Area Vulnerability and Disparities in Therapy for Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma.

Importance: Area-level measures of sociodemographic disadvantage may be associated with racial and ethnic disparities with respect to receipt of treatment for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) but have not been investigated previously, to our knowledge. Objective: To assess the association between area-level measures of social vulnerability and racial and ethnic disparities in the treatment of US Medicare beneficiaries with mRCC from 2015 through 2019. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study included Medicare beneficiaries older than 65 years who were diagnosed with mRCC from January 2015 through December 2019 and were enrolled in fee-for-service Medicare Parts A, B, and D from 1 year before through 1 year after presumed diagnosis or until death. Data were analyzed from November 22, 2022, through January 26, 2024. Exposures: Five different county-level measures of disadvantage and 4 zip code-level measures of vulnerability or deprivation and segregation were used to dichotomize whether an individual resided in the most vulnerable quartile according to each metric. Patient-level factors included age, race and ethnicity, sex, diagnosis year, comorbidities, frailty, Medicare and Medicaid dual enrollment eligibility, and Medicare Part D low-income subsidy (LIS). Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were receipt and type of systemic therapy (oral anticancer agent or immunotherapy from 2 months before to 1 year after diagnosis of mRCC) as a function of patient and area-level characteristics. Multivariable regression analyses were used to adjust for patient factors, and odds ratios (ORs) from logistic regression and relative risk ratios (RRRs) from multinomial logistic regression are reported. Results: The sample included 15 407 patients (mean [SD] age, 75.6 [6.8] years), of whom 9360 (60.8%) were men; 6931 (45.0%), older than 75 years; 93 (0.6%), American Indian or Alaska Native; 257 (1.7%), Asian or Pacific Islander; 757 (4.9%), Hispanic; 1017 (6.6%), non-Hispanic Black; 12 966 (84.2%), non-Hispanic White; 121 (0.8%), other; and 196 (1.3%), unknown. Overall, 8317 patients (54.0%) received some type of systemic therapy. After adjusting for individual factors, no county or zip code-level measures of social vulnerability, deprivation, or segregation were associated with disparities in treatment. In contrast, patient-level factors, including female sex (OR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.73-0.84) and LIS (OR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.36-0.65), were associated with lack of treatment, with particularly limited access to immunotherapy for patients with LIS (RRR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.14-0.43). Associations between individual-level factors and treatment in multivariable analysis were not mediated by the addition of area-level metrics. Disparities by race and ethnicity were consistently and only observed within the most vulnerable areas, as indicated by the top quartile of each vulnerability deprivation index. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of older Medicare patients diagnosed with mRCC, individual-level demographics, including race and ethnicity, sex, and income, were associated with receipt of systemic therapy, whereas area-level measures were not. However, individual-level racial and ethnic disparities were largely limited to socially vulnerable areas, suggesting that efforts to improve racial and ethnic disparities may be most effective when targeted to socially vulnerable areas.

Trends in new and persistent opioid use in older adults with and without cancer.

BACKGROUND: The impact of ongoing efforts to decrease opioid use on patients with cancer remains undefined. Our objective was to determine trends in new and additional opioid use in patients with and without cancer. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used data from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program-Medicare for opioid-naive patients with solid tumor malignancies diagnosed from 2012 through 2017 and a random sample of patients without cancer. We identified 238 470 eligible patients with cancer and further focused on 4 clinical strata: patients without cancer, patients with metastatic cancer, patients with nonmetastatic cancer treated with surgery alone ("surgery alone"), and patients with nonmetastatic cancer treated with surgery plus chemotherapy or radiation therapy ("surgery+"). We identified new, early additional, and long-term additional opioid use and calculated the change in predicted probability of these outcomes from 2012 to 2017. RESULTS: New opioid use was higher in patients with cancer (46.4%) than in those without (6.9%) (P < .001). From 2012 to 2017, the predicted probability of new opioid use was more stable in the cancer strata (relative declines: 0.1% surgery alone; 2.4% surgery+; 8.8% metastatic cancer), than in the noncancer stratum (20.0%) (P < .001 for each cancer to noncancer comparison). Early additional use declined among surgery patients (‒14.9% and ‒17.5% for surgery alone and surgery+, respectively) but was stable among patients with metastatic disease (‒2.8%, P = .50). CONCLUSIONS: Opioid prescribing declined over time at a slower rate in patients with cancer than in patients without cancer. Our study suggests important but tempered effects of the changing opioid climate on patients with cancer.

Association between sociodemographic factors and diagnosis of lethal prostate cancer in early life.

OBJECTIVE: A subset of patients are diagnosed with lethal prostate cancer (CaP) early in life before prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening is typically initiated. To identify opportunities for improved detection, we evaluated patient sociodemographic factors associated with advanced vs. localized (CaP) diagnosis across the age spectrum. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the National Cancer Database, identifying patients diagnosed with CaP from 2004 to 2020. We compared characteristics of patients diagnosed at the advanced (cN1 or M1) versus localized (cT1-4N0M0) stage. Using multivariable logistic regression, we evaluated the associations among patient clinical and sociodemographic factors and advanced diagnosis, stratifying patients by age as ≤55 (before screening is recommended for most patients), 56 to 65, 66 to 75, and ≥76 years. RESULTS: We identified 977,722 patients who met the inclusion criteria. The mean age at diagnosis was 65.3 years and 50,663 (5.1%) had advanced disease. Overall, uninsured (OR = 3.20, 95% CI 3.03-3.78) and Medicaid-insured (OR 2.58, 95% CI 2.48-2.69) vs. privately insured status was associated with higher odds of diagnosis with advanced disease and this effect was more pronounced for younger patients. Among patients ≤55 years, uninsured (OR 4.14, 95% CI 3.69-4.65) and Medicaid-insured (OR 3.39, 95% CI 3.10-3.72) vs. privately insured patients were associated with higher odds of advanced cancer at diagnosis. Similarly, residence in the lowest vs. highest income quartile was associated with increased odds of advanced CaP in patients ≤55 years (OR 1.15, 95% CI 1.02-1.30). Black vs. White race was associated with increased odds of advanced CaP at diagnosis later in life (OR 1.17, 95% CI 1.09-1.25); however, race was not significantly associated with advanced stage CaP in those ≤55 years (P = 0.635). CONCLUSIONS: Sociodemographic disparities in diagnosis at advanced stages of CaP were more pronounced in younger patients, particularly with respect to insurance status. These findings may support greater attention to differential use of early CaP screening based on patient health insurance.

Disparities in immune and targeted therapy utilization for older US patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

Disparities in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) outcomes persist in the era of oral anticancer agents (OAAs) and immunotherapies (IOs). We examined variation in the utilization of mRCC systemic therapies among US Medicare beneficiaries from 2015 to 2019. Logistic regression models evaluated the association between therapy receipt and demographic covariates including patient race, ethnicity, and sex. In total, 15 407 patients met study criteria. After multivariable adjustment, non-Hispanic Black race and ethnicity was associated with reduced IO (adjusted relative risk ratio [aRRR] = 0.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.61 to 0.95; P = .015) and OAA receipt (aRRR = 0.76, 95% CI = 0.64 to 0.90; P = .002) compared with non-Hispanic White race and ethnicity. Female sex was associated with reduced IO (aRRR = 0.73, 95% CI = 0.66 to 0.81; P < .001) and OAA receipt (aRRR = 0.74, 95% CI = 0.68 to 0.81; P < .001) compared with male sex. Thus, disparities by race, ethnicity, and sex were observed in mRCC systemic therapy utilization for Medicare beneficiaries from 2015 to 2019.

Access to urologic cancer care for Medicaid-insured patients.

BACKGROUND: The expansion of state Medicaid programs associated with the Affordable Care Act has led to significant increases in insurance coverage for economically vulnerable patients, however barriers to accessing cancer care still exist. To develop strategies to improve healthcare access, we characterized access to new urologic cancer care for patients with Medicaid insurance in the United States. METHODS: Using a secret shopper approach, we contacted a representative sample of facilities designated for cancer care in United States. Trained volunteers posed as a family member seeking urologic cancer care using a simulated scenario of a parent with a new diagnosis of a localized kidney tumor. The primary study outcome was acceptance of Medicaid. In addition, we assessed facility characteristics associated with Medicaid acceptance relating to state Medicaid expansion status, Medicare reimbursement rates, and teaching hospital status using data from the Medicare & Medicaid Services Hospital General Information data file, the American Hospital Directory, and the American Medical Association of Colleges Organizational Characteristics Database. RESULTS: We sampled a total of 389 facilities, of which 14.4% did not accept new Medicaid patients. Medicaid acceptance was higher in facilities located in states that elected to expand Medicaid through the ACA vs. non-expansion states (90.1% vs. 77.4% respectively, P < 0.001). Facilities accepting patients with Medicaid were located in states with higher mean Medicaid-to-Medicare fee indexes (0.70 for Medicaid-accepting vs. 0.65 for non-accepting facilities, P < 0.001). In addition, Medicaid acceptance was higher in teaching hospitals vs. non-teaching facilities (93.8% vs. 83.4% P = 0.02), and medical school affiliated facilities (89.2% vs. 79.7% P = 0.01). CONCLUSION: We identified access disparities for patients with Medicaid insurance seeking urologic cancer care at centers. These findings highlight opportunities to improve the quality and timeliness of cancer care.

Use of Monitoring Tests Among Patients With Localized Prostate Cancer Managed With Observation.

PURPOSE: It is unknown whether compliance with recommended monitoring tests during observation of localized prostate cancer has changed over time. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries diagnosed with low- or intermediate-risk prostate cancer in 2004-2016 who were initially managed with observation for a minimum of 12 months. The primary objective was to examine rates of PSA testing, prostate biopsy, and prostate MRI. We used multivariable mixed effects Poisson regression to determine whether rates of PSA testing and prostate biopsy increased over time. In addition, we identified clinical, sociodemographic, and provider factors associated with the frequency of monitoring tests during observation. RESULTS: We identified 10,639 patients diagnosed at a median age of 73 (IQR 69-77) years. The median follow-up time was 4.3 (IQR 2.7-6.6) years after diagnosis. Among patients managed without treatment for 5 years, 98% received at ≥1 PSA test, 48.0% ≥1 additional prostate biopsy, and 31.0% ≥1 prostate MRI. Among patients managed with observation for ≥12 months, mixed effects Poisson regression revealed that rates of PSA testing and biopsy increased over time (per calendar year: RR 1.02, 95% CI: 1.02-1.03 and RR 1.10, 95% CI: 1.08-1.11, respectively). Clinical and sociodemographic factors including age, clinical risk, race/ethnicity, census tract poverty, and region were associated with rates of biopsy and PSA testing. CONCLUSIONS: Use of recommended monitoring tests including repeat prostate biopsy remains low among Medicare beneficiaries undergoing observation for low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer.

Prostate cancer disparities among American Indians and Alaskan Natives in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Americans Indians and Alaska Natives face disparities in cancer care with lower rates of screening, limited treatment access, and worse survival. Prostate cancer treatment access and patterns of care remain unknown. METHODS: We used Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results data to compare incidence, primary treatment, and cancer-specific mortality across American Indian and Alaska Native, Asian and Pacific Islander, Black, and White patients. Baseline characteristics included prostate-specific antigen (PSA), Gleason score (GS), tumor stage, 9-level Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment risk score, county characteristics, and health-care provider density. Primary outcomes were first definitive treatment and prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM). RESULTS: American Indian and Alaska Native patients were more frequently diagnosed with higher PSA, GS greater than or equal or 8, stage greater than or equal to cT3, high-risk disease overall (Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment risk score ≥ 6), and metastases at diagnosis than any other group. Adjusting for age, PSA, GS, and clinical stage, American Indian or Alaska Native patients with localized prostate cancer were more likely to undergo external beam radiation than radical prostatectomy and had the highest rates of no documented treatment. Five-year PCSM was higher among American Indian and Alaska Natives than any other racial group. However, after multivariable adjustment accounting for clinical and pathologic factors, county-level demographics, and provider density, American Indian and Alaska Native patient PCSM hazards were no different than those of White patients. CONCLUSIONS: American Indian or Alaska Native patients have more advanced prostate cancer, lower rates of definitive treatment, higher mortality, and reside in areas of less specialty care. Disparities in access appear to account for excess risks of PCSM. Focused health policy interventions are needed to address these disparities.

End-of-Life Care for Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma in the Era of Oral Anticancer Therapy.

PURPOSE: New therapies including oral anticancer agents (OAAs) have improved outcomes for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). However, little is known about the quality of end-of-life (EOL) care and systemic therapy use at EOL in patients receiving OAAs or with mRCC. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed EOL care for decedents with mRCC in two parallel cohorts: (1) patients (RCC diagnosed 2004-2015) from the University of North Carolina's Cancer Information and Population Health Resource (CIPHR) and (2) patients (diagnosed 2007-2015) from SEER-Medicare. We assessed hospice use in the last 30 days of life and existing measures of poor-quality EOL care: systemic therapy, hospital admission, intensive care unit admission, and > 1 ED visit in the last 30 days of life; hospice initiation in the last 3 days of life; and in-hospital death. Associations between OAA use, patient and provider characteristics, and EOL care were examined using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: We identified 410 decedents in the CIPHR cohort (53.4% received OAA) and 1,508 in SEER-Medicare (43.5% received OAA). Prior OAA use was associated with increased systemic therapy in the last 30 days of life in both cohorts (CIPHR: 26.5% v 11.0%; P < .001; SEER-Medicare: 23.4% v 11.7%; P < .001), increased in-hospital death in CIPHR, and increased hospice in the last 30 days in SEER-Medicare. Older patients were less likely to receive systemic therapy or be admitted in the last 30 days or die in hospital. CONCLUSION: Patients with mRCC who received OAAs and younger patients experienced more aggressive EOL care, suggesting opportunities to optimize high-quality EOL care in these groups.

Acceptance of Simulated Adult Patients With Medicaid Insurance Seeking Care in a Cancer Hospital for a New Cancer Diagnosis.

Importance: Although there have been significant increases in the number of US residents insured through Medicaid, the ability of patients with Medicaid to access cancer care services is less well known. Objective: To assess facility-level acceptance of Medicaid insurance among patients diagnosed with common cancers. Design, Setting, and Participants: This national cross-sectional secret shopper study was conducted in 2020 in a random sample of Commission on Cancer-accredited facilities in the United States using a simulated cohort of Medicaid-insured adult patients with colorectal, breast, kidney, and melanoma skin cancer. Exposures: Telephone call requesting an appointment for a patient with Medicaid with a new cancer diagnosis. Main Outcomes and Measures: Acceptance of Medicaid insurance for cancer care. Descriptive statistics, χ2 tests, and multivariable logistic regression models were used to examine factors associated with Medicaid acceptance for colorectal, breast, kidney, and skin cancer. High access hospitals were defined as those offering care across all 4 cancer types surveyed. Explanatory measures included facility-level factors from the 2016 American Hospital Association Annual Survey and Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services General Information database. Results: A nationally representative sample of 334 facilities was created, of which 226 (67.7%) provided high access to patients with Medicaid seeking cancer care. Medicaid acceptance differed by cancer site, with 319 facilities (95.5%) accepting Medicaid insurance for breast cancer care; 302 (90.4%), colorectal; 290 (86.8%), kidney; and 266 (79.6%), skin. Comprehensive community cancer programs (OR, 0.4; 95% CI, 0.2-0.7; P = .007) were significantly less likely to provide high access to care for patients with Medicaid. Facilities with nongovernment, nonprofit (vs for-profit: OR, 3.5; 95% CI, 1.1-10.8; P = .03) and government (vs for-profit: OR, 6.6; 95% CI, 1.6-27.2; P = .01) ownership, integrated salary models (OR, 2.6; 95% CI, 1.5-4.5; P = .001), and average (vs above-average: OR, 6.4; 95% CI, 1.4-29.6; P = .02) or below-average (vs above-average: OR, 8.4; 95% CI, 1.5-47.5; P = .02) effectiveness of care were associated with high access to Medicaid. State Medicaid expansion status was not significantly associated with high access. Conclusions and Relevance: This study identified access disparities for patients with Medicaid insurance at centers designated for high-quality care. These findings highlight gaps in cancer care for the expanding population of patients receiving Medicaid.

Oral Anticancer Agent (OAA) Adherence and Survival in Elderly Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma (mRCC).

OBJECTIVE: To examine real-world adherence to oral anticancer agents (OAAs) and its association with outcomes among Medicare beneficiaries with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). METHODS: SEER-Medicare retrospective cohort study of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) who received an OAA between 2007 and 2015. We examined A) adherence and B) overall and disease-specific 2-year survival landmarked at 3 months after OAA initiation. Adherence was assessed by calculating the proportion of days covered (PDC) within 3 months of OAA initiation, with adherent use being defined as PDC > 80%. RESULTS: A total of 905 patients met study criteria, of whom 445 patients (49.2%) were categorized as adherent to initial OAA treatment. Adjusting for clinical and demographic factors revealed decreased odds of adherence associated with living within an impoverished neighborhood (OR 0.49, CI 0.0.33 - 0.74) and out-of-pocket costs > $200 (OR 0.68, CI 0.47-.98). Adherence was associated with improved 2-year survival in univariate analysis (logrank test, P = .01) and a non-significant trend toward an association with decreased all-cause (HR 0.87, CI 0.72 - 1.05) and RCC-specific survival (HR 0.84, CI 0.69 - 1.03) in multivariable analysis. CONCLUSION: Local poverty levels and high out-of-pocket costs are associated with poor initial adherence to OAA therapy in Medicare beneficiaries with mRCC, which in turn, suggests a trend toward poor overall and disease-specific survival. Efforts to improve outcomes in the broader mRCC population should incorporate OAA adherence and economic factors.

Association Between Private Equity Acquisition of Urology Practices and Physician Medicare Payments.

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether private equity (PE) acquisitions of urology practices were associated with changes in Medicare payments and patient volume. METHODS: We identified PE acquisitions of urology practices through financial databases, industry news outlets, practice websites, and Google search. Using the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Service's Medicare Provider Utilization and Payment Data: Physician and Other Supplier Public Use File (2012-2019), we conducted descriptive statistics and trends analysis to examine whether PE acquisition was associated with changes in Medicare payments and patient volume in comparison to non-PE affiliated urologists within the same states. RESULTS: We identified PE acquisitions of 10 independent urology practices across 6 states during the study period. In the preacquisition period, urologists later joining private-equity groups received greater mean inflation-adjusted Medicare payments ($246,977 vs $160,038; P <.001) and had greater patient volume (839.7 vs 674.2 patients; P = .001) than urologists who did not. In the postacquisition period, PE affiliated urologists had an 11.0% (95% CI: -0.2% to 22.3%) increase in inflation-adjusted Medicare payments (P = .054) and a 12.5% (95% CI: 6.5%-18.6%) increase in patient volume (P <.001). Non-PE affiliated urologists exhibited a 6% decline in Medicare payments (P <.001) and a 2.7% increase in patient volume (P <.001). CONCLUSION: PE affiliated urologists exhibited increases in Medicare payments even prior to acquisition, in contrast to declines for geographically similar, non-PE urologists. These findings may highlight characteristics of practices targeted by PE firms and local practice trends that may further diverge following acquisition.

Access to Urological Care for Medicaid-Insured Patients at Urology Practices Acquired by Private Equity Firms.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize appointment access for Medicaid-insured patients seeking care at urology practices affiliated with private equity firms in light of the recent national trends in practice consolidation. METHODS: We identified 214 urology offices affiliated with private equity firms that were geographically matched with 231 non-private equity affiliated urology offices. Using a standardized script, researchers posed as an adult patient with either Medicaid or commercial insurance in the clinical setting of new onset, painless hematuria. The primary outcome was whether the patient's insurance was accepted for an appointment. The secondary outcome was appointment wait time. RESULTS: We conducted 815 appointment inquiry calls to 214 private equity (PE) and 231 non-PE-affiliated urology offices across 12 states. Appointment availability was higher for commercially-insured patients (99.0%; 95% CI: 98.1%-99.9%) vs Medicaid-insured patients (59.8%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 55.0%-64.6%) (P < .0001). Medicaid acceptance was higher at non-PE affiliated (66.8%; CI 60.4%-73.2%) than PE-affiliated practices (52.1%; 95% CI 45.0%-59.2%) (P = .003). On multivariable logistic regression analysis, state Medicaid expansion status (odds ratio [OR] 2.20; CI 1.14-4.28; P = .020) was independently associated with Medicaid appointment availability, whereas PE-affiliation (OR 0.55; CI 0.37-0.83; P = .004) was independently associated with lower Medicaid access. Appointment wait times did not differ significantly for commercially-insured vs Medicaid patients (19.2 vs 20.1 days; p = .59), but PE-affiliated practices offered shorter mean wait times than non-PE offices (17.5 vs 21.4 days; P = .017). CONCLUSION: Access disparities for urologic evaluation in patients with Medicaid insurance at urology practices and were more pronounced at private equity acquired practices.

Mediators of Racial Disparity in the Use of Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging Among Patients With Prostate Cancer.

Importance: Racial disparity in the use of prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) presents obstacles to closing gaps in prostate cancer diagnosis, treatment, and outcome. Objective: To identify clinical, sociodemographic, and structural processes underlying racial disparity in the use of prostate MRI among men with a new diagnosis of prostate cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based cohort study used mediation analysis to assess claims in the US Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database for prostate MRI among 39 534 patients with a diagnosis of localized prostate cancer from January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2015. Statistical analysis was performed from April 1, 2020, to September 1, 2021. Exposure: Diagnosis of prostate cancer. Main Outcomes and Measures: Claims for prostate MRI within 6 months before or after diagnosis of prostate cancer were assessed. Candidate clinical and sociodemographic meditators were identified based on their association with both race and prostate MRI, including the Index of Concentration at the Extremes (ICE), as specified to measure racialized residential segregation. Mediation analysis was performed using nonlinear multiple additive regression trees models to estimate the direct and indirect effects of mediators. Results: A total of 39 534 eligible male patients (3979 Black patients [10.1%] and 32 585 White patients [82.4%]; mean [SD] age, 72.8 [5.3] years) were identified. Black patients with prostate cancer were less likely than White patients to receive a prostate MRI (6.3% vs 9.9%; unadjusted odds ratio, 0.62, 95% CI, 0.54-0.70). Approximately 24% (95% CI, 14%-32%) of the racial disparity in prostate MRI use between Black and White patients was attributable to geographic differences (SEER registry), 19% (95% CI, 11%-28%) was attributable to neighborhood-level socioeconomic status (residence in a high-poverty area), 19% (95% CI, 10%-29%) was attributable to racialized residential segregation (ICE quintile), and 11% (95% CI, 7%-16%) was attributable to a marker of individual-level socioeconomic status (dual eligibility for Medicare and Medicaid). Clinical and pathologic factors were not significant mediators. In this model, the identified mediators accounted for 81% (95% CI, 64%-98%) of the observed racial disparity in prostate MRI use between Black and White patients. Conclusions and Relevance: In this this population-based cohort study of US adults, mediation analysis revealed that sociodemographic factors and manifestations of structural racism, including poverty and residential segregation, explained most of the racial disparity in the use of prostate MRI among older Black and White men with prostate cancer. These findings can be applied to develop targeted strategies to improve cancer care equity.

Patient, provider, and hospital factors associated with oral anti-neoplastic agent initiation and adherence in older patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

INTRODUCTION: Oral anti-neoplastic agents (OAAs) for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) are associated with increased cancer-specific survival. However, racial disparities in survival persist and older adults have the lowest rates of cancer-specific survival. Research from other cancers demonstrates specialty access is associated with high-quality cancer care, but older adults receive cancer treatment less often than younger adults. We therefore examined whether patient, provider, and hospital characteristics were associated with OAA initiation, adherence, and cancer-specific survival after initiation and whether race, ethnicity, and/or age was associated with an increased likelihood of seeing a medical oncologist for diagnosis of mRCC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We used Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)Medicare data to identify patients ≥65 years of age who were diagnosed with mRCC from 2007 to 2015 and enrolled in Medicare Part D. Insurance claims were used to identify receipt of OAAs within twelve months of metastatic diagnosis, calculate proportion of days covered, and to identify the primary cancer provider and hospital. We examined provider and hospital characteristics associated with OAA initiation, adherence, and all-cause mortality after OAA initiation. RESULTS: We identified 2792 patients who met inclusion criteria. Increased OAA initiation was associated with access to a medical oncologist. Patients were less likely to begin OAA treatment if their primary oncologic provider was a urologist (hazard ratio [HR] 0.62; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.49-0.77). Provider/hospital characteristics were not associated with differences in OAA adherence or mortality. Patients who started sorafenib (odds ratio [OR] 0.50; 95% CI 0.29-0.86), were older (aged >81 OR 0.56; 95% CI 0.34-0.92), and those living in high poverty ZIP codes (OR 0.48; 95% CI 0.29-0.80) were less likely to adhere to OAA treatment. Furthermore, provider characteristics did not account for differences in mortality once an OAA was initiated. Last, only age > 81 years was statistically and clinically associated with a decreased relative risk of seeing a medical oncologist (risk ratio [RR] 0.87; CI 0.82-0.92). CONCLUSION: Provider/hospital factors, specifically, being seen by a medical oncologist for mRCC diagnosis, are associated with OAA initiation. Older patients were less likely to see a medical oncologist; however, race and/or ethnicity was not associated with differences in seeing a medical oncologist. Patient factors are more critical to OAA adherence and mortality after OAA initiation than provider/hospital factors.

Urology Practice Acquisitions by Private Equity Firms from 2011-2021.

INTRODUCTION: Private equity firms have recently acquired several large urology practices in the United States. As little is known about these acquisitions, we sought to characterize trends in urology practice consolidation. METHODS: We compiled urology practice acquisition data via financial databases, news outlets, practice websites, and Internet keyword search for the time period January 1, 2011 through March 15, 2021. For each acquisition, we determined the acquiring group, number of employed urologists, practice locations, and status of ancillary services (pathology, radiology, or surgery centers). We estimated workforce effects based on the 2019 American Urological Association workforce census. RESULTS: We identified 69 independent practice acquisitions in the study period, including 19 (28.4%) by hospital systems, 7 (10.4%) by multispecialty physician groups, 23 (34.3%) by urology practices, and 20 (29.9%) by private equity-backed platforms. Private equity firms initially targeted large urology practices (mean of 60.8±32.6 urologists) with ownership of ancillary services and consolidated local market share through acquisitions of smaller practices (mean of 15.9±14.5 urologists). As of March 2021, we estimate that 7.2% of private practice urologists in the U.S. were employed by one of 5 private equity-backed platforms; over 25% of all urologists practicing in New Jersey and Maryland are employed by a private equity-backed platform. CONCLUSIONS: Private equity acquisitions have accelerated to become a dominant form of urology practice consolidation in recent years and have achieved significant market influence in certain regions. Future research should assess the impact of private equity investment on practice patterns, health outcomes, and expenditures.

Characteristics of Online Crowdfunding Campaigns for Urological Cancers in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: We examined the characteristics and financial outcomes of online crowdfunding campaigns for patients with major urological cancers in the U.S. METHODS: This cross-sectional study analyzed publicly available data from GoFundMe, the largest online medical crowdfunding service, via automated web scraping. Online campaigns from 2010 to 2018 with the following primary cancer types were included: kidney, prostate, bladder and testicular. Financial outcomes were compared using Kruskal-Wallis and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests. Multivariable analyses were utilized to identify predictors of campaign financial outcomes. RESULTS: Kidney cancers were the most frequent online campaign type (478), followed by prostate (379), bladder (202) and testicular (175) malignancies. Urological cancer campaign recipients frequently requested funding for medical expenses (71%) during active treatment (57%). After adjustment, testicular cancer and children's cancer campaigns generated more donations than other urological and adult cancer campaigns (p <0.05). Family and friend-authored campaigns generated more donations and average donation amounts than self-authored campaigns (p <0.05). Campaign narratives focused on disheartening circumstances received fewer donations than narratives focused on the recipient's high moral character or contributions to society (p <0.05), and unclear narratives received the smallest donation amounts (p <0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Urological cancer crowdfunding in the U.S. is primarily used to finance uncovered costs associated with medical care during active treatment. Crowdfunding financial outcomes are likely related to the campaign recipient's age, malignancy type, social network and primary appeal of the narrative. Urologists should be aware of trends in medical crowdfunding in order to better understand the financial burden this patient population faces.

When is a Seminoma not a Seminoma? The Incidence, Risk Factors and Management of Patients With Testicular Seminoma With Discordant Elevated Serum Alpha-fetoprotein.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the incidence, clinical and demographic factors, and treatment patterns associated with discordant elevated alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) findings in patients with pure seminomatous histology. METHODS: We queried the National Cancer Database to identify patients with testicular germ cell tumors (GCT) diagnosed in 2011-2015. Patients were grouped based on histologic diagnosis and pre-operative serum AFP level. RESULTS: Of 18,616 patients diagnosed with testicular GCT, 53% (N = 9,849) had pure seminomatous histology, of whom 8.3% (N = 821) had an elevated serum AFP pre-operatively. Non-white patients with seminoma were more likely to have a pre-op elevated AFP (OR 1.42; 95% CI: 1.10-1.83); patients treated at higher volume centers were less likely to have a pre-op elevated AFP (0.66, 95% CI: 0.53-0.83). Patients with seminoma with elevated AFP received adjuvant radiation more frequently than those with NSGCT (Stage I: 15% vs 0.2%, P <.01; Stage II: 21.9% vs 0.1%, P <.01) and less frequently underwent retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND) (Stage 1: 1.9% vs 11.1% P <.01; Stage II: 8.8% vs 17.4%, P <.01). CONCLUSION: The detection of elevated serum alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) in patients with pure seminomatous testicular germ cell tumors (GCT) is a discordant finding that implies the presence of occult non-seminomatous GCT (NSGCT) elements. 8% of patients with pure seminomatous GCTs had diagnostically discordant elevated pre-operative AFP levels. Despite recommendations to manage these patients as NSGCT, patients with seminoma and elevated AFP were managed in a fashion comparable to those with seminoma and normal AFP levels.

Access to Urologic Care at Urgent Care Centers.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate Medicaid insurance access disparities for urologic care at urgent care centers (UCCs) in the United States. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study using a "secret shopper" methodology. We sampled 240 UCCs across 8 states. Using a standardized script, researchers posed as a patient with either Medicaid or commercial insurance in the clinical setting of obstructing nephrolithiasis. The primary study endpoint was whether a patient's insurance (Medicaid vs commercial) was accepted. We assessed factors associated with Medicaid acceptance using logistic regression models adjusted for state-level and facility-level characteristics. Additionally, we calculated triage rates, emergency department referral rates, and the ability of a UCC to refer the patient to a specialist. RESULTS: Of 240 UCCs contacted, 239 (99.6%) accepted commercial insurance and 159 (66.2%) accepted Medicaid. UCCs in Medicaid expansion states more frequently accepted patients with Medicaid insurance (74.2% vs 58.3%, respectively, P < .01). On multivariable logistic regression analysis, state Medicaid expansion (OR 1.84, 95% CI 1.04-3.26, P = .04) and affiliation with an institution (OR 2.97, 95% CI 1.59-5.57, P < .01) were independently associated with greater odds of accepting Medicaid. Medicaid-insured patients were significantly less likely to be triaged or referred to the emergency department compared to commercial patients. CONCLUSION: We identified significant disparities in access to UCCs for Medicaid patients presenting with a urologic condition. Given the expanding national role of UCCs, these findings highlight potential sources of insurance disparity in the context of a urologic emergency.