Life expectancy estimates based on comorbidities and frailty to inform preventive care.

BACKGROUND: Long-term prognostication is important to inform preventive care in older adults. Existing prediction indices incorporate age and comorbidities. Frailty is another important factor in prognostication. In this project, we aimed at developing life expectancy estimates that incorporate both comorbidities and frailty. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, we used data from a 5% sample of Medicare beneficiaries with and without history of cancer from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) cancer registry areas. We included adults aged 66-95 years who were continuously enrolled in fee-for-service Medicare for ≥1 year from 1998 to 2014. Participants were followed for survival until 12/31/2015, death, or disenrollment. Comorbidity (none, low/medium, high) and frailty categories (low, high) were defined using established methods for claims. We estimated 5- and 10-year survival probabilities and median life expectancies by age, sex, comorbidities, and frailty. RESULTS: The study included 479,646 individuals (4,128,316 person-years), of whom most were women (58.7%). Frailty scores varied widely among participants in the same comorbidity category. In Cox models, both comorbidities and frailty were independent predictors of mortality. Individuals with high comorbidities (HR, 3.24; 95% CI, 3.20-3.28) and low/medium comorbidities (HR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.34-1.39) had higher risks of death than those with no comorbidities. Compared to low frailty, high frailty was associated with higher risk of death (HR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.52-1.58). Frailty affected life expectancy estimates in ways relevant to preventive care (i.e., distinguishing <10-year versus >10-year life expectancy) in multiple subgroups. CONCLUSION: Incorporating both comorbidities and frailty may be important in estimating long-term life expectancies of older adults. Our life expectancy tables can aid clinicians' prognostication and inform simulation models and population health management.

Association of Receipt of a Housing Voucher With Subsequent Hospital Utilization and Spending.

Importance: Although neighborhoods are thought to be an important health determinant, evidence for the relationship between neighborhood poverty and health care use is limited, as prior studies have largely used observational data without an experimental design. Objective: To examine whether housing policies that reduce exposure to high-poverty neighborhoods were associated with differences in long-term hospital use among adults and children. Design, Setting, and Participants: Exploratory analysis of the Moving to Opportunity for Fair Housing Demonstration Program, a randomized social experiment conducted in 5 US cities. From 1994 to 1998, 4604 families in public housing were randomized to 1 of 3 groups: a control condition, a traditional Section 8 voucher toward rental costs in the private market, or a voucher that could only be used in low-poverty neighborhoods. Participants were linked to all-payer hospital discharge data (1995 through 2014 or 2015) and Medicaid data (1999 through 2009). The final follow-up date ranged from 11 to 21 years after randomization. Exposures: Receipt of a traditional or low-poverty voucher vs control group. Main Outcomes and Measures: Rates of hospitalizations and hospital days, and hospital spending. Results: Among 4602 eligible individuals randomized as adults, 4072 (88.5%) were linked to health data (mean age, 33 years [SD, 9.0 years]; 98% female; median follow-up, 11 years). There were no significant differences in primary outcomes among adults randomized to receive a voucher compared with the control group (unadjusted hospitalization rate, 14.0 vs 14.7 per 100 person-years, adjusted incidence rate ratio [IRR], 0.95 [95% CI, 0.84-1.08; P = .45]; hospital days, 62.8 vs 67.0 per 100 person-years; IRR, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.77-1.13; P = .46]; yearly spending, $2075 vs $1977; adjusted difference, -$129 [95% CI, -$497 to $239; P = .49]). Among 11 290 eligible individuals randomized as children, 9118 (80.8%) were linked to health data (mean age, 8 years [SD, 4.6 years]; 49% female; median follow-up, 11 years). Receipt of a housing voucher during childhood was significantly associated with lower hospitalization rates (6.3 vs 7.3 per 100 person-years; IRR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.73-0.99; P = .03]) and yearly inpatient spending ($633 vs $785; adjusted difference, -$143 [95% CI, -$256 to -$31; P = .01]) and no significant difference in hospital days (25.7 vs 28.8 per 100 person-years; IRR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.77-1.11; P = .41]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this exploratory analysis of a randomized housing voucher intervention, adults who received a housing voucher did not experience significant differences in hospital use or spending. Receipt of a voucher during childhood was significantly associated with lower rates of hospitalization and less inpatient spending during long-term follow-up.

Prevalence of Comorbidities among Older Head and Neck Cancer Survivors in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of comorbidities among patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) at the time of their cancer diagnosis and during their survivorship trajectory. The second aim was to evaluate the differences in comorbidities developed according to treatment type received. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cross-sectional. SETTING: SEER (Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results)-Medicare linked database. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Individuals with a first-incident primary diagnosis of HNSCC from 2004 to 2011 per the SEER-Medicare database were included in analysis. The presence or absence of 30 comorbid conditions of interest was identified during distinct periods and analyzed according to treatment with surgery alone, primary (chemo)radiation, or surgery with (chemo)radiation. RESULTS: The study population consisted of 10,524 individuals diagnosed with HNSCC, with a mean age of 74.8 years. At diagnosis, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and diabetes were the most prevalent comorbidities, and they increased over time. The probability of developing treatment-related comorbidities such as pneumonia, dysphagia, weight loss, malnutrition, and dental issues rose significantly in the short and long term following treatment ( P < .05). By 5 years from cancer diagnosis, patients were most likely to have newly diagnosed hypertension, dysphagia, anemia, and weight loss. Primary surgery alone was associated with a lower risk of diagnosis with these treatment-related comorbidities, as compared with treatments involving radiation therapy and/or chemotherapy in the primary or adjuvant settings ( P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: There is a large burden of comorbidities among patients following HNSCC treatment, which warrant clinical attention during surveillance.

Topical Estrogen Prescription Fill Rates for Women With a History of Breast Cancer Who Are Taking Hormone Therapy.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate how often women with a history of breast cancer who are taking hormone therapy (HT) filled prescriptions for topical estrogens and whether this frequency varied over time and by type of HT used. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study using medical and outpatient drug claims from a large commercial claims database for the years 2010-2015. Women younger than age 65 years taking HT for breast cancer were classified as users of 1) tamoxifen only, 2) aromatase inhibitor(s) only, or 3) any other or multiple HTs. Our outcome variable was filling a prescription for topical estrogen in a given year. We used multivariable logistic regression models estimated with generalized estimating equations to determine whether the fill rate varied over time and by HT category adjusting for age, receipt of surgical or radiation treatment, types of outpatient health care provider visits, and comorbidities. RESULTS: We identified 352,118 records from 176,012 unique patients (mean age 54.3 years, range 18-64 years) who met eligibility criteria. Aromatase inhibitors were used more commonly (56.0% of patient-years) than tamoxifen (38.8%). Overall, 3.0% (range 2.9-3.1%) of women filled any topical estrogen prescription in a given calendar year. More than half of filled topical estrogen prescriptions were for tablets (57.0%) with the remainder for creams (25.8%) and rings (17.3%). In adjusted analyses, the fill rate for women taking tamoxifen was significantly less (2.4%; 95% CI 2.3-2.5%) than for women taking aromatase inhibitors (3.3%; 95% CI 3.2-3.4%). There was a small but statistically significant increase in fill rates across years (odds ratio 1.03, 95% CI 1.02-1.04). CONCLUSION: A small proportion of women with a history of breast cancer who were taking HT filled a topical estrogen prescription, with significant differences by type of HT. More evidence is needed to inform national guidelines regarding safety and appropriate use of topical estrogens in this patient population.

Underutilization of Treatment for Regional Gastric Cancer Among the Elderly in the USA.

BACKGROUND: In the USA, a quarter of elderly patients do not receive any treatment for regional gastric cancer, which results in poorer outcomes. We sought to identify factors associated with undertreatment of regional gastric cancer in this population, as well as to assess overall survival in the undertreated population. METHODS: Elderly patients (aged ≥ 65 years) diagnosed with regional gastric cancer between 2001 and 2009 were identified from the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER)-Medicare linked databases. Treatment was defined as receiving any medical or surgical therapy for gastric cancer. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify factors associated with failure to receive treatment. Overall survival was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazard model. RESULTS: Of 5972 patients with regional gastric cancer, 1586 (26.5%) received no treatment. Median age was 78 years; 56.1% of patients were men. On multivariable analysis, the factors strongly associated with lack of therapy were age ≥ 80 years, black race, lower education level, and diagnosis before 2007. As expected, patients who received therapy had better overall survival (log-rank test, p < 0.001). Specifically, median survival and 5-year survival were 16.5 months and 20.5% for treated patients, compared with 9.1 months and 19.0% for untreated patients. CONCLUSIONS: Elderly patients with gastric cancer have better overall 5-year survival after receiving treatment for their cancer. Disparities in the use of treatment for curable cancers are associated with older age, black race, lower educational level, and diagnosis before 2007.

Esophageal Cancer Treatment Is Underutilized Among Elderly Patients in the USA.

OBJECTIVES: Large numbers of elderly patients in the USA receive no treatment for esophageal cancer, despite evidence that multimodality treatment can increase survival. Our goal is to identify factors that may contribute to lack of treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER)-Medicare Linked Database (2001-2009), we identified regional esophageal cancer patients ≥65 years old. Treatment was defined as receiving any medical or surgical therapy for esophageal cancer. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with failure to receive treatment. Overall survival (OS) was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazard model. RESULTS: There were 5072 patients (median age, 75 years; interquartile range (IQR), 71-81 years). Majority were treated with definitive chemoradiation (48.49 %). Factors associated with lack of treatment included West geographic region and ≥80 years old. Patients who received therapy had better OS (log-rank, p < 0.001). Compared with treated patients, non-treated patients had worse adjusted OS (HR, 1.43; 95 % confidence interval (CI), 1.33-1.55; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Elderly patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer who received treatment had improved 5-year survival compared with patients without treatment. Disparities in utilization of treatment are associated with regional and socioeconomic factors, not presence of comorbidities.

Comparing Prognostic Tools for Cancer Screening: Considerations for Clinical Practice and Performance Assessment.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the agreement and rates of cancer screening using four prognostic tools that require different types of clinical information. DESIGN: Observational retrospective cohort study. SETTING: 2009 and 2010 waves of the Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey. PARTICIPANTS: Adults aged 66-90 with survey and claims data (N = 9,469). MEASUREMENTS: Agreement between four indices predicting short-term (4-5 years) and long-term (9-10 years) survival; self-reported breast and prostate cancer screening. RESULTS: Agreement between the four prognostic tools was high. Pearson correlation coefficients ranged from 0.63 to 0.90 for short-term survival and 0.68 to 0.94 for long-term survival. When defining limited short-term life expectancy as less than 25% chance of surviving 4 or 5 years, all four tools agreed in 96.4% of the sample. All four tools agreed in their placement of participants into limited or not-limited long-term life expectancy in 77.1% of participants (<25% chance of surviving 9 or 10 years). Rates of cancer screening were similarly high in individuals with limited long-term life expectancy regardless of the tool used: greater than 31% for mammographic screening in women and greater than 69% for prostate cancer screening. CONCLUSION: There is substantial agreement among different prognostic tools for short- and long-term survival in Medicare beneficiaries. The high rates of cancer screening of individuals with limited life expectancy suggest the importance of incorporating tools into clinical decision-making.

Relationship Between Quality of Comorbid Condition Care and Costs for Cancer Survivors.

PURPOSE: To estimate the association between cancer survivors' comorbid condition care quality and costs; to determine whether the association differs between cancer survivors and other patients. METHODS: Using the SEER-Medicare-linked database, we identified survivors of breast, prostate, and colorectal cancers who were diagnosed in 2004, enrolled in Medicare fee-for-service for at least 12 months before diagnosis, and survived ≥ 3 years. Quality of care was assessed using nine process indicators for chronic conditions, and a composite indicator representing seven avoidable outcomes. Total costs on the basis of Medicare amount paid were grouped as inpatient and outpatient. We examined the association between care quality and costs for cancer survivors, and compared this association among 2:1 frequency-matched noncancer controls, using comparisons of means and generalized linear regressions. RESULTS: Our sample included 8,661 cancer survivors and 17,332 matched noncancer controls. Receipt of recommended care was associated with higher outpatient costs for eight indicators, and higher inpatient and total costs for five indicators. For three measures (visit every 6 months for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or diabetes, and glycosylated hemoglobin or fructosamine every 6 months for patients with diabetes), costs for cancer survivors who received recommended care increased less than for noncancer controls. The absence of avoidable events was associated with lower costs of each type. An annual eye examination for patients with diabetes was associated with lower inpatient costs. CONCLUSION: Higher-quality processes of care may not reduce short-term costs, but the prevention of avoidable outcomes reduces costs. The association between quality and cost was similar for cancer survivors and noncancer controls.

A two-stage approach to genetic risk assessment in primary care.

Genetic risk prediction models such as BRCAPRO are used routinely in genetic counseling for identification of potential BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. They require extensive information on the counselee and her family history, and thus are not practical for primary care. To address this gap, we develop and test a two-stage approach to genetic risk assessment by balancing the tradeoff between the amount of information used and accuracy achieved. The first stage is intended for primary care wherein limited information is collected and analyzed using a simplified version of BRCAPRO. If the assessed risk is sufficiently high, more extensive information is collected and the full BRCAPRO is used (stage two: intended for genetic counseling). We consider three first-stage tools: BRCAPROLYTE, BRCAPROLYTE-Plus, and BRCAPROLYTE-Simple. We evaluate the two-stage approach on independent clinical data on probands with family history of breast and ovarian cancers, and BRCA genetic test results. These include population-based data on 1344 probands from Newton-Wellesley Hospital and mostly high-risk family data on 2713 probands from Cancer Genetics Network and MD Anderson Cancer Center. We use discrimination and calibration measures, appropriately modified to evaluate the overall performance of a two-stage approach. We find that the proposed two-stage approach has very limited loss of discrimination and comparable calibration as BRCAPRO. It identifies a similar number of carriers without requiring a full family history evaluation on all probands. We conclude that the two-stage approach allows for practical large-scale genetic risk assessment in primary care.

Identifying changes in scores on the EORTC-QLQ-C30 representing a change in patients' supportive care needs.

PURPOSE: Using health-related quality-of-life measures for patient management requires knowing what changes in scores require clinical attention. We estimated changes on the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality-of-Life-Questionnaire-Core-30 (EORTC-QLQ-C30), representing important changes by comparing to patient-reported changes in supportive care needs. METHODS: This secondary analysis used data from 193 newly diagnosed cancer patients (63 % breast, 37 % colorectal; mean age 60 years; 20 % male) from 28 Canadian surgical practices. Participants completed the Supportive Care Needs Survey-Short Form-34 (SCNS-SF34) and EORTC-QLQ-C30 at baseline, 3, and 8 weeks. We calculated mean changes in EORTC-QLQ-C30 scores associated with improvement, worsening, and no change in supportive care needs based on the SCNS-SF34. Mean changes in the EORTC-QLQ-C30 scores associated with the SCNS-SF34 improved and worsened categories were used to estimate clinically important changes, and the 'no change' category to estimate insignificant changes. RESULTS: EORTC-QLQ-C30 score changes ranged from 6 to 32 points for patients reporting improved supportive care needs; statistically significant changes were 10-32 points. EORTC-QLQ-C30 score changes ranged from 21-point worsening to 21-point improvement for patients reporting worsening supportive care needs; statistically significant changes were 9-21 points in the hypothesized direction and a 21-point statistically significant change in the opposite direction. EORTC-QLQ-C30 score changes ranged from a 1-point worsening to 16-point improvement for patients reporting stable supportive care needs. CONCLUSION: These data suggest 10-point EORTC-QLQ-C30 score changes represent changes in supportive care needs. When using the EORTC-QLQ-C30 in clinical practice, scores changing ≥10 points should be highlighted for clinical attention.

It's who you know: patient-sharing, quality, and costs of cancer survivorship care.

PURPOSE: Cancer survivors frequently receive care from a large number of physicians, creating challenges for coordination. We sought to explore whether cancer survivors whose providers have more patients in common (e.g., shared patients) tend to have higher quality and lower cost care. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of 8,661 patients diagnosed with loco-regional breast, prostate, or colorectal cancer. We examined survivorship care from days 366 to 1,095 following their cancer diagnosis. Our primary independent variable was "care density," a novel metric of the extent to which a patient's providers share patients with one another. Our outcome measures were health care utilization, quality metrics, and costs. RESULTS: In adjusted analyses, we found that patients with high care density--indicating high levels of patient-sharing among their providers--had significantly lower rates of hospitalization (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.75-1.00) and higher odds of an eye examination for diabetes (OR 1.31, 95% CI 1.03-1.66) compared to patients with low care density. High care density was not associated with emergency department visits, avoidable outcomes, lipid profile following an angina diagnosis, or odds of glycosylated hemoglobin testing for diabetes. Patients with high care density had significantly lower total costs of care over 24 months (beta coefficient -$2,116, 95% CI -$3,107 to -$1,125) along with lower inpatient and outpatient costs. CONCLUSION: Cancer survivors treated by physicians who share more patients with one another tend to have some higher aspects of quality and lower cost care. IMPLICATIONS OF CANCER SURVIVORS: If validated, care density may be a useful indicator for monitoring care coordination among cancer survivors and potentially targeting interventions that seek to improve care delivery.

Treatment, survival, and costs of laryngeal cancer care in the elderly.

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: To examine associations between treatment and volume with survival and costs in elderly patients with laryngeal squamous cell cancer (SCCA). STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cross-sectional analysis of Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare data. METHODS: We evaluated 2,370 patients diagnosed with laryngeal SCCA from 2004 to 2007 using cross-tabulations, multivariate logistic and generalized linear regression modeling, and survival analysis. RESULTS: Chemoradiation was significantly associated with supraglottic tumors (relative risk ratio: 2.6, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.7-4.0), additional cancer-directed treatment (odds ratio [OR]: 1.8, 95% CI: 1.2-2.7), and a reduced likelihood of surgical salvage (OR: 0.3, 95% CI: 0.2-0.6). Surgery with postoperative radiation was associated with significantly improved survival (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.7, 95% CI: 0.6-0.9), after controlling for patient and tumor variables including salvage. High-volume care was not associated with survival for nonoperative treatment but was associated with improved survival (HR: 0.7, 95% CI: 0.5-0.8) among surgical patients. Initial treatment and 5-year overall costs for chemoradiation were higher than for all other treatment categories. High-volume care was associated with significantly lower costs of care for surgical patients but was not associated with differences in costs of care for nonoperative treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Chemoradiation in elderly patients with laryngeal cancer was associated with increased costs, additional cancer-directed treatment, and a reduced likelihood of surgical salvage. Surgery with postoperative radiation was associated with improved survival in this cohort, and high-volume hospital surgical care was associated with improved survival and lower costs. These findings have implications for improving the quality of laryngeal cancer treatment at a time of both rapid growth in the elderly population and diminishing healthcare resources.

Quality indicators of laryngeal cancer care in the elderly.

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: To examine associations between quality of care, survival, and costs in elderly patients treated for laryngeal squamous cell cancer (SCCA). STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Medicare data. METHODS: We evaluated 2,370 patients diagnosed with laryngeal SCCA from 2004 to 2007 using multivariate regression and survival analysis. Using quality indicators derived from guidelines for recommended care, summary measures of quality were calculated for diagnosis, initial treatment, surveillance, treatment of recurrence, end-of-life care, performance, and an overall summary measure of quality. RESULTS: High-quality care was associated with significant differences in survival for diagnosis [HR = 0.80, 95% CI (0.66-0.97)], initial treatment [HR = 0.75 (0.63-0.88)], surveillance [HR = 0.54 (0.44-0.66)], treatment of recurrence [HR = 1.54 (1.26-1.89)], end-of-life care [HR = 0.69 (0.52-0.92)], performance [HR = 0.41 (0.33-0.52)], and an overall summary measure of quality [HR = 0.66 (0.54-0.80)], which was significantly associated with lower mean incremental costs [-$24,958 (-$35,873 - -$14,042)]. There was a significant survival advantage for initial treatment with surgery and postoperative radiation [HR = 0.66 (0.53-0.82)] and high-volume surgical care [HR = 0.64 (0.43-0.96)] after controlling for all other variables, including quality of care. CONCLUSIONS: High-quality larynx cancer care in elderly patients was associated with improved survival and reduced costs; however, high-quality care for treatment of recurrence was associated with poorer survival. These data suggest that survival outcomes in elderly patients with laryngeal cancer are not entirely explained by differences in the receipt of quality care using existing treatment and performance quality indicators and also suggest a need to develop sensitive and valid quality indicators of larynx cancer care in this population.

Feasibility and value of PatientViewpoint: a web system for patient-reported outcomes assessment in clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: The PatientViewpoint website collects patient-reported outcomes and links them with the electronic health record to aid patient management. This pilot test evaluated PatientViewpoint's use, usefulness, and acceptability to patients and clinicians. METHODS: This was a single-arm prospective study that enrolled breast and prostate cancer patients undergoing treatment and the clinicians who managed them. Patients completed patient-reported outcomes every 2 weeks, and clinicians could access the results for patient visits. Scores that were poor relative to norms or substantially worse than the previous assessment were highlighted. After three on-study visits, we assessed patient and clinician perspectives on PatientViewpoint using close-ended and open-ended questions. RESULTS: Eleven out of 12 eligible clinicians (92%) and 52/76 eligible patients (68%) enrolled. Patients completed a median of 71% of assigned questionnaires; clinicians reported using the information for 79% of patients, most commonly as a source of additional information (51%). At the median, score reports identified three potential issues, of which 1 was discussed during the visit. Patients reported the system was easy to use (92%), useful (70%), aided recall of symptoms/side effects (72%), helped them feel more in control of their care (60%), improved discussions with their provider (49%), and improved care quality (39%). Patients and clinicians desired more information on score interpretation and minor adjustments to site navigation. CONCLUSIONS: These results support the feasibility and value of PatientViewpoint. An ongoing study is using a continuous quality improvement approach to further refine PatientViewpoint. Future studies will evaluate its impact on patient care and outcomes.

How does initial treatment choice affect short-term and long-term costs for clinically localized prostate cancer?

BACKGROUND: Data regarding costs of prostate cancer treatment are scarce. This study investigates how initial treatment choice affects short-term and long-term costs. METHODS: This retrospective, longitudinal cohort study followed prostate-cancer cases diagnosed in 2000 for 5 years using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database. Men age≥66 years, in Medicare fee for service, diagnosed with clinically localized prostate cancer in 2000 while residing in a SEER region, were matched to noncancer controls using age, sex, race, region, comorbidity, and survival. On the basis of treatment received during the first 9 months postdiagnosis, patients were assigned to watchful waiting, radiation, hormonal therapy, hormonal+radiation, and surgery (may have received other treatments). Incremental costs for prostate cancer were the difference in costs for prostate cancer cases versus matched controls. Costs were divided into initial treatment (months -1 to 12), long-term (each 12 months thereafter), and total (months -1 to 60). Sensitivity analyses excluded the last 12 months of life. RESULTS: A total of 13,769 prostate-cancer cases were matched to 13,769 noncancer controls. Watchful waiting had the lowest initial treatment ($4270) and 5-year total costs ($9130). Initial treatment costs were highest for hormonal+radiation ($17,474) and surgery ($15,197). At $26,896, 5-year total costs were highest for hormonal therapy only followed by hormonal+radiation ($25,097) and surgery ($19,214). After excluding the last 12 months of life, total costs were highest for hormonal+radiation ($23,488) and hormonal therapy ($23,199). CONCLUSIONS: Patterns of costs vary widely based on initial treatment. These data can inform patients and clinicians considering treatment options and policy makers interested in patterns of costs.

Needs assessments can identify scores on HRQOL questionnaires that represent problems for patients: an illustration with the Supportive Care Needs Survey and the QLQ-C30.

PURPOSE: A barrier to using HRQOL questionnaires for individual patient management is knowing what score represents a problem deserving attention. We explored using needs assessments to identify HRQOL scores associated with patient-reported unmet needs. METHODS: This cross-sectional study included 117 cancer patients (mean age 61 years; 51% men; 77% white) who completed the Supportive Care Needs Survey (SCNS) and EORTC QLQ-C30. SCNS scores were dichotomized as "no unmet need" versus "some unmet need" and served as an external criterion for identifying problem scores. We evaluated the discriminative ability of QLQ-C30 scores using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. Domains with an area under the ROC curve (AUC) >or= .70 were examined further to determine how well QLQ-C30 scores predicted presence/absence of unmet need. RESULTS: We found AUCs >or= .70 for 6 of 14 EORTC domains: physical, emotional, role, global QOL, pain, fatigue. All 6 domains had sensitivity >or= .85 and specificity >or= .50. EORTC domains that closely matched the content of SCNS item(s) were more likely to have AUCs >or= .70. The appropriate cut-off depends on the relative importance of false positives and false negatives. CONCLUSIONS: Needs assessments can identify HRQOL scores requiring clinicians' attention. Future research should confirm these findings using other HRQOL questionnaires and needs assessments.

Concordance of cancer patients' function, symptoms, and supportive care needs.

PURPOSE: Although patients' function, symptoms, and supportive care needs are obviously related, a better understanding of these relationships could improve patient management. METHODS: In this cross-sectional, observational study, 117 cancer patients completed the Supportive Care Needs Survey-34 and EORTC-QLQ-C30. Each symptom and function domain from the EORTC-QLQ-C30 was dichotomized (high vs. low) using a cut-off of reference sample mean scores. Each need domain was dichotomized using a cut-off of an average score representing an unmet need. We explored within-patient patterns of function, symptom, and need domains using latent class analysis. Based on these patterns, patients were categorized as high versus low function; high versus low symptom; and high versus low need. We examined the concordance between categorizations of patients' function, symptoms, and needs. RESULTS: The categorizations of function, symptoms, and needs were concordant for 66 patients (56%). Among patients with deficits in at least one area (n = 68), categorizations for 51 patients (75%) were discordant. CONCLUSIONS: About 50% of patients have similar classifications of their level of function, symptoms, and needs, but discordance was common among patients with deficits in at least one area, emphasizing the importance of assessing all of these outcomes as part of patient evaluations.