National survey of patient perspectives on cost discussions among recipients of copay assistance.

BACKGROUND: Individuals with cancer and other medical conditions often experience financial concerns from high costs-of-care and may utilize copay assistance programs (CAP). We sought to describe CAP recipients' experiences/preferences for cost discussions with clinicians. METHODS: We conducted a national, cross-sectional electronic-survey from 10/2022 to 11/2022 of CAP recipients with cancer or autoimmune conditions to assess patient perspectives on cost discussions. We used multivariable logistic regression models to explore associations of patient perspectives on cost discussions with patient characteristics and patient-reported outcomes (eg, financial toxicity, depression/anxiety, and health literacy). RESULTS: Among 1,566 participants, 71% had cancer and 29% had autoimmune conditions. Although 62% of respondents desired cost discussions, only 32% reported discussions took place. Additionally, 52% of respondents wanted their doctor to consider out-of-pocket costs when deciding the best treatment, and 61% of respondents felt doctors should ensure patients can afford treatment prescribed. Participants with depression symptoms were more likely to want doctors to consider out-of-pocket costs (OR = 1.54, P = .005) and to believe doctors should ensure patients can afford treatment (OR = 1.60, P = .005). Those with severe financial toxicity were more likely to desire cost discussions (OR = 1.65, P < .001) and want doctors to consider out-of-pocket costs (OR = 1.52, P = .001). Participants with marginal/inadequate health literacy were more likely to desire cost discussions (OR = 1.37, P = .01) and believe doctors should ensure patients can afford treatment (OR = 1.30, P = .036). CONCLUSIONS: In this large sample of CAP recipients with cancer and autoimmune conditions, most reported a desire for cost discussions, but under one-third reported such discussions took place.

Shifting from Equality toward Equity: Addressing Disparities in Research Participation for Clinical Cancer Research.

AbstractThere is societal consensus that cancer clinical trial participation is unjust because some sociodemographic groups have been systematically underrepresented. Despite this, neither a definition nor an ethical explication for the justice norm of equity has been clearly articulated in this setting, leading to confusion over its application and goals. Herein we define equity as acknowledging sociodemographic circumstances and apportioning resource and opportunity allocation to eliminate disparities in outcomes, and we explore the issues and tensions this norm generates through practical examples. We assess how equality-based enrollment structures in clinical cancer research have perpetuated historical disparities and what equity-based alternatives are necessary to achieve representativeness and an expansive conception of participatory justice in clinical cancer research. This framework addresses the breadth from normative to applied by defining the justice norm of equity and translating it into practical strategies for addressing participation disparities in clinical cancer research.

Perceptions of patients with early stage breast cancer toward research biopsies.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to describe the perspective of patients with early breast cancer toward research biopsies. The authors hypothesized that more patients at academic sites than at community-based sites would be willing to consider these procedures. METHODS: In total, 198 patients with early stage breast cancer were recruited from 3 academic centers (n = 102) and from 1 community oncology practice (n = 96). The primary objective was to compare the proportion of patients willing to consider donating excess tissue biospecimens from surgery, from a clinically indicated breast biopsy, or from a research purposes-only biopsy (RPOB) between practice types. RESULTS: Most patients (93% at academic sites, 94% at the community oncology site) said they would consider donating excess tissue from surgery for research. One-half of patients from academic or community sites would consider donating tissue from a clinically indicated breast biopsy. On univariate analysis, significantly fewer patients from academic sites would consider an RPOB (22% at academic sites, 42% at the community site; P = .003); however, this difference was no longer significant on multivariate analysis (P = .96). Longer transportation times and unfavorable prior experiences were associated with less willingness to consider an RPOB on multivariate analysis. Significantly fewer patients from academic sites (14%) than from the community site (35%) would consider a research biopsy in a clinical trial (P = .04). Contributing to scientific knowledge, return of results, and a personal request by their physician were the strongest factors influencing patients' willingness to undergo research biopsies. CONCLUSIONS: The current results rejected the hypothesis that more patients with early breast cancer at academic sites would be willing to donate tissue biospecimens for research compared with those at community oncology sites. These findings identify modifiable factors to consider in biobanking studies and clinical trials.

Moving forward on all fronts: impact, patterns, and barriers to exercise in cancer survivors and patients living with advanced disease.

INTRODUCTION: Exercise is recommended for all patients with cancer, but there has been limited study of exercise habits in patients across the spectrum of illness. PURPOSE: This pragmatic survey aimed to identify the unmet supportive care needs, self-reported symptoms, and exercise habits among both cancer survivors and patients living with advanced disease to determine adherence to exercise guidelines and to identify barriers and opportunities to improve exercise. METHODS: An anonymous cross-sectional self-administered paper survey was distributed to patients with cancer presenting for oncology clinic visits at an academic cancer center. Survey measures included presence of symptoms and health problems in addition to weekly time spent exercising, change in exercise levels since diagnosis, interest in exercise, and self-reported barriers. Participants reporting at least 150 min of exercise per week were characterized as adherent to guidelines. RESULTS: Among 640 survey respondents, 570 (89%) completed questions about exercise. Only 44% of cancer survivors and 34% of patients living with advanced disease met current guidelines. Survivors who met exercise guidelines had a lower prevalence of fatigue and memory impairments, but this finding was not seen among patients with advanced cancer. Over 70% of patients with advanced disease and 47% of survivors reported decreasing exercise post-diagnosis compared to pre-diagnosis. Prominent barriers to exercise among both groups included burden of illness and time constraints but interest in increasing exercise was high. CONCLUSIONS: There is an opportunity to improve exercise and related outcomes among a large percentage of both cancer survivors and patients living with advanced disease.

Perspectives on the Costs of Cancer Care: A Survey of the American Society of Breast Surgeons.

BACKGROUND: Cancer treatment costs are not routinely addressed in shared decisions for breast cancer surgery. Thus, we sought to characterize cost awareness and communication among surgeons treating breast cancer. METHODS: We conducted a self-administered, confidential electronic survey among members of the American Society of Breast Surgeons from 1 July to 15 September 2018. Questions were based on previously published or validated survey items, and assessed surgeon demographics, cost sensitivity, and communication. Descriptive summaries and cross-tabulations with Chi-square statistics were used, with exact tests where warranted, to assess findings. RESULTS: Of those surveyed (N = 2293), 598 (25%) responded. Surgeons reported that 'risk of recurrence' (70%), 'appearance of the breast' (50%), and 'risks of surgery' (47%) were the most influential on patients' decisions for breast cancer surgery; 6% cited out-of-pocket costs as significant. Over half (53%) of the surgeons agreed that doctors should consider patient costs when choosing cancer treatment, yet the majority of surgeons (58%) reported 'infrequently' (43%) or 'never' (15%) considering patient costs in medical recommendations. The overwhelming majority (87%) of surgeons believed that patients should have access to the costs of their treatment before making medical decisions. Surgeons treating a higher percentage of Medicaid or uninsured patients were more likely to consistently consider costs (p < 0.001). Participants reported that insufficient knowledge or resources (61%), a perceived inability to help with costs (24%), and inadequate time (22%) impeded cost discussions. Notably, 20% of participants believed that discussing costs might impact the quality of care patients receive. CONCLUSIONS: Cost transparency remains rare, however in shared decisions for breast cancer surgery, improved cost awareness by surgeons has the potential to reduce financial hardship.

Going for Broke: A Longitudinal Study of Patient-Reported Financial Sacrifice in Cancer Care.

PURPOSE: Patients with cancer are at risk for substantial treatment-related costs; however, little is known about patients' willingness to sacrifice to receive cancer care and how their attitudes and burden may change with time. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a longitudinal survey of insured patients with solid tumor cancers receiving chemotherapy or hormonal therapy. Patients were surveyed at two time points about their willingness to make financial sacrifices and their actual sacrifices, including out-of-pocket costs. Patient attitudes and sacrifices were compared over time. RESULTS: Of 349 patients approached, 300 completed the baseline survey (86% response) and 245 completed the follow-up survey 3 months later (82% retention). Median patient-reported cancer-related out-of-pocket costs for patients who completed both surveys were $393 per month (range, $0 to $26,586 per month) at baseline and $328 per month (range, $0 to $8,210 per month) at follow-up. At baseline, 49% were willing to declare personal bankruptcy, 38% were willing to sell their homes, and ≥ 65% were willing to make other sacrifices, including borrowing money to afford their cancer care. Upon follow-up, there were minor decreases in willingness; the maximum net change was a 7% decline in patients willing to declare bankruptcy. Actual sacrifice increased over time; the greatest increase was in patients who used their savings (increased from 41% to 54%). CONCLUSION: A large proportion of insured patients with cancer were willing to make considerable personal and financial sacrifices to receive care; these attitudes did not change greatly over time. Shared decision making is important to ensure patients fully understand the goals, risks, and benefits of therapy before they make such personal sacrifices.

Defining Value of Cancer Therapeutics-A Health System Perspective.

Because of the rising costs of cancer care and ongoing challenges in ensuring access to quality care, there is an increasing need to prioritize spending and define the benefits of therapy in proportion to costs. The term "value" has gained favor as means to define the relative utility of a medical intervention in terms of benefits, risks, and financial costs, which in turn can help clinicians, patients, and policy makers prioritize "high-value" care. While numerous value concepts have been proposed, a comprehensive discussion of value initiatives along the care continuum is missing. In this Commentary, we propose a health system taxonomy of value initiatives in cancer care to discuss what the field needs to progress.

Patterns in Health Care Access and Affordability Among Cancer Survivors During Implementation of the Affordable Care Act.

Importance: Cancer survivors face ongoing health issues and need access to affordable health care, yet studies examining health care access and affordability in this population are lacking. Objectives: To evaluate health care access and affordability in a national sample of cancer survivors compared with adults without cancer and to evaluate temporal trends during implementation of the Affordable Care Act. Design, Setting, and Participants: We used data from the National Health Interview Survey from 2010 through 2016 to conduct a population-based study of 30 364 participants aged 18 years or older. We grouped participants as cancer survivors (n = 15 182) and those with no reported history of cancer, whom we refer to as control respondents (n = 15 182), matched on age. We excluded individuals reporting a cancer diagnosis prior to age 18 years and those with nonmelanoma skin cancers. Main Outcomes and Measures: We compared issues with health care access (eg, delayed or forgone care) and affordability (eg, unable to afford medications or health care services) between cancer survivors and control respondents. We also explored trends over time in the proportion of cancer survivors reporting these difficulties. Results: Of the 30 364 participants, 18 356 (57.4%) were women. The mean (SD) age was 63.5 (23.5) years. Cancer survivors were more likely to be insured (14 412 [94.8%] vs 13 978 [92.2%], P < .001) and to have government-sponsored insurance (7266 [44.3%] vs 6513 [38.8%], P < .001) compared with control respondents. In multivariable models, cancer survivors were more likely than control respondents to report delayed care (odds ratio [OR], 1.38; 95% CI, 1.16-1.63), forgone medical care (OR, 1.76; 95% CI, 1.45-2.12), and/or inability to afford medications (OR, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.46-2.14) and health care services (OR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.27-1.68) (P < .001 for all). From 2010 to 2016, the proportion of survivors reporting delayed medical care decreased each year (B = 0.47; P = .047), and the proportion of those needing and not getting medical care also decreased each year (B = 0.35; P = .04). In addition, the proportion of cancer survivors who reported being unable to afford prescription medication decreased each year (B=0.66; P = .004) and the proportion of those unable to afford at least 1 of 6 services decreased each year (B = 0.51; P = .01). Conclusions and Relevance: Despite higher rates of insurance coverage, cancer survivors reported greater difficulties accessing and affording health care compared with adults without cancer. Importantly, the proportion of survivors reporting these issues continued a downward trend throughout our observation period in the years following the implementation of the Affordable Care Act. Our findings suggest incremental improvement in health care access and affordability after recent health care reform and provide an important benchmark as additional changes are likely to occur in the coming years.

Cost Implications of an Evidence-Based Approach to Radiation Treatment After Lumpectomy for Early-Stage Breast Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Breast cancer treatment costs are rising, and identification of high-value oncology treatment strategies is increasingly needed. We sought to determine the potential cost savings associated with an evidence-based radiation treatment (RT) approach among women with early-stage breast cancer treated in the United States. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Using the National Cancer Database, we identified women with T1-T2 N0 invasive breast cancers treated with lumpectomy during 2011. Adjuvant RT regimens were categorized as conventionally fractionated whole-breast irradiation, hypofractionated whole-breast irradiation, and omission of RT. National RT patterns were determined, and RT costs were estimated using the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule. RESULTS: Within the 43,247 patient cohort, 64% (n = 27,697) received conventional RT, 13.3% (n = 5,724) received hypofractionated RT, 1.1% (n = 477) received accelerated partial-breast irradiation, and 21.6% (n = 9,349) received no RT. Among patients who were eligible for shorter RT or omission of RT, 57% underwent treatment with longer, more costly regimens. Estimated RT expenditures of the national cohort approximated $420.2 million during 2011, compared with $256.2 million had women been treated with the least expensive regimens for which they were safely eligible. This demonstrated a potential annual savings of $164.0 million, a 39% reduction in associated treatment costs. CONCLUSION: Among women with early-stage breast cancer after lumpectomy, use of an evidence-based approach illustrates an example of high-value care within oncology. Identification of high-value cancer treatment strategies is critically important to maintaining excellence in cancer care while reducing health care expenditures.

Integration of Palliative Care Into Standard Oncology Care: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline Update.

Purpose To provide evidence-based recommendations to oncology clinicians, patients, family and friend caregivers, and palliative care specialists to update the 2012 American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) provisional clinical opinion (PCO) on the integration of palliative care into standard oncology care for all patients diagnosed with cancer. Methods ASCO convened an Expert Panel of members of the ASCO Ad Hoc Palliative Care Expert Panel to develop an update. The 2012 PCO was based on a review of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) by the National Cancer Institute Physicians Data Query and additional trials. The panel conducted an updated systematic review seeking randomized clinical trials, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses, as well as secondary analyses of RCTs in the 2012 PCO, published from March 2010 to January 2016. Results The guideline update reflects changes in evidence since the previous guideline. Nine RCTs, one quasiexperimental trial, and five secondary analyses from RCTs in the 2012 PCO on providing palliative care services to patients with cancer and/or their caregivers, including family caregivers, were found to inform the update. Recommendations Inpatients and outpatients with advanced cancer should receive dedicated palliative care services, early in the disease course, concurrent with active treatment. Referral of patients to interdisciplinary palliative care teams is optimal, and services may complement existing programs. Providers may refer family and friend caregivers of patients with early or advanced cancer to palliative care services.

Identifying cancer patients who alter care or lifestyle due to treatment-related financial distress.

BACKGROUND: Cancer patients may experience financial distress as a side effect of their care. Little is known about which patients are at greatest risk for altering their care or lifestyle due to treatment-related financial distress. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey study to determine which patients are at greatest risk for altering their care or lifestyle due to treatment-related financial distress. Eligible patients were adults receiving cancer treatment enrolled between June 2010 and May 2011. We grouped coping strategies as lifestyle altering or care altering. We assessed coping strategies and relationships between covariates using descriptive statistics and analysis of variance. RESULTS: Among 174 participants, 89% used at least one lifestyle-altering coping strategy, while 39% used a care-altering strategy. Care-altering coping strategies adopted by patients included the following: not filling a prescription (28%) and taking less medication than prescribed (23%). Lifestyle-altering strategies included the following: spending less on leisure activities (77%), spending less on basics like food and clothing (57%), borrowing money (54%), and spending savings (50%). Younger patients were more likely than older patients to use coping strategies (p < 0.001). Lower-income patients adopted care-altering strategies more than higher-income patients (p = 0.03). Participants with more education and shorter duration of chemotherapy used lifestyle-altering strategies more than their counterparts (both p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: As a means of coping with treatment-related financial distress, patients were more likely to use lifestyle-altering approaches, but more than one-third adopted potentially harmful care-altering strategies. Younger age, lower income, higher education, and shorter duration of chemotherapy were characteristics associated with greater use of coping strategies. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

In vivo assessment of the metabolic activity of CYP2D6 diplotypes and alleles.

AIMS: A prospectively enrolled patient cohort was used to assess whether the prediction of CYP2D6 phenotype activity from genotype data could be improved by reclassification of diplotypes or alleles. METHODS: Three hundred and fifty-five patients receiving tamoxifen 20 mg were genotyped for CYP2D6 and tamoxifen metabolite concentrations were measured. The endoxifen : N-desmethly-tamoxifen metabolic ratio, as a surrogate of CYP2D6 activity, was compared across four diplotypes (EM/IM, EM/PM, IM/IM, IM/PM) that are typically collapsed into an intermediate metabolizer (IM) phenotype. The relative metabolic activity of each allele type (UM, EM, IM, and PM) and each EM and IM allele was estimated for comparison with the activity scores typically assigned, 2, 1, 0.5 and 0, respectively. RESULTS: Each of the four IM diplotypes have distinct CYP2D6 activity from each other and from the EM and PM phenotype groups (each P < 0.05). Setting the activity of an EM allele at 1.0, the relative activities of a UM, IM and PM allele were 0.85, 0.67 and 0.52, respectively. The activity of the EM alleles were statistically different (P < 0.0001), with the CYP2D6*2 allele (scaled activity = 0.63) closer in activity to an IM than an EM allele. The activity of the IM alleles were also statistically different (P = 0.014). CONCLUSION: The current systems for translating CYP2D6 genotype into phenotype are not optimally calibrated, particularly in regards to IM diplotypes and the *2 allele. Additional research is needed to improve the prediction of CYP2D6 activity from genetic data for individualized dosing of CYP2D6 dependent drugs.

Prevalence and impact of correlative science in breast cancer phase II trials.

Correlative science (CS) can potentially augment clinical trial results by identifying biomarkers of response and resistance to a novel intervention. We evaluated recently published breast cancer phase II trials (BP2T) to determine prevalence, characteristics, and outcomes of CS. Through Pubmed, we identified BP2T of systemic therapy published between June 2005 and June 2010. A study-specific abstraction tool recorded trial characteristics, CS endpoints, source of tissue, adequacy of samples, biopsy safety, and CS outcomes. BP2T authors were contacted to verify abstraction results. Results were abstracted from 298 eligible trials enrolling 18,782 patients, of which 81 (27.2 %) involved CS. Of these, 57 (70.4 %) included tissue with 16 (28 %) using optional research biopsies and 17 (30 %) requiring mandatory research biopsies. No trial addressed biopsy safety issues. Trials were more likely to include CS if they were: industry versus non-industry sponsored (33.7 % vs. 17.1 %, p = 0.0017), neoadjuvant versus metastatic setting (47 % vs. 21.2 %, p = 0.0001), or U.S. versus non-U.S. trials (37 % vs. 21 %, p = 0.005). A minority of phase II breast cancer trials include CS representing a missed opportunity to learn more from clinical research. When CS is included, consistent reporting of endpoints, feasibility, outcomes, and safety is needed.

The financial toxicity of cancer treatment: a pilot study assessing out-of-pocket expenses and the insured cancer patient's experience.

PURPOSE: Cancer patients carry rising burdens of health care-related out-of-pocket expenses, and a growing number of patients are considered "underinsured." Our objective was to describe experiences of insured cancer patients requesting copayment assistance and to describe the impact of health care expenses on well-being and treatment. METHODS: We conducted baseline and follow-up surveys regarding the impact of health care costs on well-being and treatment among cancer patients who contacted a national copayment assistance foundation along with a comparison sample of patients treated at an academic medical center. RESULTS: Among 254 participants, 75% applied for drug copayment assistance. Forty-two percent of participants reported a significant or catastrophic subjective financial burden; 68% cut back on leisure activities, 46% reduced spending on food and clothing, and 46% used savings to defray out-of-pocket expenses. To save money, 20% took less than the prescribed amount of medication, 19% partially filled prescriptions, and 24% avoided filling prescriptions altogether. Copayment assistance applicants were more likely than nonapplicants to employ at least one of these strategies to defray costs (98% vs. 78%). In an adjusted analysis, younger age, larger household size, applying for copayment assistance, and communicating with physicians about costs were associated with greater subjective financial burden. CONCLUSION: Insured patients undergoing cancer treatment and seeking copayment assistance experience considerable subjective financial burden, and they may alter their care to defray out-of-pocket expenses. Health insurance does not eliminate financial distress or health disparities among cancer patients. Future research should investigate coverage thresholds that minimize adverse financial outcomes and identify cancer patients at greatest risk for financial toxicity.

Financial Distress, Use of Cost-Coping Strategies, and Adherence to Prescription Medication Among Patients With Cancer.

The authors found that cost-related medication nonadherence was prevalent among patients with cancer who sought financial assistance.