Access and barriers to genomic classifiers for breast cancer and prostate cancer in India.

The incidence of cancer in general, including breast and prostate cancer specifically, is increasing in India. Breast and prostate cancers have genomic classifiers developed to guide therapy decisions. However, these genomic classifiers are often inaccessible in India due to high cost. These classifiers may also be less suitable to the Indian population, as data primarily from patients in wealthy Western countries were used in developing these genomic classifiers. In addition to the limitations in using these existing genomic classifiers, developing and validating new genomic classifiers for breast and prostate cancer in India is challenging due to the heterogeneity in the Indian population. However, there are steps that can be taken to address the various barriers that currently exist for accurate, accessible genomic classifiers for cancer in India.

Colon Cancer Disparities in Stage at Presentation and Time to Surgery for Asian Americans, Native Hawaiians, and Pacific Islanders: A Study with Disaggregated Ethnic Groups.

BACKGROUND: Vast differences in barriers to care exist among Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander (AANHPI) groups and may manifest as disparities in stage at presentation and access to treatment. Thus, we characterized AANHPI patients with stage 0-IV colon cancer and examined differences in (1) stage at presentation and (2) time to surgery relative to white patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We assessed all patients in the National Cancer Database (NCDB) with stage 0-IV colon cancer from 2004 to 2016 who identified as white, Chinese, Japanese, Filipino, Native Hawaiian, Korean, Vietnamese, Laotian, Hmong, Kampuchean, Thai, Asian Indian or Pakistani, and Pacific Islander. Multivariable ordinal logistic regression defined adjusted odds ratios (AORs), with 95% confidence intervals (CI), of (1) patients presenting with advanced stage colon cancer and (2) patients with stage 0-III colon cancer receiving surgery at ≥ 60 days versus 30-59 days versus < 30 days postdiagnosis, adjusting for sociodemographic/clinical factors. RESULTS: Among 694,876 patients, Japanese [AOR 1.08 (95% CI 1.01-1.15), p < 0.05], Filipino [AOR 1.17 (95% CI 1.09-1.25), p < 0.001], Korean [AOR 1.09 (95% CI 1.01-1.18), p < 0.05], Laotian [AOR 1.51 (95% CI 1.17-1.95), p < 0.01], Kampuchean [AOR 1.33 (95% CI 1.04-1.70), p < 0.01], Thai [AOR 1.60 (95% CI 1.22-2.10), p = 0.001], and Pacific Islander [AOR 1.41 (95% CI 1.20-1.67), p < 0.001] patients were more likely to present with more advanced colon cancer compared with white patients. Chinese [AOR 1.27 (95% CI 1.17-1.38), p < 0.001], Japanese [AOR 1.23 (95% CI 1.10-1.37], p < 0.001], Filipino [AOR 1.36 (95% CI 1.22-1.52), p < 0.001], Korean [AOR 1.16 (95% CI 1.02-1.32), p < 0.05], and Vietnamese [AOR 1.55 (95% CI 1.36-1.77), p < 0.001] patients were more likely to experience greater time to surgery than white patients. Disparities persisted when comparing among AANHPI subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings reveal key disparities in stage at presentation and time to surgery by race/ethnicity among AANHPI subgroups. Heterogeneity upon disaggregation underscores the importance of examining and addressing access barriers and clinical disparities.

A burden shared: the financial, psychological, and health-related consequences borne by family members and caregivers of people with cancer in India.

In India, approximately 1.4 million new cases of cancer are recorded annually, with 26.7 million people living with cancer in 2021. Providing care for family members with cancer impacts caregivers' health and financial resources. Effects on caregivers' health and financial resources, understood as family and caregiver "financial toxicity" of cancer, are important to explore in the Indian context, where family members often serve as caregivers, in light of cultural attitudes towards family. This is reinforced by other structural issues such as grave disparities in socioeconomic status, barriers in access to care, and limited access to supportive care services for many patients. Effects on family caregivers' financial resources are particularly prevalent in India given the increased dependency on out-of-pocket financing for healthcare, disparate access to insurance coverage, and limitations in public expenditure on healthcare. In this paper, we explore family and caregiver financial toxicity of cancer in the Indian context, highlighting the multiple psychosocial aspects through which these factors may play out. We suggest steps forward, including future directions in (1) health services research, (2) community-level interventions, and (3) policy changes. We underscore that multidisciplinary and multi-sectoral efforts are needed to study and address family and caregiver financial toxicity in India.

Bullying of vascular surgery trainees.

OBJECTIVE: Bullying is defined as the perception of negative actions in which the target has difficulty in defending themself. Bullying can include verbal, physical, and psychological force used to influence the target's behavior. We sought to understand the factors associated with bullying identified in vascular surgery trainees and the barriers to reporting. METHODS: An anonymous electronic survey consisting of demographic information and validated scales for bullying (negative acts questionnaire - revised [NAQ-R]), social support, and grit was sent to vascular surgery trainees in the United States. The respondents who had reported experiencing bullying were compared with those who had not been bullied. RESULTS: Of the 516 trainees invited, 132 (26%) completed the survey. Of these 132 trainees, 63 (48%) reported having been bullied or witnessing a fellow trainee being bullied in the previous 6 months, with 42 (32%) reporting having been bullied. Gender, marital status, paradigm of vascular training, grit level, and social support did not predict for the receipt of bullying, although those in the highest quartile of grit showed a trend toward lower NAQ-R scores (P = .06). As expected, the trainees that reported having experienced bullying had had higher NAQ-R scores (P < .0001). No trainee reported daily bullying; however, 52% reported bullying "now and then" or several times a week. The most common perpetrator was their direct superior surgeon, although 12 (29%) had reported bullying from co-residents and 6 (14%) had reported bullying from patients. Of the 42 trainees who had reported experiencing bullying, 15 (36%) did not address the bullying behavior. The most common barriers to reporting bullying identified were fear of loss of support from their supervisor (48%), loss of reputation (45%), and effect on career choices (43%). Of those who reported addressing the behavior, 56% reported that the behavior had continued. Of the 132 respondents, 70 (53%) reported no knowledge of institution-specific policies to address bullying in their program. The most common reasons identified for why bullying might occur in vascular training programs were "high stress environments" and "learned behavior" from others. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that bullying occurs for a significant number of vascular trainees. However, we did not find any clearly identified factors predictive of who will experience bullying. Trainees with higher grit might experience less bullying or be more likely to have a lower perception of bullying behavior. Further research is needed to determine the effects of bullying on vascular trainees.

Outcomes after endovascular reintervention for aortic interventions.

OBJECTIVE: Endovascular reinterventions are often performed after previous open or endovascular aortic procedures. We used the GREAT (Global Registry for Endovascular Aortic Treatment) database to compare the outcomes between these groups. We also compared reintervention of any type with a group of patients who had undergone primary endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR). METHODS: All patients enrolled in GREAT were grouped according to a previous EVAR or open abdominal aortic procedure (OAP). Univariate analysis was performed using the χ2, Wilcoxon rank sum, and Fisher exact tests. Cox proportional analysis was used to test the predictors for all-cause and aorta-related mortality. RESULTS: A total of 3974 subjects who had undergone EVAR with follow-up data available were included in the GREAT. Of the 3974 procedures, 196 (4.9%) were reinterventions (49 after OAP and 147 after previous EVAR). Reintervention after previous EVAR showed a trend toward a greater endoleak rate through 2 years (13.6% vs 4.1%; P = .07), although no difference was found in the occurrence of the intervention (12.2% vs 17.7%; P = .37). Reintervention after OAP resulted in higher all-cause mortality through 2 years of follow-up (32.7% vs 17.7%; P = .0.03). The predictors of mortality included prior OAP, renal insufficiency, and the use of cutdown for access. Compared with the patients who had undergone primary endovascular repair, patients in the reintervention cohort were older (75.3 years vs 73.3 years; P = .0005), had had only femoral artery access used (95.8% vs 90.3%; P < .0001), and were more likely to have undergone aortic branch vessel procedures (32.3% vs 13.3%; P < .0001). Both all-cause and aorta-related mortality through 2 years was higher in the reintervention group than in the primary EVAR group (21.4% vs 12.5% [P = .0003; and 4.6% vs 1% [P < .0001], respectively). On multivariate analysis, the predictors of aortic-related mortality included reintervention, renal insufficiency, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, underweight body mass index, increasing aortic diameter, and the use of brachial artery or other arterial access sites. CONCLUSIONS: Endovascular reintervention for aortic pathology was associated with higher mortality than was primary EVAR. Reinterventions after prior OAPs were associated with higher mortality than were prior EVARs.

Trends in Location of Death for Individuals With Ovarian Cancer in the United States.

Using the publicly available Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's WONDER (Wide-ranging Online Data for Epidemiologic Research) database from 2003 to 2019, we evaluated associations between decedent characteristics and location of death for patients with ovarian malignancy. We found that Black, Native American, Asian American, and Hispanic patients were more likely to die in hospitals than White patients, despite an overall reduction in hospital deaths and an overall increase in hospice facility deaths. Additionally, patients with lesser educational attainment were more likely to die in nursing facilities and less likely to die in hospice facilities. Although there may be some contribution from cultural preferences, these findings may represent disparities in access to palliative care affecting people with cancer from racial and ethnic minoritized groups.

Associations Between Annual Medicare Part D Low-Income Subsidy Loss and Prescription Drug Spending and Use.

Importance: The Medicare Part D Low Income Subsidy (LIS) program provides millions of beneficiaries with drug plan premium and cost-sharing assistance. The extent to which LIS recipients experience subsidy losses with annual redetermination cycles and the resulting associations with prescription drug affordability and use are unknown. Objective: To examine how frequently annual LIS benefits are lost among Medicare Part D beneficiaries and how this is associated with prescription drug use and out-of-pocket costs. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cohort study of Medicare Part D beneficiaries from 2007 to 2018, annual changes in LIS recipients among those automatically deemed eligible (eg, due to dual eligibility for Medicare and Medicaid) and nondeemed beneficiaries who must apply for LIS benefits were analyzed using Medicare enrollment and Part D event data. Subsidy losses were classified in 4 groups: temporary losses (<1 year); extended losses (≥1 year); subsidy reductions (change to partial LIS); and disenrollment from Medicare Part D after subsidy loss. Temporary losses could more likely represent subsidy losses among eligible beneficiaries. Multinomial logit models were used to examine associations between beneficiary characteristics and subsidy loss; linear regression models were used to compare changes in prescription drug cost and use in the months after subsidy losses vs before. Analyses were conducted between November 2022 and November 2023. Exposure: Subsidy loss at the beginning of each year among subsidy recipients in December of the prior year. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were out-of-pocket costs and prescription drug fills overall and for 4 classes: antidiabetes, antilipid, antidepressant, and antipsychotic drugs. Results: In 2008, 731 070 full LIS beneficiaries (17%) were not deemed automatically eligible (39% were aged <65 years; 59% were female). Nearly all beneficiaries deemed automatically eligible (≥99%) retained the subsidy annually from 2007 to 2018, compared with 78% to 84% of nondeemed beneficiaries. Among nondeemed beneficiaries, disabled individuals younger than 65 years and racial and ethnic minority groups were more likely to have temporary subsidy losses vs none. Temporary losses were associated with an average 700% increase in out-of-pocket drug costs (+$52.72/mo [95% CI, 52.52-52.92]) and 15% reductions in prescription fills (-0.58 fills/mo [95% CI, -0.59 to -0.57]) overall. Similar changes were found for antidiabetes, antilipid, antidepressant, and antipsychotic prescription drug classes. Beneficiaries who retained their subsidy had few changes. Conclusions and Relevance: The conclusions of this cohort study suggest that efforts to help eligible beneficiaries retain Medicare Part D subsidies could improve drug affordability, treatment adherence, and reduce disparities in medication access.

Trends in Utilization and Medicare Spending on Short-Course Radiation Therapy for Breast and Prostate Cancer: An Episode-Based Analysis From 2015 to 2019.

PURPOSE: Evidence supports the value of shorter, similarly efficacious, and potentially more cost-effective hypofractionated radiation therapy (RT) regimens in many clinical scenarios for breast cancer (BC) and prostate cancer (PC). However, practice patterns vary considerably. We used the most recent Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services data to assess trends in RT cost and practice patterns among episodes of BC and PC. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We performed a retrospective cohort analysis of all external beam RT episodes for BC and PC from 2015 to 2019 to assess predictors of short-course RT (SCRT) use and calculated spending differences. Multivariable logistic regression defined adjusted odds ratios of receipt of SCRT over longer-course RT (LCRT) by treatment modality, age, year of diagnosis, type of practice, and the interaction between year and treatment setting. Medicare spending was evaluated using multivariable linear regression controlling for duration of RT regimen (SCRT vs LCRT) in addition to the above covariables. RESULTS: Of 143,729 BC episodes and 114,214 PC episodes, 63,623 (44.27%) and 25,955 (22.72%) were SCRT regimens, respectively. Median total spending for SCRT regimens among BC episodes was $9418 (interquartile range [IQR], $7966-$10,983) versus $13,602 (IQR, $11,814-$15,499) for LCRT. Among PC episodes, median total spending was $6924 (IQR, $4,509-$12,905) for stereotactic body RT, $18,768 (IQR, $15,421-$20,740) for moderate hypofractionation, and $27,319 (IQR, $25,446-$29,421) for LCRT. On logistic regression, receipt of SCRT was associated with older age among both BC and PC episodes as well as treatment at hospital-affiliated over freestanding sites (P < .001 for all). CONCLUSIONS: In this evaluation of BC and PC RT episodes from 2015 to 2019, we found that shorter-course RT resulted in lower costs than longer-course RT. SCRT was also more common in hospital-affiliated sites. Future research focusing on potential payment incentives encouraging SCRT when clinically appropriate in the 2 most common cancers treated with RT will be valuable as the field continues to prospectively evaluate cost-effective hypofractionation in other disease sites.

Disparities in Stage at Presentation Among Hispanic and Latinx Patients With Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer in the United States.

PURPOSE: Hispanic and Latinx people in the United States are the fastest-growing ethnic group. However, previous studies in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) often analyze these diverse communities in aggregate. We aimed to identify differences in NSCLC stage at diagnosis in the US population, focusing on disaggregated Hispanic/Latinx individuals. METHODS: Data from the National Cancer Database from 2004 to 2018 identified patients with primary NSCLC. Individuals were disaggregated by racial and ethnic subgroup and Hispanic country of origin. Ordinal logistic regression adjusting for age, facility type, income, educational attainment, comorbidity index, insurance, and year of diagnosis was used to create adjusted odds ratios (aORs), with higher odds representing diagnosis at later-stage NSCLC. RESULTS: Of 1,565,159 patients with NSCLC, 46,616 were Hispanic/Latinx (3.0%). When analyzed in the setting of race and ethnicity, Hispanic patients were more likely to be diagnosed with metastatic disease compared with non-Hispanic White (NHW) patients: 47.0% for Hispanic Black, 46.0% Hispanic White, and 44.3% of Hispanic other patients versus 39.1% of non-Hispanic White patients (P < .001 for all). By country of origin, 51.4% of Mexican, 41.7% of Puerto Rican, 44.6% of Cuban, 50.8% of South or Central American, 48.4% of Dominican, and 45.6% of other Hispanic patients were diagnosed with metastatic disease, compared with 39.1% of NHWs. Conversely, 20.2% of Mexican, 26.9% of Puerto Rican, 24.2% of Cuban, 22.5% of South or Central American, 23.7% of Dominican, and 24.5% of other Hispanic patients were diagnosed with stage I disease, compared with 30.0% of NHWs. All Hispanic groups were more likely to present with later-stage NSCLC than NHW patients (greatest odds for Mexican patients, aOR, 1.44; P < .001). CONCLUSION: Hispanic/Latinx patients with non-small-cell lung cancer were more likely to be diagnosed with advanced disease compared with NHWs. Disparities persisted upon disaggregation by both race and country of origin, with over half of Mexican patients with metastatic disease at diagnosis. Disparities among Hispanic/Latinx groups by race and by country of origin highlight the shortcomings of treating these groups as a monolith and underscore the need for disaggregated research and targeted interventions.

Spending Analysis of Machine Learning-Based Communication Nudges in Oncology.

BACKGROUND: Serious illness conversations (SICs) in the outpatient setting may improve mood and quality of life among patients with cancer and decrease aggressive end-of-life care. Interventions informed by behavioral economics may increase rates of SICs between oncology clinicians and patients, but the impact of these interventions on end-of-life spending is unknown. METHODS: This study is a secondary analysis of a stepped-wedge cluster randomized, controlled trial that involved nine medical oncology practices and their high-risk patients at a large academic institution between June 2019 and April 2020. The study included 1187 patients who were identified by a machine-learning algorithm as high risk of 180-day mortality and who died by December 2020. The patients were randomly assigned to standard of care (controls) or to a behavioral intervention designed to increase clinician-initiated SICs. We abstracted spending - defined as inflation-adjusted costs for acute care (inpatient plus emergency room), office/outpatient care, intravenous systemic therapy, other therapy (e.g., radiation), long-term care, and hospice - from the institution's accounting system, and we captured spending at inpatient, outpatient, and pharmacy settings. To evaluate intervention impacts on spending, we used a two-part model, first using logistic regression to model zero versus nonzero spending and second using generalized linear mixed models with gamma distribution and log-link function to model daily mean spending in the last 180days of life. Models were adjusted for clinic and wedge fixed effects, and they were clustered at the oncologist level. For all patients with at least one SIC within 6 months of death, we also calculated their mean daily spending before and after SIC. RESULTS: Median age at death was 68years (interquartile range, 15.5), 317 patients (27%) were Black or of ethnicities other than white, and 448 patients (38%) had an SIC. The intervention was associated with lower unadjusted mean daily spending in the last 6 months of life for the intervention group versus controls ($377.96 vs. $449.92; adjusted mean difference, -$75.33; 95% confidence interval, -$136.42 to -$14.23; P=0.02), translating to $13,747 total adjusted savings per decedent and $13 million in cumulative savings across all decedents in the intervention group. Compared with controls, patients in the intervention group incurred lower mean daily spending for systemic therapy (adjusted difference, -$44.59; P=0.001), office/outpatient care (-$9.62; P=0.001), and other therapy (-$8.65; P=0.04). The intervention was not associated with differences in end-of-life spending for acute care, long-term care, or hospice. Results were consistent for spending in the last 1 and 3 months of life and after adjusting for age, race, and ethnicity. For patients with SICs, mean daily spending decreased by $37.92 following the first SIC ($329.87 vs. $291.95). CONCLUSIONS: A machine learning-based, behaviorally informed intervention to prompt SICs led to end-of-life savings among patients with cancer, driven by decreased systemic therapy and outpatient spending. (Funded by the Penn Center for Precision Medicine and the National Institutes of Health; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03984773.).

The Enhancing Oncology Model: Leveraging improvement science to increase health equity in value-based care.

The Oncology Care Model (OCM), launched in 2016 by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, was the first demonstration of value-based payment in oncology. Although the OCM delivered mixed results in terms of quality of care and total episode costs, the model had no statistically significant impact on remediating racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic disparities among beneficiaries. These deficits have been prominent in other aspects of US healthcare, and as a result, the Institute for Healthcare Improvement has advocated for stakeholders to leverage improvement science, an applied science that focuses on implementing rapid cycles for change, to identify and overcome barriers to health equity. With the announcement of the new Enhancing Oncology Model, a continuation of the OCM's efforts in introducing value to cancer care for episodes surrounding chemotherapy administration, both policymakers and providers must apply tenets of improvement science and make eliminating disparities in alternative payment models a forefront objective. In this commentary, we discuss previous inequities in alternative payment models, the role that improvement science plays in addressing health-care disparities, and steps that stakeholders can take to maximize equitable outcomes in the Enhancing Oncology Model.

Operative management of an incidental portal vein aneurysm in the setting of an incarcerated congenital diaphragmatic hernia.

Portal vein aneurysms are rare pathologic entities. A 3.7-cm portal vein aneurysm was incidentally discovered in an 80-year-old male patient on imaging for acute abdominal pain secondary to an incarcerated diaphragmatic hernia. The aneurysm was resected, and primary repair of the portal vein was performed during a second-look operation after repair of the incarcerated hernia. Operative intervention was chosen for this patient because of the aneurysm's size and the additional indication for abdominal exploration.