation were used to dichotomize whether an individual resided in the most vulnerable quartile according to each metric. Patient-level factors included age, race and ethnicity, sex, diagnosis year, comorbidities, frailty, Medicare and Medicaid dual enrollment eligibility, and Medicare Part D low-income subsidy (LIS). Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were receipt and type of systemic therapy (oral anticancer agent or immunotherapy from 2 months before to 1 year after diagnosis of mRCC) as a function of patient and area-level characteristics. Multivariable regression analyses were used to adjust for patient factors, and odds ratios (ORs) from logistic regression and relative risk ratios (RRRs) from multinomial logistic regression are reported. Results: The sample included 15 407 patients (mean [SD] age, 75.6 [6.8] years), of whom 9360 (60.8%) were men; 6931 (45.0%), older than 75 years; 93 (0.6%), American Indian or Alaska Native; 257 (1.7%), Asian or Pacific Islander; 757 (4.9%), Hispanic; 1017 (6.6%), non-Hispanic Black; 12 966 (84.2%), non-Hispanic White; 121 (0.8%), other; and 196 (1.3%), unknown. Overall, 8317 patients (54.0%) received some type of systemic therapy. After adjusting for individual factors, no county or zip code-level measures of social vulnerability, deprivation, or segregation were associated with disparities in treatment. In contrast, patient-level factors, including female sex (OR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.73-0.84) and LIS (OR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.36-0.65), were associated with lack of treatment, with particularly limited access to immunotherapy for patients with LIS (RRR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.14-0.43). Associations between individual-level factors and treatment in multivariable analysis were not mediated by the addition of area-level metrics. Disparities by race and ethnicity were consistently and only observed within the most vulnerable areas, as indicated by the top quartile of each vulnerability deprivation index. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of older Medicare patients diagnosed with mRCC, individual-level demographics, including race and ethnicity, sex, and income, were associated with receipt of systemic therapy, whereas area-level measures were not. However, individual-level racial and ethnic disparities were largely limited to socially vulnerable areas, suggesting that efforts to improve racial and ethnic disparities may be most effective when targeted to socially vulnerable areas.

Estimating Breast Cancer Overdiagnosis After Screening Mammography Among Older Women in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Overdiagnosis is increasingly recognized as a harm of breast cancer screening, particularly for older women. OBJECTIVE: To estimate overdiagnosis associated with breast cancer screening among older women by age. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study comparing the cumulative incidence of breast cancer among older women who continued screening in the next interval with those who did not. Analyses used competing risk models, stratified by age. SETTING: Fee-for-service Medicare claims, linked to the SEER (Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results) program. PATIENTS: Women 70 years and older who had been recently screened. MEASUREMENTS: Breast cancer diagnoses and breast cancer death for up to 15 years of follow-up. RESULTS: This study included 54 635 women. Among women aged 70 to 74 years, the adjusted cumulative incidence of breast cancer was 6.1 cases (95% CI, 5.7 to 6.4) per 100 screened women versus 4.2 cases (CI, 3.5 to 5.0) per 100 unscreened women. An estimated 31% of breast cancer among screened women were potentially overdiagnosed. For women aged 75 to 84 years, cumulative incidence was 4.9 (CI, 4.6 to 5.2) per 100 screened women versus 2.6 (CI, 2.2 to 3.0) per 100 unscreened women, with 47% of cases potentially overdiagnosed. For women aged 85 and older, the cumulative incidence was 2.8 (CI, 2.3 to 3.4) among screened women versus 1.3 (CI, 0.9 to 1.9) among those not, with up to 54% overdiagnosis. We did not see statistically significant reductions in breast cancer-specific death associated with screening. LIMITATIONS: This study was designed to estimate overdiagnosis, limiting our ability to draw conclusions on all benefits and harms of screening. Unmeasured differences in risk for breast cancer and differential competing mortality between screened and unscreened women may confound results. Results were sensitive to model specifications and definition of a screening mammogram. CONCLUSION: Continued breast cancer screening was associated with greater incidence of breast cancer, suggesting overdiagnosis may be common among older women who are diagnosed with breast cancer after screening. Whether harms of overdiagnosis are balanced by benefits and for whom remains an important question. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Cancer Institute.

Disparities in immune and targeted therapy utilization for older US patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

Disparities in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) outcomes persist in the era of oral anticancer agents (OAAs) and immunotherapies (IOs). We examined variation in the utilization of mRCC systemic therapies among US Medicare beneficiaries from 2015 to 2019. Logistic regression models evaluated the association between therapy receipt and demographic covariates including patient race, ethnicity, and sex. In total, 15 407 patients met study criteria. After multivariable adjustment, non-Hispanic Black race and ethnicity was associated with reduced IO (adjusted relative risk ratio [aRRR] = 0.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.61 to 0.95; P = .015) and OAA receipt (aRRR = 0.76, 95% CI = 0.64 to 0.90; P = .002) compared with non-Hispanic White race and ethnicity. Female sex was associated with reduced IO (aRRR = 0.73, 95% CI = 0.66 to 0.81; P < .001) and OAA receipt (aRRR = 0.74, 95% CI = 0.68 to 0.81; P < .001) compared with male sex. Thus, disparities by race, ethnicity, and sex were observed in mRCC systemic therapy utilization for Medicare beneficiaries from 2015 to 2019.

Genetic testing in privately insured women with surgically treated breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Rates of BRCA1 and BRCA2 prevalence among women with breast cancer vary by age, hormone receptor status, and family history. Recommendations for genetic testing have varied between overlapping guidelines, payor coverage policies, and have evolved over time, resulting in unclear implications for adoption into routine breast cancer care. METHODS: Using a large, private insurer database, we examined rates of BRCA1/BRCA2 genetic testing in women with newly diagnosed invasive breast cancer undergoing surgery from 2015 through 2019. RESULTS: Testing increased among women 50 years or older from 26 to 38%, remained stable at 66% in both 2015 and 2019 in the under 50 population, and was slightly decreased in women under age 45 years. CONCLUSION: Among privately insured patients with breast cancer, rates are increasing in older women, but appear persistently underused in younger women.

The role of lung cancer risk and comorbidity in lung cancer screening use.

Although lung cancer screening (LCS) with low dose computed tomography has been shown to reduce lung cancer mortality, benefits and harms of screening vary among eligible adults. The goal of this study was to evaluate whether LCS is more commonly used among populations most likely to benefit, namely adults with high lung cancer risk and low comorbidity. In this cohort study of patients eligible for LCS, we used data from the electronic health record to evaluate the relationship between lung cancer risk, comorbidity, and receipt of LCS. We also evaluated use of diagnostic chest CT. Analyses used a nonparametric test for trend across quartiles of lung cancer risk and comorbidity. The study sample included 551 LCS-eligible adults who were followed for a mean 2.9 years (SD 1.6 years). A cumulative 190 (34 %) received at least 1 LCS, and 141 (26 %) had a diagnostic chest CT. Receipt of LCS increased across quartiles of lung cancer risk (5 per 100 person years in the lowest quartile vs 13 per 100 person-years in the highest, p < 0.001 for test of trend). LCS receipt decreased across increasing quartiles of comorbidity (14 vs 8 per 100 person-years, p = 0.008). Diagnostic CT was more common in among patient with higher levels of comorbidity (15 vs 5 per 100 person-years, p < 0.001). In conclusion, lung cancer screening was more commonly used in patients with greater lung cancer risk and lower comorbidity. Results suggest that both patient characteristics and use of diagnostic imaging may shape current patterns of LCS use.

Insurance Coverage Mandates and the Adoption of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis.

Importance: Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) is a breast cancer screening modality that has gained popularity in recent years. Although insurance coverage for DBT is not mandated under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, several states have required coverage without cost sharing for private insurers. Objective: To evaluate the association between state-level insurance coverage mandates for DBT and changes in DBT use, price, and out-of-pocket payments. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used an event-study design with repeated cross-sectional observations of US states. Data were obtained from the Blue Cross Blue Shield Axis database for commercially insured women aged 40 to 64 years who underwent screening mammography between January 1, 2015, and June 30, 2019. Data were analyzed between January 14, 2021, and January 20, 2022. Interventions: Passage of state-level legislation requiring insurance coverage of DBT. Main Outcomes and Measures: Change in DBT use among women screened for breast cancer, overall DBT price, and out-of-pocket payments for DBT in states with mandates for coverage of DBT compared with states that did not pass legislation. Results: This study included 9 604 084 screening mammograms from 5 754 123 women (mean [SD] age, of 53 [6.7] years). During the study period, 15 states enacted DBT coverage mandates and 34 states did not. In states with coverage mandates, DBT use increased by 9.0 percentage points (95% CI, 1.8-16.3 percentage points; P = .02) 2 years after the mandate compared with states without coverage mandates. Coverage mandates were also associated with a net $38.7 (95% CI, $13.4-$63.9; P = .003) decrease in the mean price of DBT compared with no coverage mandates. There was no association between coverage mandates and out-of-pocket payments 2 years after mandate passage ($-2.1; 95% CI, $-5.3 to $1.0; P = .18). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, DBT coverage mandates were associated with an increase in DBT use but not with any change in out-of-pocket payments. The findings suggest that coverage mandates for DBT may have been associated with broader use but were not associated with changes in direct costs to patients.

Comparative Effectiveness of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis and Mammography in Older Women.

BACKGROUND: Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) has become a prevalent mode of breast cancer screening in recent years. Although older women are commonly screened for breast cancer, little is known about screening outcomes using DBT among older women. OBJECTIVE: To assess proximal screening outcomes with DBT compared to traditional two-dimensional(2-D) mammography among women 67-74 and women 75 and older. DESIGN: Cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries aged 67 years and older with no history of prior cancer who received a screening mammogram in 2015. MAIN MEASURES: Use of subsequent imaging (ultrasound and diagnostic mammography) as an indication of recall, breast cancer detection, and characteristics of breast cancer at the time of diagnosis. Analyses used weighted logistic regression to adjust for potential confounders. KEY RESULTS: Our study included 26,406 women aged 67-74 and 17,001 women 75 and older who were screened for breast cancer. Among women 75 and older, the rate of subsequent imaging among women screened with DBT did not differ significantly from 2-D mammography (91.8 versus 97.0 per 1,000 screening mammograms, p=0.37). In this age group, DBT was associated with 2.1 additional cancers detected per 1,000 screening mammograms compared to 2D (11.5 versus 9.4, p=0.003), though these additional cancers were almost exclusively in situ and stage I invasive cancers. For women 67-74 years old, DBT was associated with a higher rate of subsequent imaging than 2-D mammography (113.9 versus 100.3, p=0.004) and a higher rate of stage I invasive cancer detection (4.7 versus 3.7, p=0.002), but not other stages. CONCLUSIONS: Breast cancer screening with DBT was not associated with lower rates of subsequent imaging among older women. Most additional cancers detected with DBT were early stage. Whether detecting these additional early-stage cancers among older women improves health outcomes remains uncertain.

Comparative Effectiveness of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis for Breast Cancer Screening Among Women 40-64 Years Old.

BACKGROUND: Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) may have a higher cancer detection rate and lower recall compared with 2-dimensional (2 D) mammography for breast cancer screening. The goal of this study was to evaluate screening outcomes with DBT in a real-world cohort and to characterize the population health impact of DBT as it is widely adopted. METHODS: This observational study evaluated breast cancer screening outcomes among women screened with 2 D mammography vs DBT. We used deidentified administrative data from a large private health insurer and included women aged 40-64 years screened between January 2015 and December 2017. Outcomes included recall, biopsy, and incident cancers detected. We used 2 complementary techniques: a patient-level analysis using multivariable logistic regression and an area-level analysis evaluating the relationship between population-level adoption of DBT use and outcomes. All statistical tests were 2-sided. RESULTS: Our sample included 7 602 869 mammograms in 4 580 698 women, 27.5% of whom received DBT. DBT was associated with modestly lower recall compared with 2 D mammography (113.6 recalls per 1000 screens, 99% confidence interval [CI] = 113.0 to 114.2 vs 115.4, 99% CI = 115.0 to 115.8, P < .001), although younger women aged 40-44 years had a larger reduction in recall (153 recalls per 1000 screens, 99% CI = 151 to 155 vs 164 recalls per 1000 screens, 99% CI = 163 to 166, P < .001). DBT was associated with higher biopsy rates than 2 D mammography (19.6 biopsies per 1000 screens, 99% CI = 19.3 to 19.8 vs 15.2, 99% CI = 15.1 to 15.4, P < .001) and a higher cancer detection rate (4.9 incident cancers per 1000 screens, 99% CI = 4.7 to 5.0 vs 3.8, 99% CI = 3.7 to 3.9, P < .001). Point estimates from the area-level analysis generally supported these findings. CONCLUSIONS: In a large population of privately insured women, DBT was associated with a slightly lower recall rate than 2 D mammography and a higher cancer detection rate. Whether this increased cancer detection improves clinical outcomes remains unknown.

Understanding Regional Variation in the Cost of Breast Cancer Screening Among Privately Insured Women in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer screening for women aged 40-49 years is prevalent and costly, with costs varying substantially across US regions. Newer approaches to mammography may improve cancer detection but also increase screening costs. We assessed factors associated with regional variation in screening costs. METHODS: We used Blue Cross Blue Shield Axis, a large US commercial claims database accessed through secure portal, to assess regional variation in screening utilization and costs. We included screening mammography±digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT), screening ultrasound, diagnostic mammography±DBT, diagnostic ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging and biopsy, and evaluated their utilization and costs. We assessed regional variation in annual per-screened-beneficiary costs and examined potential savings from reducing regional variation. RESULTS: Of the 2,257,393 privately insured women, 41.2% received screening mammography in 2017 (range: 26.6%-54.2% across regions). Wide regional variation was found in the DBT proportion (0.7%-91.1%) and mean costs of DBT ($299; range: $113-714) and 2-dimensional (D) mammograms ($213; range: $107-471). In one-fourth of the regions, the mean DBT cost was lower than the mean 2D mammography cost in the full sample. Regional variation in the per-screened-beneficiary cost (mean: $353; range: $151-751) was mainly attributable to variation in the cost of DBT (accounting for 23.4% of regional variation) and 2D mammography (23.0%). Reducing regional variation by decreasing the highest values to the national mean was projected to save $79-335 million annually. CONCLUSIONS: The mean mammogram cost for privately insured women ages 40-49 varies 7-fold across regions, driving substantial variation in breast cancer screening costs. Reducing this regional variation would substantially decrease the screening costs.

Measuring Exposure to Incarceration Using the Electronic Health Record.

BACKGROUND: Electronic health records (EHRs) are a rich source of health information; however social determinants of health, including incarceration, and how they impact health and health care disparities can be hard to extract. OBJECTIVE: The main objective of this study was to compare sensitivity and specificity of patient self-report with various methods of identifying incarceration exposure using the EHR. RESEARCH DESIGN: Validation study using multiple data sources and types. SUBJECTS: Participants of the Veterans Aging Cohort Study (VACS), a national observational cohort based on data from the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) EHR that includes all human immunodeficiency virus-infected patients in care (47,805) and uninfected patients (99,060) matched on region, age, race/ethnicity, and sex. MEASURES AND DATA SOURCES: Self-reported incarceration history compared with: (1) linked VHA EHR data to administrative data from a state Department of Correction (DOC), (2) linked VHA EHR data to administrative data on incarceration from Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), (3) VHA EHR-specific identifier codes indicative of receipt of VHA incarceration reentry services, and (4) natural language processing (NLP) in unstructured text in VHA EHR. RESULTS: Linking the EHR to DOC data: sensitivity 2.5%, specificity 100%; linking the EHR to CMS data: sensitivity 7.9%, specificity 99.3%; VHA EHR-specific identifier for receipt of reentry services: sensitivity 7.3%, specificity 98.9%; and NLP, sensitivity 63.5%, specificity 95.9%. CONCLUSIONS: NLP tools hold promise as a feasible and valid method to identify individuals with exposure to incarceration in EHR. Future work should expand this approach using a larger body of documents and refinement of the methods, which may further improve operating characteristics of this method.

Associations of preoperative breast magnetic resonance imaging with subsequent mastectomy and breast cancer mortality.

PURPOSE: To examine associations between pre-operative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) use and clinical outcomes among women undergoing breast-conserving surgery (BCS) with or without radiotherapy for early-stage breast cancer. METHODS: We identified women from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare dataset aged 67-94 diagnosed during 2004-2010 with stage I/II breast cancer who received BCS. We compared subsequent mastectomy and breast cancer mortality with versus without pre-operative MRI, using Cox regression and competing risks models. We further stratified by receipt of radiotherapy for subgroup analyses. RESULTS: Our sample consisted of 24,379 beneficiaries, 4691 (19.2%) of whom received pre-operative MRI. Adjusted rates of subsequent mastectomy and breast cancer mortality were not significantly different with and without MRI: 3.2 versus 4.1 per 1000 person-years [adjusted hazard ratio (AHR) 0.92; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70-1.19] and 5.3 versus 8.7 per 1000 person-years (AHR 0.89; 95% CI 0.73-1.08), respectively. In subgroup analyses, women receiving BCS plus radiotherapy had similar rates of subsequent mastectomy (AHR 1.17; 95% CI 0.84-1.61) and breast cancer mortality (AHR 1.00; 95% CI 0.80-1.24) with versus without MRI. However, among women receiving BCS alone, MRI use was associated with lower risks of subsequent mastectomy (AHR 0.60; 95% CI 0.37-0.98) and breast cancer mortality (AHR 0.57; 95% CI 0.36-0.92). CONCLUSIONS: Pre-operative MRI was associated with improved outcomes among older women with breast cancer receiving BCS alone, but not among those receiving BCS plus radiotherapy. Further research is needed to identify appropriate settings for which MRI may be helpful.

Associations Between Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy and Complications for Patients with Ductal Carcinoma In Situ.

PURPOSE: To examine the associations between sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) and complications among older patients who underwent breast-conserving surgery (BCS) for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). METHODS: We identified women from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare dataset aged 67-94 years diagnosed during 1998-2011 with DCIS who underwent BCS as initial treatment. We assessed incidence of complications, including lymphedema, wound infection, seroma, or pain, within 9 months of diagnosis. We used Mahalanobis matching and generalized linear models to estimate the associations between SLNB and complications. RESULTS: Our sample consisted of 15,515 beneficiaries, 2409 (15.5%) of whom received SLNB. Overall, 16.8% of women who received SLNB had complications, compared with 11.3% of women who did not receive SLNB (p < 0.001). Use of SLNB was associated with subsequent mastectomy but not radiotherapy. Multivariate analyses of the matched sample showed that, compared with no SLNB, SLNB use was significantly associated with incidence of any complication [adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 1.39; 99% confidence interval (CI) 1.18-1.63], lymphedema (AOR 4.45; 99% CI 2.27-8.75), wound infection (AOR 1.24; 99% CI 1.00-1.54), seroma (AOR 1.40; 99% CI 1.03-1.91), and pain (AOR 1.31; 99% CI 1.04-1.65). Sensitivity analyses excluding patients who underwent mastectomy yielded qualitatively similar results regarding the associations between SLNB and complications. CONCLUSIONS: Among older women with DCIS who received BCS, SLNB use was associated with higher risks of short-term complications. These findings support consensus guidelines recommending against SLNB for this population and provide empirical information for patients.

Regional Medicare Expenditures and Survival Among Older Women With Localized Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Despite evidence on large variation in breast cancer expenditures across geographic regions, there is little understanding about the association between expenditures and patient outcomes. OBJECTIVES: To examine whether Medicare beneficiaries with nonmetastatic breast cancer living in regions with higher cancer-related expenditures had better survival. RESEARCH DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study of women with localized breast cancer from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare linked database. Hospital referral regions (HRR) were categorized into quintiles based on risk-standardized per patient Medicare expenditures on initial phase of breast cancer care. Hierarchical generalized linear models were estimated to examine the association between patients' HRR quintile and survival. SUBJECTS: In total, 12,610 Medicare beneficiaries diagnosed with stage II-III breast cancer during 2005-2008 who underwent surgery. MEASURES: Outcome measures for our analysis were 3- and 5-year overall survival. RESULTS: Risk-standardized per patient Medicare expenditures on initial phase of breast cancer care ranged from $13,338 to $26,831 across the HRRs. Unadjusted 3- and 5-year survival varied from 66.7% to 92.2% and 50.0% to 84.0%, respectively, across the HRRs, but there was no significant association between HRR quintile and survival in bivariate analysis (P=0.08 and 0.28, respectively). After adjustment for sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, quintiles of regional cancer expenditures remained unassociated with patients' 3-year (P=0.35) and 5-year survival (P=0.20). Further analysis adjusting for treatment factors (surgery type and receipt of radiation and systemic therapy) and stratifying by cancer stage showed similar results. CONCLUSIONS: For Medicare beneficiaries with nonmetastatic breast cancer, residence in regions with higher breast cancer-related expenditures was not associated with better survival. More attention to value in breast cancer care is warranted.