Impact of Sociodemographic Disparities and Insurance Status on Survival of Patients with Early-Onset Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Low socioeconomic status (SES) has been linked to worse survival in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC); however, the impact of SES on early-onset CRC remains undescribed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective analysis of data from the National Cancer Database (NCDB) between 2004 and 2016 was conducted. We combined income and education to form a composite measure of SES. Logistic regression and χ2 testing were used to examine early-onset CRC according to SES group. Survival rates and Cox proportional hazards models compared stage-specific overall survival (OS) between the SES groups. RESULTS: In total, 30,903 patients with early-onset CRC were identified, of whom 78.7% were White; 14.5% were Black. Low SES compared with high SES patients were more likely to be Black (26.3% vs. 6.1%) or Hispanic (25.3% vs. 10.5%), have T4 tumors (21.3% vs. 17.8%) and/or N2 disease (13% vs. 11.1%), and present with stage IV disease (32.8% vs. 27.7%) at diagnosis (p < .0001, all comparisons). OS gradually improved with increasing SES at all disease stages (p < .001). In stage IV, the 5-year survival rate was 13.9% vs. 21.7% for patients with low compared with high SES. In multivariable analysis, SES (low vs. high group; adjusted hazard ratio [HRadj ], 1.35; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.26-1.46) was found to have a significant effect on survival (p < .0001) when all of the confounding variables were adjusted. Insurance (not private vs. private; HRadj , 1.38; 95% CI, 1.31-1.44) mediates 31% of the SES effect on survival. CONCLUSION: Patients with early-onset CRC with low SES had the worst outcomes. Our data suggest that SES should be considered when implementing programs to improve the early detection and treatment of patients with early-onset CRC. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Low socioeconomic status (SES) has been linked to worse survival in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC); however, the impact of SES on early-onset CRC remains undescribed. In this retrospective study of 30,903 patients with early-onset CRC in the National Cancer Database, a steady increase in the yearly rate of stage IV diagnosis at presentation was observed. The risk of death increased as socioeconomic status decreased. Race and insurance status were independent predictors for survival. Implementation of programs to improve access to care and early diagnostic strategies among younger adults, especially those with low SES, is warranted.

Levine Cancer Institute Financial Toxicity Tumor Board: A Potential Solution to an Emerging Problem.

PURPOSE: Fiscal distress or "financial toxicity," in which patients experience challenges in paying for treatment, are becoming dominant problems for patients with cancer because of burgeoning health care costs and strategies implemented by health insurance payers to reduce their level of expenditure. We report the structure and function of the first Financial Toxicity Tumor Board (FTTB). Modeled on the concept of a conventional multidisciplinary tumor board, FTTB functions as a multidisciplinary conference providing broad problem-solving approaches to financial toxicity. METHODS: The FTTB, with participation from physicians, nurses, financial counselors, nurse navigators, social workers, and administrators, meets monthly and is focused on financial toxicity and financial worry experienced by patients with cancer. It is linked to a Patient Assistance Program for oncologic pharmaceutical agents as this domain constitutes a critical area of financial toxicity for many patients. RESULTS: In the first years of function, more than $55-$60 million of personal expenditure has been avoided for 1,749 and 1,819 patients, respectively, as well as more than $1.3 million copay assistance provided for financially challenged patients. Problems addressed have included payer impediments, underinsurance, complexities of certification, coding or billing issues, and inadequate internal standard operating procedures. CONCLUSION: A focus on proactive management of financial toxicity through the function of multidisciplinary FTTBs substantially ameliorates this burgeoning international problem. This concept is presented early as it may be leveraged readily in other centers.

Initial Results from Mobile Low-Dose Computerized Tomographic Lung Cancer Screening Unit: Improved Outcomes for Underserved Populations.

INTRODUCTION: The National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) demonstrated that screening high-risk patients with low-dose computed tomography (CT) of the chest reduces lung cancer mortality compared with screening with chest x-ray. Uninsured and Medicaid patients usually lack access to this hospital-based screening test because of geographic and socioeconomic factors. We hypothesized that a mobile screening unit would improve access and confer the benefits demonstrated by the NLST to this underserved group, which is most at risk of lung cancer deaths. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We created a mobile unit by building a Samsung BodyTom portable 32-slice low-dose CT scanner into a 35-foot coach; it delivers high-quality images for both soft tissue and bone and includes a waiting area and high-speed wireless internet connection for fast image transfer. The unit was extensively tested to show robustness and stability of mobile equipment. This project was designed to screen uninsured and underinsured patients, otherwise with eligibility criteria identical to that of the National Lung Screening Trial, with the only difference being exclusion of patients eligible for Medicare (which provides financial coverage for CT-based lung cancer screening). RESULTS: We screened 550 patients (20% black, 3% Hispanic, 70% rural) with a male-to-female ratio of 1.1:1, median age 61 years (range, 55-64), and found 12 lung cancers at initial screen (2.2%), including 6 at stage I-II (58% of total lung cancers early stage) and 38 Lung-RADS 4 (highly suspicious) lesions that are being followed closely. Incidental findings included nonlung cancers and coronary artery disease. DISCUSSION: In this initial pilot study, using the first mobile low-dose whole body CT screening unit in the U.S., the initial cancer detection rate is comparable to that reported in the NLST, despite excluding patients over the age of 64 years who have Medicare coverage, but with marked improvement of screening rates specifically in underserved sociodemographic, racial, and ethnic groups and with better outcomes than conventionally found in the underserved and at lower cost per case. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This study shows clearly that a mobile low-dose CT scanning unit allows effective lung cancer screening for underserved populations, such as impoverished African Americans, Hispanics, Native Americans, or isolated rural groups, and has a pick-up rate of 1% for early stage disease. If confirmed in a planned randomized trial, this will be policy changing, as these groups usually present with advanced disease; this approach will produce better survival data at lower cost per case.

Survival disparities by Medicaid status: an analysis of 8 cancers.

BACKGROUND: A study was undertaken to compare survival and 5-year mortality by Medicaid status in adults diagnosed with 8 select cancers. METHODS: Linking records from the Ohio Cancer Incidence Surveillance System (OCISS) with Ohio Medicaid enrollment data, the authors identified Medicaid and non-Medicaid patients aged 15 to 54 years and diagnosed with the following incident cancers in the years 1996-2002: cancer of the testis; Hodgkin and non-Hodgkin lymphoma; early stage melanoma, colon, lung, and bladder cancer; and pediatric malignancies (n = 12,703). Medicaid beneficiaries were placed in the pre-diagnosis group if they were enrolled in Medicaid at least 3 months before cancer diagnosis, and in the peri/post-diagnosis group if they enrolled in Medicaid upon or after being diagnosed with cancer. The authors also linked the OCISS with death certificates and data from the US Census. By using Cox and logistic regression analysis, they examined the association between Medicaid status and survival and 5-year mortality, respectively, after adjusting for patient covariates. RESULTS: Nearly 11% of the study population were Medicaid beneficiaries. Of those, 45% were classified in the peri/post-diagnosis group. Consistent with higher mortality, findings from the Cox regression model indicated that compared with non-Medicaid, patients in the Medicaid pre-diagnosis and peri/post-diagnosis groups experienced unfavorable survival outcomes (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR], 1.52; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.27-1.82 and AHR, 2.01; 95% CI, 1.70-2.38, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Medicaid status was associated with unfavorable survival, even after adjusting for confounders. The findings reflect the vulnerability of Medicaid beneficiaries and possible inadequacies in the process of care.

American society of clinical oncology policy statement: disparities in cancer care.

The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) has embarked on an intensive campaign to integrate elimination of cancer health disparities into the Society's overall mission and activities. Key components of this commitment are enhancing awareness of disparities; improving access to care; and supporting research on health disparities. Major objectives are to advance the education of the oncology community in the care of patients from underserved and minority populations; increase the diversity of the clinical oncology workforce as a requisite to improving access to cancer care for the underserved; and support research in the area of health disparities. Racial and ethnic disparities in cancer care are an issue of critical importance to ASCO, the oncology community, and our society at large. The health disparities initiative outlined herein enunciates ASCO's dedication to eliminating disparities in cancer care and discusses our multipronged approach for addressing disparities within the clinical oncology community. ASCO is committed to collaborating with the diverse community of stakeholders to undertake the following: develop policies to guarantee equal access to quality health care, with special emphasis on reducing insurance and economic barriers to cancer care; develop a comprehensive plan to increase awareness of racial and ethnic disparities in cancer care; execute a strategy to enhance the supply of minority physicians and to improve the training of the oncology workforce to meet the needs of racially and ethnically diverse cancer patients; increase prioritization of public and private research on cancer care disparities; develop mechanisms to increase participation of racially and ethnically diverse populations in cancer clinical trials; and support initiatives to enhance patients' involvement in their cancer care.

Clinical cancer advances 2008: major research advances in cancer treatment, prevention, and screening--a report from the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

A message from ASCO'S president: Nearly 40 years ago, President Richard Nixon signed the National Cancer Act, mobilizing the country's resources to make the "conquest of cancer a national crusade." That declaration led to a major investment in cancer research that has significantly improved cancer prevention, treatment, and survival. As a result, two thirds of people diagnosed with cancer today will live at least 5 years after diagnosis, compared with just half in the 1970s. In addition, there are now more than 12 million cancer survivors in the United States--up from 3 million in 1971. Scientifically, we have never been in a better position to advance cancer treatment. Basic scientific research, fueled in recent years by the tools of molecular biology, has generated unprecedented knowledge of cancer development. We now understand many of the cellular pathways that can lead to cancer. We have learned how to develop drugs that block those pathways; increasingly, we know how to personalize therapy to the unique genetics of the tumor and the patient. Yet in 2008, 1.4 million people in the United States will still be diagnosed with cancer, and more than half a million will die as a result of the disease. Some cancers remain stubbornly resistant to treatment, whereas others cannot be detected until they are in their advanced, less curable stages. Biologically, the cancer cell is notoriously wily; each time we throw an obstacle in its path, it finds an alternate route that must then be blocked. To translate our growing basic science knowledge into better treatments for patients, a new national commitment to cancer research is urgently needed. However, funding for cancer research has stagnated. The budgets of the National Institutes of Health and the National Cancer Institute have failed to keep pace with inflation, declining up to 13% in real terms since 2004. Tighter budgets reduce incentives to support high-risk research that could have the largest payoffs. The most significant clinical research is conducted increasingly overseas. In addition, talented young physicians in the United States, seeing less opportunity in the field of oncology, are choosing other specialties instead. Although greater investment in research is critical, the need for new therapies is only part of the challenge. Far too many people in the United States lack access to the treatments that already exist, leading to unnecessary suffering and death. Uninsured cancer patients are significantly more likely to die than those with insurance, racial disparities in cancer incidence and mortality remain stark, and even insured patients struggle to keep up with the rapidly rising cost of cancer therapies. As this annual American Society of Clinical Oncology report of the major cancer research advances during the last year demonstrates, we are making important progress against cancer. But sound public policies are essential to accelerate that progress. In 2009, we have an opportunity to reinvest in cancer research, and to support policies that will help ensure that every individual in the United States receives potentially life-saving cancer prevention, early detection, and treatment. Sincerely, Richard L. Schilsky, MD President American Society of Clinical Oncology.