Radioembolization plus Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Therapy Compared with Radioembolization plus Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor Therapy for the Treatment of Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

PURPOSE: To investigate if combination therapy with immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) and yttrium-90 (90Y) radioembolization results in superior outcomes than those yielded by tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy and 90Y for the treatment of intermediate- to advanced-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). METHODS: A retrospective review of patients presented at an institutional multidisciplinary liver tumor board between January 1, 2012 and August 1, 2023 was conducted. In total, 44 patients with HCC who underwent 90Y 4 weeks within initiation of ICI or TKI therapy were included. Propensity score matching was conducted to account for baseline demographic differences. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to compare median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), and univariate statistics identified disease response and control rate differences. Duration of imaging response was defined as number of months between the first scan after therapy and the first scan showing progression as defined by modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (mRECIST) or immune Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (iRECIST). Adverse events were analyzed per Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 5.0. RESULTS: Patients in the 90Y+ICI therapy group had better objective response rates (ORRs) (89.5% vs 36.8%; P < .001) and disease control rates (DCRs) (94.7% vs 63.2%; P < .001) by mRECIST and iRECIST (ORR: 78.9% vs 36.8%; P < .001; DCR: 94.7% vs 63.2%; P < .001). Median PFS (8.3 vs 4.1 months; P = .37) and OS (15.8 vs 14.3 months; P = .52) were not statistically different. Twelve patients (63.1%) in the 90Y+TKI group did not complete systemic therapy owing to adverse effects compared with 1 patient (5.3%) in the 90Y+ICI group (P < .001). Grade 3/4 adverse events were not statistically different (90Y+TKI: 21.1%; 90Y+ICI: 5.3%; P = .150). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with HCC who received 90Y+ICI had better imaging response and fewer regimen-altering adverse events than those who received 90Y+TKI. No significant combination therapy adverse events were attributable to radioembolization.

BRCA1/2 Testing in Massachusetts Among Women With Private Insurance or Medicaid, 2011-2015.

PURPOSE: Testing for BRCA1/2 mutations has increased among privately insured women in the United States. However, little is known about testing rates or trends among women with Medicaid. We sought to determine whether BRCA1/2 testing rates differed between women with private insurance compared with women with Medicaid in a state where both insurance types cover the test, and to compare testing trends from 2011 to 2015. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of medical claims from January 2011 through June 2015. We included Massachusetts women aged 18-64 with private insurance or Medicaid and at least 12 months of continuous enrollment. We used multivariable linear regression to examine the association of insurance type, age, and time with testing rates. RESULTS: Mean monthly BRCA1/2 testing rates were lower among women with Medicaid compared with those with private insurance. Among privately insured women, mean monthly rates rose from 9.3 per 100,000 in 2011 to 18.4 per 100,000 in 2015, while among Medicaid-insured women, rates increased from 3.7 to 14.7. There was no difference in the monthly rate of increase in both groups (P=0.07). In adjusted analyses, rates were lower among Medicaid-insured women (7 fewer tests per month than privately insured women, P<0.001), and differed by age, with women aged 44-54 most likely to receive testing and women 18-34 the least likely. CONCLUSION: BRCA1/2 testing rates were lower among women insured by Medicaid compared with those with private insurance, though rates increased from 2011 to 2015 among both groups of women at a similar rate.

Comparison of up-front cash cards and checks as incentives for participation in a clinician survey: a study within a trial.

BACKGROUND: Evidence is needed regarding effective incentive strategies to increase clinician survey response rates. Cash cards are increasingly used as survey incentives; they are appealing because of their convenience and because in some cases their value can be reclaimed by investigators if not used. However, their effectiveness in clinician surveys is not known. In this study within the BRCA Founder OutReach (BFOR) study, a clinical trial of population-based BRCA1/2 mutation screening, we compared the use of upfront cash cards requiring email activation versus checks as clinician survey incentives. METHODS: Participants receiving BRCA1/2 testing in the BFOR study could elect to receive their results from their primary care provider (PCP, named by the patient) or from a geneticist associated with the study. In order to understand PCPs' knowledge, attitudes, experiences and willingness to disclose results we mailed paper surveys to the first 501 primary care providers (PCPs) in New York, Boston, Los Angeles and Philadelphia who were nominated by study participants to disclose their BRCA1/2 mutation results obtained through the study. We used alternating assignment stratified by city to assign the first 303 clinicians to receive a $50 up-front incentive as a cash card (N = 155) or check (N = 148). The cash card required PCPs to send an activation email in order to be used. We compared response rates by incentive type, adjusting for PCP characteristics and study site. RESULTS: In unadjusted analyses, PCPs who received checks were more likely to respond to the survey than those who received cash cards (54.1% versus 41.9%, p = 0.046); this remained true when we adjusted for provider characteristics (OR for checks 1.61, 95% CI 1.01, 2.59). No other clinician characteristics had a statistically significant association with response rates in adjusted analyses. When we included an interaction term for incentive type and city, the favorable impact of checks on response rates was evident only in Los Angeles and Philadelphia. CONCLUSIONS: An up-front cash card incentive requiring email activation may be less effective in eliciting clinician responses than up-front checks. However, the benefit of checks for clinician response rates may depend on clinicians' geographic location. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT03351803 ), November 24, 2017.