Impact of the American Tax Payer Relief Act on stereotactic radiosurgery utilization in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: Single-fraction stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is delivered predominantly via two modalities: Gamma Knife, and linear accelerator (LINAC). Implementation of the American Tax Payer Relief Act (ATRA) in 2013 represented the first time limitations specifically targeting SRS reimbursement were introduced into federal law. The subsequent impact of the ATRA on SRS utilization in the United States (US) has yet to be examined. METHODS: The National Cancer Database from 2010-2016 identified brain metastases patients from non-small cell lung cancer throughout the US having undergone SRS. Utilization between GKRS and LINAC was assessed before (2010-2012), during (2013-2014) and after (2015-2016) ATRA implementation. RESULTS: In 2013, there was a substantial decrease of LINAC SRS in favor of GKRS in non-academic centers. Over the 3-year span immediately preceding ATRA implementation, 39% of all eligible SRS cases received LINAC. There was a modest decrease in LINAC utilization over the 2 years immediately following ATRA implementation (35%), followed by an increase over the next two years (40%). SRS modality showed differences over the three time periods (unadjusted, p = 0.043), primarily in non-academic centers (unadjusted, p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: ATRA implementation in 2013 caused an initial spike in Gamma Knife SRS utilization, followed by a decline to rates similar to the years before implementation. These findings indicate that the ATRA provision mandating Medicare reduction of outpatient payment rates for Gamma Knife to be equivalent with those of LINAC SRS had a significant short-term impact on the radiosurgical treatment of metastatic brain disease throughout the US, serving as a reminder of the importance/impact of public policy on treatment modality utilization by physicians and hospitals.

Real-World Treatment Patterns, Overall Survival, and Occurrence and Costs of Adverse Events Associated With Second-Line Therapies for Medicare Patients With Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Real-world data on current treatment practices for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are needed to understand the place in therapy and potential economic impact of newer therapies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study identified patients ≥ 65 years old in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare linked database with first-time diagnosis of stage IIIB/IV NSCLC from 2007-2011 who received second-line therapy after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy from 2007 through mid-2013. Second-line regimens, health care resource use, adverse events (AEs), and associated costs were analyzed descriptively. Overall survival was determined by Kaplan-Meier test. Costs were adjusted to 2013 US dollars. RESULTS: We identified 4033 patients with advanced NSCLC who received second-line therapy (47% of those who received first-line platinum-based chemotherapy). Mean (SD) age was 73 (5) years, 2246 (56%) were male; 1134 (28%) and 2899 (72%) had squamous and nonsquamous NSCLC, respectively. The 4 most common second-line regimens were pemetrexed (22%), docetaxel (12%), carboplatin/paclitaxel (11%), and gemcitabine (7%). Median overall survival from second-line therapy initiation was 7.3 months (95% confidence interval, 7.0-7.7). Dyspnea and anemia were the most common AEs of interest, affecting 29% and 26% of patients, respectively; atypical pneumonia was associated with the highest AE-related costs (mean, $5339). The mean total per-patient-per-month cost was $10,885; AE-related per-patient-per-month costs totaled $1036 (10%). Costs were highest for pemetrexed-treated patients. CONCLUSION: These real-world data illustrate the variety of second-line regimens, poor prognosis, and high cost of second-line chemotherapy for patients with advanced NSCLC treated before the approval of immunotherapies for these patients.

A Population-Based Cost Analysis of Thoracoscopic Versus Open Lobectomy in Primary Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Thoracoscopic lobectomy for primary lung cancer has become increasingly popular worldwide due to several advantages over open lobectomy including reduced pain, reduced length of hospital stay, and comparable oncologic outcomes. The costs of thoracoscopic versus conventional open lobectomy have been compared in several studies with variable results. We compared the costs of thoracoscopic versus open lobectomy in lung cancer patients in Taiwan. METHODS: Patients who underwent lobectomy for primary lung cancer from the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database (NHIRD) between 2004 and 2010 were identified. Patient characteristics, operative data, and costs for each part of the hospitalization for surgery and 30 days of care after discharge were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 5366 patients with complete clinical data who underwent either conventional open lobectomy (n = 3166, 59 %) or thoracoscopic lobectomy (n = 2200, 41 %) for primary lung cancer were identified from the database. Compared with open lobectomy, thoracoscopic lobectomy was associated with younger age, less comorbidity, shorter anesthesia times, and reduced lengths of hospital stay. Total hospital costs, operative costs, and other costs were significantly higher in the thoracoscopic group. The 30-day after discharge costs were significantly lower in the thoracoscopic group. CONCLUSIONS: Thoracoscopic lobectomy for primary lung cancer in Taiwan was associated with higher total hospital costs but lower 30 days after discharge costs than open lobectomy. These differences may have resulted from higher operative and instrument costs in the thoracoscopic group.

Epidemiology and treatment costs of bone metastases from lung cancer: a French prospective, observational, multicenter study (GFPC 0601).

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this prospective, observational, multicenter study was to examine the epidemiology and management costs of bone metastatic disease (BMD) in patients with lung cancer. METHODS: The analysis included all patients with BMD from lung cancer diagnosed between May 2006 and May 2007 in 40 centers. We analyzed their management and the direct costs of BMD from the health care provider's perspective, using a Markov model. Skeletal-related event (SRE) was defined as pathological fractures, spinal cord compression, or hypercalcemia (clinical SRE [cSRE]) for an initial analysis; a second analysis included palliative radiotherapy and surgery (therapeutic SRE [tSRE]). RESULTS: Among the 554 patients enrolled (62 ± 11 years, 76.5% males, 69.3% performance status 0/1, 91% non-small cell lung cancer), 24.7% had a cSRE and 26.7% a tSRE at baseline and 9% and 39% during follow-up, respectively; 81.8% received at least one chemotherapy cycle. The median survival time was 5.8 months, and the 1- and 2-year survival rates were 22% and 7%, respectively; there was no significant difference in overall survival between the patients with and without SRE at enrollment. The main BMD treatments were opiate therapy (77.7%), biphosphonates (52.3%), radiotherapy (42.1%), and surgery (9.2%). The mean monthly BMD treatment costs in euros were €190, €374, and €4672 for asymptomatic patients, symptomatic patients, and patients with SRE, respectively. The average first-year BMD management cost in euros was €3999 ± 4135 (95% confidence interval: 374-15,886), and 49.5% of this cost was attributable to patients with SRE. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis confirms the poor prognosis of BMD from lung cancer and underlines the burden of SRE in overall treatment costs.