Factors Associated With Delay of Diagnosis of Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Patients With Cirrhosis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: We examined the frequency of and factors associated with delays in diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in a cohort of patients with cirrhosis in the Veterans Health Administration. METHODS: In a retrospective study, we collected and analyzed data from the Veterans Health Administration's electronic health records. We used a multivariate logistic regression model to identify factors associated with a delay in diagnosis of HCC of more than 60 days following a red flag (defined as the earliest date at which a diagnosis of HCC could have been made, based on American Association for the Study of Liver Disease 2005 guidelines). We used multivariate Cox proportional hazards model to evaluate the effects of delayed diagnosis on survival, adjusting for patient and provider characteristics. RESULTS: Among 655 patients with cirrhosis and a diagnosis of HCC from 2006 through 2011, 46.9% had a delay in diagnosis of more than 60 days following a red flag for HCC. Delays in diagnosis for more than 60 days were significantly associated with lack of provider adherence to the guidelines (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 4.82; 95% CI, 3.12-7.45), a diagnostic imaging evaluation instead of only measurement of alfa fetoprotein (adjusted OR, 2.63; 95% CI, 1.09-6.24), and diagnosis as an incidental finding during examination for an unrelated medical problem (compared with an HCC-related assessment) (adjusted OR, 2.26; 95% CI, 1.09-4.67). Diagnostic delays of 60 days or more were associated with lower mortality compared to patients without a delay in diagnosis (unadjusted hazard ratio, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.47-0.68 and adjusted hazard ratio, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.50-0.78). CONCLUSIONS: Nearly half of veterans with cirrhosis have delays in diagnosis of HCC of 60 days or more after a red flag, defined by guidelines. Interventions are needed to improve timely follow-up of red flags for HCC and adherence to guidelines, to increase early detection of HCC.

Hepatocellular Carcinoma Screening Is Associated With Increased Survival of Patients With Cirrhosis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) screening of patients with cirrhosis is recommended by professional societies to increase detection of early stage tumors and survival, but is underused in clinical practice. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 13,714 patients diagnosed with HCC from 2003 through 2013 included in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program-Medicare database. We characterized receipt of HCC screening in the 3 years before HCC diagnosis using mutually exclusive categories (consistent vs inconsistent vs no screening) and the proportion of time covered with screening. Correlates for screening receipt were assessed using a multivariable 2-part regression model. We examined the association between screening receipt and early detection of tumors using multivariable logistic regression. We evaluated associations between screening receipt and overall survival using a Cox proportional hazards model, after adjustments for effects of lead-time bias and length-time bias on survival rate estimators. RESULTS: Most patients with cirrhosis (51.1%) did not receive any screening in the 3 years before a diagnosis of HCC, and only 6.8% of patients underwent consistent annual screening. The proportion with consistent screening increased from 5.4% in 2003 to 2006 to 8.8% in 2011 to 2013 (P < .001). The mean proportion of time covered was 13.4% overall, which increased from 11.7% in 2003 to 2006 to 15.2% in 2011 to 2013. Receipt of consistent screening was associated with detection of early stage tumors (odds ratio, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.68-2.33) and a reduced risk of death after correction for lead-time bias (hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.70-0.83). Inconsistent screening was associated with a slightly smaller increase in early detection of HCC (odds ratio, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.20-1.43) and a reduced risk of death (hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.83-0.90). After correction for lead- and length-time biases, higher proportions of patients with consistent (23%; 95% CI, 21%-25%) and inconsistent screening (19%; 95% CI, 19%-20%) survived for 3 years compared with patients without screening (13%; 95% CI, 12%-14%). CONCLUSIONS: In an analysis of the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program-Medicare database, we found HCC screening to be underused for patients with cirrhosis. This contributes to detection of liver tumors at later stages and shorter times of survival. However, the proportion of patients screened for HCC has increased over time.

Medical Home Implementation and Follow-Up of Cancer-Related Abnormal Test Results in the Veterans Health Administration.

Importance: Lack of timely follow-up of cancer-related abnormal test results can lead to delayed or missed diagnoses, adverse cancer outcomes, and substantial cost burden for patients. Care delivery models, such as the Veterans Affairs' (VA) Patient-Aligned Care Team (PACT), which aim to improve patient-centered care coordination, could potentially also improve timely follow-up of abnormal test results. PACT was implemented nationally in the VA between 2010 and 2012. Objective: To evaluate the long-term association between PACT implementation and timely follow-up of abnormal test results related to the diagnosis of 5 different cancers. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multiyear retrospective cohort study used 14 years of VA data (2006-2019), which were analyzed using panel data-based random-effects linear regressions. The setting included all VA clinics and facilities. The participants were adult patients who underwent diagnostic testing related to 5 different cancers and had abnormal test results. Data extraction and statistical analyses were performed from September 2021 to December 2023. Exposure: Calendar years denoting preperiods and postperiods of PACT implementation, and the PACT Implementation Progress Index Score denoting the extent of implementation in each VA clinic and facility. Main Outcome and Measure: Percentage of potentially missed timely follow-ups of abnormal test results. Results: This study analyzed 6 data sets representing 5 different types of cancers. During the initial years of PACT implementation (2010 to 2013), percentage of potentially missed timely follow-ups decreased between 3 to 7 percentage points for urinalysis suggestive of bladder cancer, 12 to 14 percentage points for mammograms suggestive of breast cancer, 19 to 22 percentage points for fecal tests suggestive of colorectal cancer, and 6 to 13 percentage points for iron deficiency anemia laboratory tests suggestive of colorectal cancer, with no statistically significant changes for α-fetoprotien tests and lung cancer imaging. However, these beneficial reductions were not sustained over time. Better PACT implementation scores were associated with a decrease in potentially missed timely follow-up percentages for urinalysis (0.3-percentage point reduction [95% CI, -0.6 to -0.1] with 1-point increase in the score), and laboratory tests suggestive of iron deficiency anemia (0.5-percentage point reduction [95% CI,-0.8 to -0.2] with 1-point increase in the score). Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study found that implementation of PACT in the VA was associated with a potential short-term improvement in the quality of follow-up for certain test results. Additional multifaceted sustained interventions to reduce missed test results are required to prevent care delays.

Using Telemedicine to Facilitate Patient Communication and Treatment Decision-Making Following Multidisciplinary Tumor Board Review for Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: A rapid increase in the use of telemedicine for delivering healthcare has occurred since the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic. There is evidence for using telemedicine to facilitate cancer care delivery for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Examining how telemedicine can be used to communicate multidisciplinary tumor board (MTB) recommendations for HCC has not been studied. This study has two specific aims: (1) to evaluate the patient perspective of the MTB review process and identify best strategies for communicating treatment recommendations for HCC and (2) to pilot test a telemedicine intervention following MTB review to assess patient feasibility and satisfaction with using telemedicine to facilitate treatment decision-making and treatment referral. METHODS: We conducted a mixed-methods study. First, semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted among patients diagnosed with HCC who were discussed in MTB review at one of three VA Medical Centers (VAMC). We collected information about the MTB process from the patient perspective and identified strategies for improving communication and delivery of care. Rapid qualitative analysis was used to inform intervention development. Using our qualitative data, a MTB telemedicine pilot intervention was developed and implemented to assess the feasibility of using this approach for patients with HCC. RESULTS: Almost all patients (94%) in the pilot study would recommend telemedicine to other patients with HCC, and half of the patients (50%) preferred telemedicine over in-person visits. Many patients (81%) found communication through telemedicine an acceptable platform to deliver difficult cancer information. Overall, patients felt they understood their treatment recommendations and found them clear and useful. Further, patients reported that they enjoyed being included in the decision-making process and appreciated being able to have family members easily join them for the telemedicine visit. CONCLUSIONS: Using telemedicine to communicate treatment recommendations following MTB review was found to be feasible and an acceptable alternative to an in-person visit for patient with HCC. Future studies could include expanding this approach for communicating MTB recommendations to patients with other types of cancers.

Inviting patients to identify diagnostic concerns through structured evaluation of their online visit notes.

BACKGROUND: The 21st Century Cures Act mandates patients' access to their electronic health record (EHR) notes. To our knowledge, no previous work has systematically invited patients to proactively report diagnostic concerns while documenting and tracking their diagnostic experiences through EHR-based clinician note review. OBJECTIVE: To test if patients can identify concerns about their diagnosis through structured evaluation of their online visit notes. METHODS: In a large integrated health system, patients aged 18-85 years actively using the patient portal and seen between October 2019 and February 2020 were invited to respond to an online questionnaire if an EHR algorithm detected any recent unexpected return visit following an initial primary care consultation ("at-risk" visit). We developed and tested an instrument (Safer Dx Patient Instrument) to help patients identify concerns related to several dimensions of the diagnostic process based on notes review and recall of recent "at-risk" visits. Additional questions assessed patients' trust in their providers and their general feelings about the visit. The primary outcome was a self-reported diagnostic concern. Multivariate logistic regression tested whether the primary outcome was predicted by instrument variables. RESULTS: Of 293 566 visits, the algorithm identified 1282 eligible patients, of whom 486 responded. After applying exclusion criteria, 418 patients were included in the analysis. Fifty-one patients (12.2%) identified a diagnostic concern. Patients were more likely to report a concern if they disagreed with statements "the care plan the provider developed for me addressed all my medical concerns" [odds ratio (OR), 2.65; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.45-4.87) and "I trust the provider that I saw during my visit" (OR, 2.10; 95% CI, 1.19-3.71) and agreed with the statement "I did not have a good feeling about my visit" (OR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.09-2.01). CONCLUSION: Patients can identify diagnostic concerns based on a proactive online structured evaluation of visit notes. This surveillance strategy could potentially improve transparency in the diagnostic process.

Cancer Evaluations During the COVID-19 Pandemic: An Observational Study Using National Veterans Affairs Data.

INTRODUCTION: Fewer cancer diagnoses have been made during the COVID-19 pandemic. Pandemic-related delays in cancer diagnosis could occur from limited access to care or patient evaluation delays (e.g., delayed testing after abnormal results). Follow-up of abnormal test results warranting evaluation for cancer was examined before and during the pandemic. METHODS: Electronic trigger algorithms were applied to the Department of Veterans Affairs electronic health record data to assess follow-up of abnormal test results before (March 10, 2019-March 7, 2020) and during (March 8, 2020-March 6, 2021) the pandemic. RESULTS: Electronic triggers were applied to 8,021,406 veterans' electronic health records to identify follow-up delays for abnormal results warranting evaluation for 5 cancers: bladder (urinalysis with high-grade hematuria), breast (abnormal mammograms), colorectal (positive fecal occult blood tests/fecal immunochemical tests or results consistent with iron deficiency anemia), liver (elevated alpha-fetoprotein), and lung (chest imaging suggestive of malignancy) cancers. Between prepandemic and pandemic periods, test quantities decreased by 12.6%-27.8%, and proportions of abnormal results lacking follow-up decreased for urinalyses (-0.8%), increased for fecal occult blood tests/fecal immunochemical test (+2.3%) and chest imaging (+1.8%), and remained constant for others. Follow-up times decreased for most tests; however, control charts suggested increased delays at 2 stages: early (pandemic beginning) for urinalyses, mammograms, fecal occult blood tests/fecal immunochemical test, iron deficiency anemia, and chest imaging and late (30-45 weeks into pandemic) for mammograms, fecal occult blood tests/fecal immunochemical test, and iron deficiency anemia. CONCLUSIONS: Although early pandemic delays in follow-up may have led to reduced cancer rates, the significant decrease in tests performed is likely a large driver of these reductions. Future emergency preparedness efforts should bolster essential follow-up and testing procedures to facilitate timely cancer diagnosis.

Care transitions: opportunities to better serve the traveling patient.

The authors share a model that facilitates patient-centered care and can be adopted by other health systems to encourage successful care transitions for the traveling patient.

Effectiveness of Elbasvir/Grazoprevir in patients with hepatitis C virus genotype 1 infection and chronic kidney disease in the United States veterans population.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Randomized controlled trials of EBR/GZR have reported high treatment efficacy, safety and tolerability in patients undergoing dialysis. However, real world effectiveness data for EBR/GZR in this population is lacking. We evaluated the effectiveness of EBR/GZR in an HCV-infected population with all stages of CKD including dialysis compared with control patients with estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) ≥60 in the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients with chronic HCV genotype 1 infection with EBR/GZR prescriptions dispensed during February 1, 2016-August 31, 2017 in 128 VA Medical Centers. We collected patient information regarding history of dialysis, end stage renal disease (ESRD), and/or eGFR values. We measured SVR based on undetectable HCV RNA at least 4 weeks after the completion of treatment. We examined SVR rates by CKD stage compared to control patients and within patient subgroups using logistic regression models. RESULTS: We identified 5961 patients (42.5% genotype 1a, 55.0% genotype 1b) who met eligibility criteria and completed a EBR/GZR treatment course (≥11 weeks). Approximately 73.2% (n = 4361) had eGFR ≥60 who served as control patients, 14.4% (n = 860) had Stage 3 CKD, and 12.4% (n = 740) had Stage 4-5 CKD or ESRD. Of patients with Stage 4-5 CKD/ESRD, 76.1% underwent dialysis (n = 563). The overall SVR was 96.7% in all patients, 96.4% for eGFR≥60, 98.3% in Stage 3 CKD, and 96.5% in Stage 4-5 CKD/ESRD. No statistically significant differences were found in the SVR rates in patients with or without dialysis in the Stage 4-5 CKD/ESRD patients (adjusted OR 0.91; 95% CI 0.56-1.47 and OR 1.74; 95% CI 0.63-4.81) compared with those with eGFR≥60. CONCLUSION: We found EBR/GZR was effective in patients with HCV GT1 infection regardless of CKD severity or receipt of dialysis in the US VA population.