Disease Profile and Oncologic Outcomes After Delayed Diagnosis of Human Papillomavirus-Associated Oropharyngeal Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Diagnostic delay in human papillomavirus-associated oropharynx squamous cell carcinoma (HPV(+)OPSCC) is common due to nonspecific symptoms. We aim to describe the disease burden and oncologic outcomes of patients with HPV(+)OPSCC diagnosed >12 months after symptom onset. STUDY DESIGN: This is a retrospective cohort study of HPV(+)OPSCC patients receiving intent-to-cure treatment (including surgery ± adjuvant therapy or primary chemoradiation). SETTING: 2006-2016, tertiary care center. METHODS: Tumor stage was compared between patients with and without delayed diagnosis using χ2 tests. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis with univariate and multivariable Cox regressions were used to determine the effect of diagnostic delay on oncologic outcomes. RESULTS: In total, 664 patients were included. Compared to patients diagnosed <12 months from symptom onset (n = 601), those diagnosed at >12 months (n = 63) were more likely to have T4 disease and higher overall American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) clinical stage at presentation (P < .01 for both). At 5 years, rates of overall survival, cancer-specific survival, progression-free survival, and distant metastases-free survival in the delayed diagnosis cohort were 80%, 90%, 80%, and 89%, respectively. A >12-month delay in diagnosis did not significantly impact overall survival (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.16; 95% CI, 0.58-2.31), cancer-specific survival (aHR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.29-2.39), progression-free survival (aHR, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.56-2.37), or distant metastases-free survival (aHR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.42-2.40) after adjusting for age, sex, and clinical AJCC stage (P > .05 for all). CONCLUSIONS: Delayed diagnosis of HPV(+)OPSCC is associated with greater burden of disease at presentation, but oncologic outcomes remain favorable across treatment modalities. When appropriate, intent-to-cure therapy should be pursued despite diagnostic delay. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Costs of Definitive Chemoradiation, Surgery, and Adjuvant Radiation Versus De-Escalated Adjuvant Radiation per MC1273 in HPV+ Cancer of the Oropharynx.

PURPOSE: De-escalated treatment for human papillomavirus (HPV)+ oropharynx squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) has shown promising initial results. Health-care policy is increasingly focusing on high-value care. This analysis compares the cost of care for HPV+ OPSCC treated with definitive chemoradiation (CRT), surgery and adjuvant radiation (RT), and surgery and de-escalated CRT on MC1273. METHODS AND MATERIALS: MC1273 is a prospective, phase 2 study evaluating adjuvant CRT to 30 to 36 Gy plus docetaxel for HPV+ OPSCC after surgery for high-risk patients. Matched standard-of-care control groups were retrospectively identified for patients treated with definitive CRT or adjuvant RT. Standardized costs were evaluated before radiation, during treatment (during RT), and at short-term (6 month) and long-term (7-24 month) follow-up periods. RESULTS: A total of 56 definitive CRT, 101 adjuvant RT, and 66 MC1273 patients were included. The CRT arm had more T3-4 disease (63% vs 17-21%) and higher N2c-N3 disease (52% vs 20-24%) vs both other groups. The total treatment costs in the CRT, adjuvant RT, and MC1273 groups were $47,763 (standard deviation [SD], $19,060], $57,845 (SD, $17,480), and $46,007 (SD, $9019), respectively, and the chemotherapy and/or RT costs were $39,936 (SD, $18,480), $26,603 (SD, $12,542), and $17,864 (SD, $3288), respectively. The per-patient, per-month, average short-term follow-up costs were $3860 (SD, $10,525), $1072 (SD, $996), and $972 (SD, $833), respectively, and the long-term costs were $978 (SD, $2294), $485 (SD, $1156), and $653 (SD, $1107), respectively. After adjustment for age, T-stage, and N-stage, treatment costs remained lower for CRT and MC1273 versus adjuvant RT ($45,450 and $47,114 vs $58,590, respectively; P < .001), whereas the total per-patient, per-month follow-up costs were lower in the MC1273 study group and adjuvant RT versus CRT ($853 and $866 vs $2030, respectively; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: MC1273 resulted in 10% and 20% reductions in global costs compared with standard-of-care adjuvant RT and definitive CRT treatments. Substantial cost savings may be an added benefit to the already noted low toxicity and maintained quality of life of treatment per MC1273.

Impact of Patient Stage and Disease Characteristics on the proposed Radiation Oncology Alternative Payment Model (RO-APM).

PURPOSE: The proposed Radiation Oncology Alternative Payment Model (RO-APM) released on July 10, 2019, represents a dramatic shift from fee-for-service (FFS) reimbursement in radiation therapy (RT). This study compares historical revenue at Mayo Clinic to the RO-APM and quantifies the effect that disease characteristics may have on reimbursement. METHODS AND MATERIALS: FFS Medicare reimbursements were determined for patients undergoing RT at Mayo Clinic from 2015 to 2016. Disease categories and payment episodes were defined as per the RO-APM. Average RT episode reimbursements were reported for each disease site, except for lymphoma and metastases, and stratified by stage and disease subcategory. Comparisons with RO-APM reimbursements were made via descriptive statistics. RESULTS: A total of 2098 patients were identified, of whom 1866 (89%) were categorized per the RO-APM; 840 (45%) of those were aged >65 years. Breast (33%), head and neck (HN) (14%), and prostate (11%) cancer were most common. RO-APM base rate reimbursements and sensitivity analysis range were lower than historical reimbursement for bladder (-40%), cervical (-34%), lung (-28%), uterine (-26%), colorectal (-24%), upper gastrointestinal (-24%), HN (-23%), pancreatic (-20%), prostate (-16%), central nervous system (-13%), and anal (-10%) and higher for liver (+24%) and breast (+36%). Historical reimbursement varied with stage (stage III vs stage I) for breast (+57%, P < .01), uterine (+53%, P = .01), lung (+50%, P < .01), HN (+24%, P = .01), and prostate (+13%, P = .01). Overall, for patients older than 65 years of age, the RO-APM resulted in a -9% reduction in total RT reimbursement compared with historical FFS (-2%, -15%, and -27% for high, mid, and low adjusted RO-APM rates). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that the RO-APM will result in significant reductions in reimbursement at our center, particularly for cancers more common in underserved populations. Practices that care for socioeconomically disadvantaged populations may face significant reductions in revenue, which could further reduce access for this vulnerable population.

Identifying the Most Costly Patients in Radiation Oncology and Predicting the Top Spenders.

PURPOSE: Quality payment programs aim to adjust payments on the basis of quality and cost; however, few quality metrics exist in radiation oncology. This study evaluates and predicts the top spenders (TS) after radiation therapy (RT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patient characteristics, cancer details, treatments, toxicity, and survival data were collected for patients treated with RT at Mayo Clinic from 2007 to 2016. Standardized costs were obtained and adjusted for inflation. TSs were identified as those with greater than 93rd percentile costs (≥ $120,812). Prediction models were developed to predict TSs using training and validation sets using information available at consultation, after RT, and at last follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 15,131 patients were included and 1,065 TSs identified. Mean cost overall was $55,290 (median, $39,996) for all patients. Prediction models 1, 2, and 3 had concordance statistics of 0.83 to 0.83, 0.85 to 0.85, and 0.87 to 0.88, respectively in training and validation, indicating excellent prediction of TSs. Factors that were most predictive of TSs included stage N/A and stage 4 (v stage 0; odds ratio [OR], 18.23 and 8.44, respectively; P < .001); hematologic, upper GI, skin and lung cancers (v breast; OR, 11.45, 7.69, 3.81, and 2.43, respectively; P < .01); immunotherapy, surgery, and chemotherapy use (OR, 4.36, 2.51, and 1.61, respectively; P < .01); hospitalizations within 90 days of RT (OR, 2.26; P < .01); or death during the episode (OR, 1.56; P < .01). CONCLUSION: This is the first study of its kind to predict with high accuracy the highest spenders in radiation oncology. These patients may benefit from pre-emptive management to mitigate costs, or may require exclusion or adjustment from quality payment programs.

Clinically Applicable Monte Carlo-based Biological Dose Optimization for the Treatment of Head and Neck Cancers With Spot-Scanning Proton Therapy.

PURPOSE: Our aim is to demonstrate the feasibility of fast Monte Carlo (MC)-based inverse biological planning for the treatment of head and neck tumors in spot-scanning proton therapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Recently, a fast and accurate graphics processor unit (GPU)-based MC simulation of proton transport was developed and used as the dose-calculation engine in a GPU-accelerated intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) optimizer. Besides dose, the MC can simultaneously score the dose-averaged linear energy transfer (LETd), which makes biological dose (BD) optimization possible. To convert from LETd to BD, a simple linear relation was assumed. By use of this novel optimizer, inverse biological planning was applied to 4 patients, including 2 small and 1 large thyroid tumor targets, as well as 1 glioma case. To create these plans, constraints were placed to maintain the physical dose (PD) within 1.25 times the prescription while maximizing target BD. For comparison, conventional intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and IMPT plans were also created using Eclipse (Varian Medical Systems) in each case. The same critical-structure PD constraints were used for the IMRT, IMPT, and biologically optimized plans. The BD distributions for the IMPT plans were obtained through MC recalculations. RESULTS: Compared with standard IMPT, the biologically optimal plans for patients with small tumor targets displayed a BD escalation that was around twice the PD increase. Dose sparing to critical structures was improved compared with both IMRT and IMPT. No significant BD increase could be achieved for the large thyroid tumor case and when the presence of critical structures mitigated the contribution of additional fields. The calculation of the biologically optimized plans can be completed in a clinically viable time (<30 minutes) on a small 24-GPU system. CONCLUSIONS: By exploiting GPU acceleration, MC-based, biologically optimized plans were created for small-tumor target patients. This optimizer will be used in an upcoming feasibility trial on LETd painting for radioresistant tumors.