Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Light Adjustable Lens Compared to Monofocal Intraocular Lens in Cataract Surgery.

PURPOSE: To analyze the cost-effectiveness of the Light Adjustable Lens (LAL; RxSight) in comparison to a monofocal intraocular lens (IOL) for individuals undergoing cataract surgery in both eyes. METHODS: A cost-effectiveness analysis was performed using a Markov model that simulated the patient outcomes and costs associated with undergoing cataract surgery with the LAL or monofocal IOL. Cost-effectiveness was determined using the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), a measure that quantifies the incremental cost in dollars per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Treatments with the ICER below the willingness-to-pay threshold (WTP) of $50,000/QALY were considered cost-effective. The model was also evaluated for the impact of uncertainties in parameters using one-way sensitivity and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: The cost-effectiveness analysis showed that the LAL is cost-effective compared to monofocal IOLs in patients undergoing cataract surgery, with ICERs of $9,792/QALY (health care perspective) and $10,072/QALY (societal perspective) both significantly below the WTP. The model was most sensitive to patient age, market cost of the LAL, and proportion of patients with residual astigmatism following cataract surgery. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that cataract surgeries in patients starting at age 65 years were cost-effective in 94% of the simulations at a WTP of $50,000/QALY. CONCLUSIONS: From both health care and societal perspectives, the study shows cataract surgeries performed with the LAL are cost-effective when compared to those performed with a monofocal IOL. More studies are needed to compare the LAL to other premium lenses that also provide patients with excellent visual outcomes at a higher cost. [J Refract Surg. 2023;39(11):777-782.].

The disproportionate burden of Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD) in diverse older adults diagnosed with cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Older adults living with Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD) who are then diagnosed with cancer are an understudied population. While the role of cognitive impairment during and after cancer treatment have been well-studied, less is understood about patients who are living with ADRD and then develop cancer. The purpose of this study is to contribute evidence about our understanding of this vulnerable population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of a linked, representative family of databases of cancer registries and Medicare administrative claims that make up the SEER-Medicare database. Older adults ages 68 and older with a first primary cancer type: breast, cervical, colorectal, lung, oral, or prostate were eligible for inclusion (N = 337,932). Prevalence estimates of ADRD across cancer types and a 5% non-cancer comparison sample were compared by patient factors. RESULTS: The overall prevalence of patients who had an ADRD diagnosis anytime in the three years prior to their cancer diagnosis was 5.6%. Patients with ADRD were more likely to be female, older (over age 75), a racial/ethnic minority, single, with multiple chronic conditions, and a tumor diagnosed early (stage I) or were unstaged. Black patients with colorectal and oral cancer had the highest and second highest prevalence of ADRD compared to White patients (13.46% vs 7.95% and 12.64% vs 7.82% respectively, p < .0001). We observed the highest prevalence of ADRD among Black patients for breast (11.85%), cervical (11.98%), lung (8.41%), prostate (4.83), and the 5% sample (9.50%, p > .0001). DISCUSSION: The higher prevalence of ADRD among Black and Latine older adults with cancer not only aligns with the trend observed in our non-cancer comparison sample, but also, these findings demonstrate the compounded risk experienced by minoritized older adults over the life course. The greater than expected prevalence of patients with ADRD who go on to develop cancer demonstrates better assessment of cognition is urgently needed. Accurate identification of these vulnerable populations is critical to improve assessment, care coordination, and address inequities in screening and treatment planning.

Low-Value Prostate-Specific Antigen Screening in Older Males.

Importance: The US Preventive Services Task Force guidelines advise against prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening for prostate cancer in males older than 69 years due to the risk of false-positive results and overdiagnosis of indolent disease. However, this low-value PSA screening in males aged 70 years or older remains common. Objective: To characterize the factors associated with low-value PSA screening in males 70 years or older. Design, Setting, and Participants: This survey study used data from the 2020 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS), a nationwide annual survey conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that collects information via telephone from more than 400 000 US adults on behavioral risk factors, chronic illnesses, and use of preventive services. The final cohort comprised male respondents to the 2020 BRFSS survey who were categorized into the following age groups: 70 to 74 years, 75 to 79 years, or 80 years or older. Males with a former or current prostate cancer diagnosis were excluded. Main Outcomes and Measures: The outcomes were recent PSA screening rates and factors associated with low-value PSA screening. Recent screening was defined as PSA testing within the past 2 years. Weighted multivariable logistic regressions and 2-sided significance tests were used to characterize factors associated with recent screening. Results: The cohort included 32 306 males. Most of these males (87.6%) were White individuals, whereas 1.1% were American Indian, 1.2% were Asian, 4.3% were Black, and 3.4% were Hispanic individuals. Within this cohort, 42.8% of respondents were aged 70 to 74 years, 28.4% were aged 75 to 79 years, and 28.9% were 80 years or older. The recent PSA screening rates were 55.3% for males in the 70-to-74-year age group, 52.1% in the 75-to-79-year age group, and 39.4% in the 80-year-or-older group. Among all racial groups, non-Hispanic White males had the highest screening rate (50.7%), and non-Hispanic American Indian males had the lowest screening rate (32.0%). Screening increased with higher educational level and annual income. Married respondents were screened more than unmarried males. In a multivariable regression model, discussing PSA testing advantages with a clinician (odds ratio [OR], 9.09; 95% CI, 7.60-11.40; P < .001) was associated with increased recent screening, whereas discussing PSA testing disadvantages had no association with screening (OR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.77-1.17; P = .60). Other factors associated with a higher screening rate included having a primary care physician, a post-high school educational level, and income of more than $25 000 per year. Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this survey study suggest that older male respondents to the 2020 BRFSS survey were overscreened for prostate cancer despite the age cutoff for PSA screening recommended in national guidelines. Discussing the benefits of PSA testing with a clinician was associated with increased screening, underscoring the potential of clinician-level interventions to reduce overscreening in older males.

Differences in Social Determinants of Health Underlie Racial/Ethnic Disparities in Psychological Health and Well-Being: Study of 11,143 Older Adults.

OBJECTIVE: The authors sought to determine the impact of selected social determinants of health (SDoH) on psychological health and well-being (defined as depression, cognition, and self-rated health) among Black and Hispanic/Latinx adults relative to White adults 51-89 years of age. METHODS: Disparities in depressive symptomatology, cognition, and self-rated health were measured among 2,306 non-Hispanic/Latinx Black, 1,593 Hispanic/Latinx, and 7,244 non-Hispanic/Latinx White adults who participated in the Health and Retirement Study (N=11,143). Blinder-Oaxaca decomposition was used to examine whether differences in selected SDoH explained a larger share of the disparities than age, sex, measures of health, health behaviors, and health care utilization. Selected SDoH included education, parental education, number of years worked, marital status, veteran status, geographic residence, nativity status, income, and insurance coverage. RESULTS: Black and Hispanic/Latinx adults reported worse depressive symptomatology, cognition, and self-rated health than White adults. Selected SDoH were associated with a larger proportion of the Black-White disparities in depressive symptomatology (51%), cognition (39%), and self-rated health (37%) than were age, sex, measures of health, health behaviors, and health care utilization. SDoH were associated with a larger proportion of the Hispanic/Latinx-White disparity in cognition (76%) and self-rated health (75%), but age and physical health correlated with the disparity in depressive symptomatology (28%). Education, parental education, years worked, income, and insurance parity were SDoH associated with these disparities. CONCLUSIONS: Differences in SDoH underlie racial/ethnic disparities in depression, cognition, and self-rated health among older adults. Education, income, number of years worked, and insurance parity are key SDoH.

Temporal Trends and Predictors of Opioid Use Among Older Patients With Cancer.

OBJECTIVES: While opioids represent a cornerstone of cancer pain management, the timing and patterns of opioid use in the cancer population have not been well studied. This study sought to explore longitudinal trends in opioid use among Medicare beneficiaries with nonmetastatic cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Within a cohort of 16,072 Medicare beneficiaries ≥66 years old diagnosed with nonmetastatic cancer between 2007 and 2013, we determined the likelihood of receiving a short-term (0 to 6 mo postdiagnosis), intermediate-term (6 to 12 mo postdiagnosis), long-term (1 to 2 y postdiagnosis), and high-risk (morphine equivalent dose ≥90 mg/day) opioid prescription after cancer diagnosis. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to identify patient and cancer risk factors associated with these opioid use endpoints. RESULTS: During the study period, 74.6% of patients received an opioid prescription, while only 2.66% of patients received a high-risk prescription. Factors associated with use varied somewhat between short-term, intermediate-term, and long-term use, though in general, patients at higher risk of receiving an opioid prescription after their cancer diagnosis were younger, had higher stage disease, lived in regions of higher poverty, and had a history of prior opioid use. Prescriptions for high-risk opioids were associated with individuals living in regions with lower poverty. CONCLUSIONS: Temporal trends in opioid use in cancer patients depend on patient, demographic, and tumor characteristics. Overall, understanding these correlations may help physicians better identify patient-specific risks of opioid use and could help better inform future evidence-based, cancer-specific opioid prescription guidelines.

The price is right: Routine fluorescent cholangiography during laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

BACKGROUND: Early experience with indocyanine green-based fluorescent cholangiography during laparoscopic cholecystectomy suggests the potential to improve outcomes. However, the cost-effectiveness of routine use has not been studied. Our objective was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of fluorescent cholangiography versus standard bright light laparoscopic cholecystectomy for noncancerous gallbladder disease. METHODS: A Markov model decision analysis was performed comparing fluorescent cholangiography versus standard bright light laparoscopic cholecystectomy alone. Probabilities of outcomes, survival, toxicities, quality-adjusted life-years, and associated costs were determined from literature review and pooled analysis of currently available studies on fluorescent cholangiography (n = 37). Uncertainty in the model parameters was evaluated with 1-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses, varying parameters up to 40% of their means. Cost-effectiveness was measured with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio expressed as the dollar amount per quality-adjusted life-year. RESULTS: The model predicted that fluorescent cholangiography reduces lifetime costs by $1,235 per patient and improves effectiveness by 0.09 quality-adjusted life-years compared to standard bright light laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Reduced costs were due to a decreased operative duration (21.20 minutes, P < .0001) and rate of conversion to open (1.62% vs 6.70%, P < .0001) associated with fluorescent cholangiography. The model was not influenced by the rate of bile duct injury. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis found that fluorescent cholangiography was both more effective and less costly in 98.83% of model iterations at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/quality-adjusted life year. CONCLUSION: The current evidence favors routine use of fluorescent cholangiography during laparoscopic cholecystectomy as a cost-effective surgical strategy. Our model predicts that fluorescent cholangiography reduces costs while improving health outcomes, suggesting fluorescence imaging may be considered standard surgical management for noncancerous gallbladder disease. Further study with prospective trials should be considered to verify findings of this predictive model.

Cost-effectiveness of ipilimumab versus high-dose interferon as an adjuvant therapy in resected high-risk melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Adjuvant ipilimumab was found to improve the overall survival and reduce toxicity compared to high-dose interferon (HDI) in patients with resected, high-risk melanoma. However, the cost of ipilimumab is substantially higher than HDI. This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of ipilimumab as an adjuvant treatment in melanoma from a healthcare perspective. METHODS: We designed a Markov model simulating resected, high-risk melanoma patients receiving either ipilimumab or HDI. Transition probabilities, including risks of survival, disease progression, and toxicity, were ascertained from clinical trial data. Costs and quality of life measurements (health utilities) were extracted from the literature. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), defined as incremental costs divided by incremental quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), assessed cost-effectiveness. ICERs <$100,000/QALY were deemed cost-effective. We measured model uncertainty with one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: In our base case model, ipilimumab increased costs by $107,100 and increased effectiveness by 0.43 QALY, yielding an ICER of $392,600/QALY. Our model was moderately sensitive to the costs of ipilimumab, though the cost of ipilimumab would need to decrease by 44% for ipilimumab to become cost-effective compared to HDI. The model was not sensitive to survival, toxicity, or other costs. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that HDI would remain the cost-effective treatment option 96.2% of the time at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/QALY. CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant ipilimumab increases the survival and decreases the toxicity compared to HDI in resected, high-risk melanoma patients, though this would not be considered cost-effective due to the high price of ipilimumab.

Evaluation of Insurance Coverage and Cancer Stage at Diagnosis Among Low-Income Adults With Renal Cell Carcinoma After Passage of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

Importance: The association of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) with insurance status and cancer stage at diagnosis among patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is unknown. Objective: To test the hypothesis that the ACA may be associated with increased access to care through expansion of insurance, which may vary based on income. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort analysis included patients diagnosed with RCC from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2016, in the National Cancer Database. Data were analyzed from July 1 to December 31, 2020. The periods from 2010 to 2013 and from 2014 to 2016 were defined as pre- and post-ACA implementation, respectively. Patients were categorized as living in a Medicaid expansion state or not. Exposures: Implementation of the ACA. Main Outcomes and Measures: The absolute percentage change (APC) of insurance coverage was calculated before and after ACA implementation in expansion and nonexpansion states. Secondary outcomes included change in stage at diagnosis, difference in the rate of insurance change, and change in localized disease between expansion and nonexpansion states. Adjusted difference-in-difference modeling was performed. Results: The cohort included 78 099 patients (64.7% male and 35.3% female; mean [SD] age, 54.66 [6.46] years), of whom 21.2% had low, 46.2% had middle, and 32.6% had high incomes. After ACA implementation, expansion states had a lower proportion of uninsured patients (adjusted difference-in-difference, -1.14% [95% CI, -1.98% to -1.41%]; P = .005). This occurred to the greatest degree among low-income patients through the acquisition of Medicaid (APC, 11.0% [95% CI, 8.6%-13.3%]; P < .001). Implementation of the ACA was also associated with an increase in detection of stage I and II disease (APC, 4.0% [95% CI, 1.6%-6.3%]; P = .001) among low-income patients in expansion states. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with RCC, ACA implementation was associated with an increase in insurance coverage status in both expansion and nonexpansion states for all income groups, but to a greater degree in expansion states. The proportion of patients with localized disease increased among low-income patients in both states. These data suggest that ACA implementation is associated with earlier RCC detection among lower-income patients.

Disentangling Racial, Ethnic, and Socioeconomic Disparities in Treatment for Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer is curable if diagnosed early and treated properly. Black and Hispanic patients with colorectal cancer are more likely to experience treatment delays and/or receive lower standards of care. Socioeconomic deprivation may contribute to these disparities, but this has not been extensively quantified. We studied the interrelationship between patient race/ethnicity and neighborhood socioeconomic status (nSES) on receipt of timely appropriate treatment among patients with colorectal cancer in California. METHODS: White, Black, and Hispanic patients (26,870) diagnosed with stage I-III colorectal cancer (2009-2013) in the California Cancer Registry were included. Logistic regression models were used to examine the association of race/ethnicity and nSES with three outcomes: undertreatment, >60-day treatment delay, and >90-day treatment delay. Joint effect models and mediation analysis were used to explore the interrelationships between race/ethnicity and nSES. RESULTS: Hispanics and Blacks were at increased risk for undertreatment [Black OR = 1.39; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.23-1.57; Hispanic OR = 1.17; 95% CI = 1.08-1.27] and treatment delay (Black/60-day OR = 1.78; 95% CI = 1.57-2.02; Hispanic/60-day OR = 1.50; 95% CI = 1.38-1.64) compared with Whites. Of the total effect (OR = 1.15; 95% CI = 1.07-1.24) of non-white race on undertreatment, 45.71% was explained by nSES. CONCLUSIONS: Lower nSES patients of any race were at substantially higher risk for undertreatment and treatment delay, and racial/ethnic disparities are reduced or eliminated among non-white patients living in the highest SES neighborhoods. Racial and ethnic disparities persisted after accounting for neighborhood socioeconomic status, and between the two, race/ethnicity explained a larger portion of the total effects. IMPACT: This research improves our understanding of how socioeconomic deprivation contributes to racial/ethnic disparities in colorectal cancer.

Cost-effectiveness of Nivolumab-Ipilimumab Combination Therapy for the Treatment of Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

Importance: Treatment with nivolumab-ipilimumab combination therapy was found to improve overall survival compared with chemotherapy among patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in the CheckMate 227 clinical trial. However, these drugs are substantially more expensive than chemotherapy and, given the high incidence of advanced NSCLC, the incorporation of dual immune checkpoint inhibitors into the standard of care could have substantial economic consequences. Objective: To assess whether nivolumab-ipilimumab combination therapy is a cost-effective first-line treatment for patients with advanced NSCLC. Design, Setting, and Participants: This economic evaluation designed a Markov model to compare the cost-effectiveness of nivolumab-ipilimumab combination therapy with platinum-doublet chemotherapy as first-line treatment for patients with advanced NSCLC. The Markov model was created to simulate patients with advanced NSCLC who were receiving either nivolumab-ipilimumab combination therapy or platinum-doublet chemotherapy. Transition probabilities, including disease progression, survival, and treatment toxic effects, were derived using data from the CheckMate 227 clinical trial. Costs and health utilities were obtained from published literature. Data analyses were conducted from November 2019 to September 2020. Exposures: Nivolumab-ipilimumab combination therapy. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary study outcomes were quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and cost in 2020 US dollars. Cost-effectiveness was measured using an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), with an ICER less than $100 000 per QALY considered cost-effective. Model uncertainty was assessed with 1-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Results: Treatment with nivolumab-ipilimumab combination therapy was associated with an increase in overall cost of $201 900 and improved effectiveness of 0.50 QALYs compared with chemotherapy, yielding an ICER of $401 700 per QALY. The study model was sensitive to the cost and duration of immunotherapy. Treatment with nivolumab-ipilimumab combination therapy became cost-effective when monthly treatment costs were reduced from $26 425 to $5058 (80.9% reduction) or when the maximum duration of immunotherapy was reduced from 24.0 months to 1.4 months. The model was not sensitive to assumptions about survival or programmed cell death 1 ligand 1 status. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated that, at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000 per QALY, nivolumab-ipilimumab combination therapy was less cost-effective than chemotherapy 99.9% of the time. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, first-line treatment with nivolumab-ipilimumab combination therapy was not found to be cost-effective at current prices despite clinical trial data indicating that this regimen increases overall survival among patients with advanced NSCLC.

Impact of Radiation on Cardiovascular Outcomes in Older Resectable Esophageal Cancer Patients With Medicare.

OBJECTIVES: Preoperative radiotherapy improves outcomes for operable esophageal cancer patients, though the proximity of the heart to the esophagus puts patients at risk of radiation-induced cardiovascular disease. This study characterizes the impact of radiotherapy and different radiation techniques on cardiovascular morbidity among a cohort of esophageal cancer patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified 1125 patients aged 65 and older diagnosed between 2000 and 2011 with esophageal cancer who received surgery alone, or surgery preceded by either preoperative chemotherapy or preoperative chemoradiation from the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database. We used Medicare claims to identify severe perioperative and late cardiovascular events. Multivariable logistic regression and Fine-Gray models were used to determine the effect of presurgery treatment on the risk of perioperative and late cardiovascular disease. RESULTS: Preoperative chemotherapy or chemoradiation did not significantly increase the risk of perioperative cardiovascular complications compared with surgery alone. Patients treated with preoperative chemoradiation had a 36% increased risk of having a late cardiovascular event compared with patients treated with surgery alone (subdistribution hazard ratio [SDHR]: 1.36; P=0.035). There was no significant increase in late cardiovascular events among patients treated with preoperative chemotherapy (SDHR: 1.18; P=0.40). Among patients treated with preoperative chemoradiation, those receiving intensity modulated radiotherapy had a 68% decreased risk of having a late cardiovascular event compared with patients receiving conventional radiation (SDHR: 0.32; P=0.007). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates an increased risk of cardiovascular complications among operative esophageal cancer patients treated with preoperative chemoradiation, though these risks might be reduced with more cardioprotective radiation techniques such as intensity modulated radiotherapy.

Surgical revascularization for Moyamoya disease in the United States: A cost-effectiveness analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Moyamoya disease (MMD) is a vasculopathy of the internal carotid arteries with ischemic and hemorrhagic sequelae. Surgical revascularization confers upfront peri-procedural risk and costs in exchange for long-term protective benefit against hemorrhagic disease. The authors present a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) of surgical versus non-surgical management of MMD. METHODS: A Markov Model was used to simulate a 41-year-old suffering a transient ischemic attack (TIA) secondary to MMD and now faced with operative versus nonoperative treatment options. Health utilities, costs, and outcome probabilities were obtained from the CEA registry and the published literature. The primary outcome was incremental cost-effectiveness ratio which compared the quality adjusted life years (QALYs) and costs of surgical and nonsurgical treatments. Base-case, one-way sensitivity, two-way sensitivity, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed with a willingness to pay threshold of $50,000. RESULTS: The base case model yielded 3.81 QALYs with a cost of $99,500 for surgery, and 3.76 QALYs with a cost of $106,500 for nonsurgical management. One-way sensitivity analysis demonstrated the greatest sensitivity in assumptions to cost of surgery and cost of admission for hemorrhagic stroke, and probabilities of stroke with no surgery, stroke after surgery, poor surgical outcome, and death after surgery. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses demonstrated that surgical revascularization was the cost-effective strategy in over 87.4% of simulations. CONCLUSIONS: Considering both direct and indirect costs and the postoperative QALY, surgery is considerably more cost-effective than non-surgical management for adults with MMD.

Cost Savings Associated With Palliative Care Among Older Adults With Advanced Cancer.

BACKGROUND: There is inconsistent evidence that palliative care intervention decreases total healthcare expenditure at end-of-life for oncology patients. This inconsistent evidence may result from small sample sizes at single institution studies and disparate characterization of costs across studies. Comprehensive studies in population-based datasets are needed to fully understand the impact of palliative care on total healthcare costs. This study analyzed the impact of palliative care on total healthcare costs in a nationally representative sample of advanced cancer patients. METHODS: We conducted a matched cohort study among Medicare patients with metastatic lung, colorectal, breast and prostate cancers. We matched patients who received a palliative care consultation to similar patients who did not receive a palliative care consultation on factors related to both the receipt of palliative care and end of life costs. We compared direct costs between matched patients to determine the per-patient economic impact of a palliative care consultation. RESULTS: Patients who received a palliative care consultation experienced an average per patient cost of $5,834 compared to $7,784 for usual care patients (25% decrease; p < 0.0001). Palliative care consultation within 7 days of death decreased healthcare costs by $451, while palliative care consultation more than 4 weeks from death decreased costs by $4,643. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that palliative care has the capacity to substantially reduce healthcare expenditure among advanced cancer patients. Earlier palliative care consultation results in greater cost reductions than consultation in the last week of life.

Validation of an oncology-specific opioid risk calculator in cancer survivors.

BACKGROUND: Clinical guidelines recommend that providers risk-stratify patients with cancer before prescribing opioids. Prior research has demonstrated that a simple cancer opioid risk score might help identify to patients with cancer at the time of diagnosis with a high likelihood of long-term posttreatment opioid use. This current project validates this cancer opioid risk score in a generalizable, population-based cohort of elderly cancer survivors. METHODS: This study identified 44,932 Medicare beneficiaries with cancer who had received local therapy. Longitudinal opioid use was ascertained from Medicare Part D data. A risk score was calculated for each patient, and patients were categorized into low-, moderate-, and high-risk groups on the basis of the predicted probability of persistent opioid use. Model discrimination was assessed with receiver operating characteristic curves. RESULTS: In the study cohort, 5.2% of the patients were chronic opioid users 1 to 2 years after the initiation of cancer treatment. The majority of the patients (64%) were at low risk and had a 1.2% probability of long-term opioid use. Moderate-risk patients (33% of the cohort) had a 5.6% probability of long-term opioid use. High-risk patients (3.5% of the cohort) had a 75% probability of long-term opioid use. The opioid risk score had an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.869. CONCLUSIONS: This study found that a cancer opioid risk score could accurately identify individuals with a high likelihood of long-term opioid use in a large, generalizable cohort of cancer survivors. Future research should focus on the implementation of these scores into clinical practice and how this could affect prescriber behavior and patient outcomes. LAY SUMMARY: A novel 5-question clinical decision tool allows physicians treating patients with cancer to accurately predict which patients will persistently be using opioid medications after completing therapy.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Stereotactic Ablative Radiation Therapy in Patients With Oligometastatic Cancer.

PURPOSE: The Stereotactic Ablative Radiation therapy for Comprehensive Treatment of Oligometastatic Tumors phase 2 randomized clinical trial found that stereotactic ablative radiation therapy (SABR) improved outcomes among cancer patients with oligometastatic disease. Yet, the cost of SABR along with the large number of patients with oligometastatic disease raises the important question of value. This study sought to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the addition of SABR compared with standard therapy alone among cancer patients with oligometastatic disease. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We constructed a Markov model to simulate treatment with stereotactic ablative radiation therapy or standard therapy among patients with oligometastatic cancers. The model derived transition probabilities from Stereotactic Ablative Radiation therapy for Comprehensive Treatment of Oligometastatic Tumors clinical trial data to estimate risks of toxicity, disease progression and survival. Health care costs and health utilities were estimated from the literature. Probabilistic and one-way sensitivity analyses evaluate model uncertainty. Cost-effectiveness was estimated from both the health care sector and societal perspectives with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) defined as dollars per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). An ICER less than $100,000/QALY was considered cost-effective. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were used to examine model uncertainty. RESULTS: The addition of SABR increased total costs by $54,260 (health care sector perspective) or $72,799 (societal perspective) and improved effectiveness by 1.88 QALYs compared with standard therapy, leading to an ICER of $28,906/QALY (health care sector perspective) or $38,783/QALY (societal perspective). The model was modestly sensitive to assumptions about tumor progression, although the model was not sensitive to assumptions about survival or cost of treatment. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses demonstrated that SABR was the cost-effective treatment option 99.8% (health care sector perspective) or 98.7% (societal perspective) of the time. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of SABR increased costs and improved quality adjusted survival, overall leading to a cost-effective treatment strategy for patients with oligometastatic cancer.

Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Genetic Testing and Tailored First-Line Therapy for Patients With Metastatic Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors.

Importance: Gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) is frequently driven by oncogenic KIT variations. Imatinib targeting of KIT marked a new era in GIST treatment and ushered in precision oncological treatment for all solid malignant neoplasms. However, studies on the molecular biological traits of GIST have found that tumors respond differentially to imatinib dosage based on the KIT exon with variation. Despite this knowledge, few patients undergo genetic testing at diagnosis, and empirical imatinib therapy remains routine. Barriers to genetic profiling include concerns about the cost and utility of testing. Objective: To determine whether targeted gene testing (TGT) is a cost-effective diagnostic for patients with metastatic GIST from the US payer perspective. Design, Setting, and Participants: This economic evaluation developed a Markov model to compare the cost-effectiveness of TGT and tailored first-line therapy compared with empirical imatinib therapy among patients with a new diagnosis of metastatic GIST. The main health outcome, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and costs were obtained from the literature, and transitional probabilities were modeled from disease progression and survival estimates from randomized clinical trials of patients with metastatic GIST. Data analyses were conducted October 2019 to January 2020. Exposure: TGT and tailored first-line therapy. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was QALYs and cost. Cost-effectiveness was defined using an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio less than $100 000/QALY considered cost-effective. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess model stability. Results: Therapy directed by TGT was associated with an increase of 0.10 QALYs at a cost of $9513 compared with the empirical imatinib approach, leading to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $92 100. These findings were sensitive to the costs of TGT, drugs, and health utility model inputs. Therapy directed by TGT remained cost-effective for genetic testing costs up to $3730. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis found that TGT-directed therapy was considered cost-effective 70% of the time. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that using genetic testing to match treatment of KIT variations to imatinib dosing is a cost-effective approach compared with empirical imatinib.

Quality of care at safety-net hospitals and the impact on pay-for-performance reimbursement.

BACKGROUND: Pay-for-performance reimbursement ties hospital payments to standardized quality-of-care metrics. To the authors' knowledge, the impact of pay-for-performance reimbursement models on hospitals caring primarily for uninsured or underinsured patients remains poorly defined. The objective of the current study was to evaluate how standardized quality-of-care metrics vary by a hospital's propensity to care for uninsured or underinsured patients and demonstrate the potential impact that pay-for-performance reimbursement could have on hospitals caring for the underserved. METHODS: The authors identified 1,703,865 patients with cancer who were diagnosed between 2004 and 2015 and treated at 1344 hospitals. Hospital safety-net burden was defined as the percentage of uninsured or Medicaid patients cared for by that hospital, categorizing hospitals into low-burden, medium-burden, and high-burden hospitals. The authors evaluated the impact of safety-net burden on concordance with 20 standardized quality-of-care measures, adjusting for differences in patient age, sex, stage of disease at diagnosis, and comorbidity. RESULTS: Patients who were treated at high-burden hospitals were more likely to be young, male, Black and/or Hispanic, and to reside in a low-income and low-educated region. High-burden hospitals had lower adherence to 13 of 20 quality measures compared with low-burden hospitals (all P < .05). Among the 350 high-burden hospitals, concordance with quality measures was found to be lowest for those caring for the highest percentage of uninsured or Medicaid patients, minority patients, and less educated patients (all P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Hospitals caring for uninsured or underinsured individuals have decreased quality-of-care measures. Under pay-for-performance reimbursement models, these lower quality-of-care scores could decrease hospital payments, potentially increasing health disparities for at-risk patients with cancer.

Age-related differences in breast cancer mortality according to race/ethnicity, insurance, and socioeconomic status.

BACKGROUND: We assessed breast cancer mortality in older versus younger women according to race/ethnicity, neighborhood socioeconomic status (nSES), and health insurance status. METHODS: The study included female breast cancer cases 18 years of age and older, diagnosed between 2005 and 2015 in the California Cancer Registry. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards modeling was used to generate hazard ratios (HR) of breast cancer specific deaths and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for older (60+ years) versus younger (< 60 years) patients separately by race/ethnicity, nSES, and health insurance status. RESULTS: Risk of dying from breast cancer was higher in older than younger patients after multivariable adjustment, which varied in magnitude by race/ethnicity (P-interaction< 0.0001). Comparing older to younger patients, higher mortality differences were shown for non-Hispanic White (HR = 1.43; 95% CI, 1.36-1.51) and Hispanic women (HR = 1.37; 95% CI, 1.26-1.50) and lower differences for non-Hispanic Blacks (HR = 1.17; 95% CI, 1.04-1.31) and Asians/Pacific Islanders (HR = 1.15; 95% CI, 1.02-1.31). HRs comparing older to younger patients varied by insurance status (P-interaction< 0.0001), with largest mortality differences observed for privately insured women (HR = 1.51; 95% CI, 1.43-1.59) and lowest in Medicaid/military/other public insurance (HR = 1.18; 95% CI, 1.10-1.26). No age differences were shown for uninsured women. HRs comparing older to younger patients were similar across nSES strata. CONCLUSION: Our results provide evidence for the continued disparity in Black-White breast cancer mortality, which is magnified in younger women. Moreover, insurance status continues to play a role in breast cancer mortality, with uninsured women having the highest risk for breast cancer death, regardless of age.

A Model-Based Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of an Exercise Program for Lung Cancer Survivors After Curative-Intent Treatment.

OBJECTIVE: The cost-effectiveness of exercise interventions in lung cancer survivors is unknown. We performed a model-based cost-effectiveness analysis of an exercise intervention in lung cancer survivors. DESIGN: We used Markov modeling to simulate the impact of the Lifestyle Interventions and Independence for Elders exercise intervention compared with usual care for stage I-IIIA lung cancer survivors after curative-intent treatment. We calculated and considered incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of less than US $100,000/quality-adjusted life-year as cost-effective and assessed model uncertainty using sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: The base-case model showed that the Lifestyle Interventions and Independence for Elders exercise program would increase overall cost by US $4740 and effectiveness by 0.06 quality-adjusted life-years compared with usual care and have an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of US $79,504/quality-adjusted life-year. The model was most sensitive to the cost of the exercise program, probability of increasing exercise, and utility benefit related to exercise. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of US $100,000/quality-adjusted life-year, Lifestyle Interventions and Independence for Elders had a 71% probability of being cost-effective compared with 27% for usual care. When we included opportunity costs, Lifestyle Interventions and Independence for Elders had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of US $179,774/quality-adjusted life-year, exceeding the cost-effectiveness threshold. CONCLUSIONS: A simulation of the Lifestyle Interventions and Independence for Elders exercise intervention in lung cancer survivors demonstrates cost-effectiveness from an organization but not societal perspective. A similar exercise program for lung cancer survivors may be cost-effective.