The Cancer Financial Experience (CAFÉ) study: randomized controlled trial of a financial navigation intervention to address cancer-related financial hardship.

BACKGROUND: There is an urgent need for evidence on how interventions can prevent or mitigate cancer-related financial hardship. Our objectives are to compare self-reported financial hardship, quality of life, and health services use between patients receiving a financial navigation intervention versus a comparison group at 12 months follow-up, and to assess patient-level factors associated with dose received of a financial navigation intervention. METHODS: The Cancer Financial Experience (CAFÉ) study is a multi-site randomized controlled trial (RCT) with individual-level randomization. Participants will be offered either brief (one financial navigation cycle, Arm 2) or extended (three financial navigation cycles, Arm 3) financial navigation. The intervention period for both Arms 2 and 3 is 6 months. The comparison group (Arm 1) will receive enhanced usual care. The setting for the CAFÉ study is the medical oncology and radiation oncology clinics at two integrated health systems in the Pacific Northwest. Inclusion criteria includes age 18 or older with a recent cancer diagnosis and visit to a study clinic as identified through administrative data. Outcomes will be assessed at 12-month follow-up. Primary outcomes are self-reported financial distress and health-related quality of life. Secondary outcomes are delayed or foregone care; receipt of medical financial assistance; and account delinquency. A mixed methods exploratory analysis will investigate factors associated with total intervention dose received. DISCUSSION: The CAFÉ study will provide much-needed early trial evidence on the impact of financial navigation in reducing cancer-related financial hardship. It is theory-informed, clinic-based, aligned with patient preferences, and has been developed following preliminary qualitative studies and stakeholder input. By design, it will provide prospective evidence on the potential benefits of financial navigation on patient-relevant cancer outcomes. The CAFÉ trial's strengths include its broad inclusion criteria, its equity-focused sampling plan, its novel intervention developed in partnership with clinical and operations stakeholders, and mixed methods secondary analyses related to intervention dose offered and dose received. The resulting analytic dataset will allow for rich mixed methods analysis and provide critical information related to implementation of the intervention should it prove effective. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05018000 . August 23, 2021.

Feasibility and Assessment of a Cascade Traceback Screening Program (FACTS): Protocol for a Multisite Study to Implement and Assess an Ovarian Cancer Traceback Cascade Testing Program.

Ovarian cancer (OVCA) patients may carry genes conferring cancer risk to biological family; however, fewer than one-quarter of patients receive genetic testing. "Traceback" cascade testing -outreach to potential probands and relatives-is a possible solution. This paper outlines a funded study (U01 CA240747-01A1) seeking to determine a Traceback program's feasibility, acceptability, effectiveness, and costs. This is a multisite prospective observational feasibility study across three integrated health systems. Informed by the Conceptual Model for Implementation Research, we will outline, implement, and evaluate the outcomes of an OVCA Traceback program. We will use standard legal research methodology to review genetic privacy statutes; engage key stakeholders in qualitative interviews to design communication strategies; employ descriptive statistics and regression analyses to evaluate the site differences in genetic testing and the OVCA Traceback testing; and assess program outcomes at the proband, family member, provider, system, and population levels. This study aims to determine a Traceback program's feasibility and acceptability in a real-world context. It will account for the myriad factors affecting implementation, including legal issues, organizational- and individual-level barriers and facilitators, communication issues, and program costs. Project results will inform how health care providers and systems can develop effective, practical, and sustainable Traceback programs.

Association of the Intensity of Diagnostic Evaluation With Outcomes in Incidentally Detected Lung Nodules.

Importance: Whether guideline-concordant lung nodule evaluations lead to better outcomes remains unknown. Objective: To examine the association between the intensity of lung nodule diagnostic evaluations and outcomes, safety, and health expenditures. Design, Setting, and Participants: This comparative effectiveness research study analyzed health plan enrollees at Kaiser Permanente Washington in Seattle, Washington, and Marshfield Clinic in Marshfield, Wisconsin, with an incidental lung nodule detected between January 1, 2005, and December 31, 2015. Included patients were 35 years or older, had no high suspicion of infection, had no history of malignant neoplasm, and had no evidence of advanced lung cancer on nodule detection. Data analysis was conducted from January 7 to August 19, 2020. Exposures: With the 2005 Fleischner Society guidelines (selected for their applicability to the time frame under investigation) as the comparator, 2 other intensities of lung nodule evaluation were defined. Guideline-concordant evaluation followed the guidelines. Less intensive evaluation was the absence of recommended testing, longer-than-recommended surveillance intervals, or less invasive testing than recommended. More intensive evaluation consisted of testing when the guidelines recommended no further testing, shorter-than-recommended surveillance intervals, or more invasive testing than recommended. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was the proportion of patients with lung cancer who had stage III or IV disease, radiation exposure, procedure-related adverse events, and health expenditures 2 years after nodule detection. Results: Among the 5057 individuals included in this comparative effectiveness research study, 1925 (38%) received guideline-concordant, 1863 (37%) less intensive, and 1269 (25%) more intensive diagnostic evaluations. The entire cohort comprised 2786 female patients (55%), and the mean (SD) age was 67 (13) years. Adjusted analyses showed that compared with guideline-concordant evaluations, less intensive evaluations were associated with fewer procedure-related adverse events (risk difference [RD], -5.9%; 95% CI, -7.2% to -4.6%), lower mean radiation exposure (-9.5 milliSieverts [mSv]; 95% CI, -10.3 mSv to -8.7 mSv), and lower mean health expenditures (-$10 916; 95% CI, -$16 112 to -$5719); no difference in stage III or IV disease was found among patients diagnosed with lung cancer (RD, 4.6%; 95% CI, -22% to +31%). More intensive evaluations were associated with more procedure-related adverse events (RD, +8.1%; 95% CI, +5.6% to +11%), higher mean radiation exposure (+6.8 mSv; 95% CI, +5.8 mSv to +7.8 mSv), and higher mean health expenditures ($20 132; 95% CI, +$14 398 to +$25 868); no difference in stage III or IV disease was observed (RD, -0.5%; 95% CI, -28% to +27%). Conclusions and Relevance: This study found inconclusive evidence of an association between less intensive diagnostic evaluations and more advanced stage at lung cancer diagnosis compared with guideline-concordant care; higher intensities of diagnostic evaluations were associated with greater procedural complications, radiation exposure, and expenditures. These findings underscore the need for more evidence on better ways to evaluate lung nodules and to avoid unnecessarily intensive diagnostic evaluations of lung nodules.

Natural Language Processing-Identified Problem Opioid Use and Its Associated Health Care Costs.

Use of prescription opioids and problems of abuse and addiction have increased over the past decade. Claims-based studies have documented substantial economic burden of opioid abuse. This study utilized electronic health record (EHR) data to identify chronic opioid therapy (COT) patients with problem opioid use (POU) and compared costs with those for COT patients without POU. This study utilized EHR and claims data from an integrated health care system. Patients received COT (≥70 days' supply in ≥1 calendar quarter, 2006-2012). Natural language processing (NLP) identified notations of opioid addiction, abuse, misuse, or overuse, and manual validation was performed. Cases had evidence of POU (index = first POU notation), and controls, sampled 9:1, did not. Health care resource utilization was measured and costs estimated using Medicare reimbursement rates. A longitudinal analysis of costs was conducted using generalized estimating equations. Adjusted analyses controlled for baseline age, gender, region, specific comorbidities, and a comorbidity index. The analysis population included 1,125 cases and 10,128 controls. Unadjusted costs were higher for cases in all three years. After controlling for covariates, total costs remained higher in cases and were significantly higher in the first year of follow-up ($38,064 vs. $31,674, P = .0048). The largest cost difference was observed in the first month of follow-up. COT patients with POU experienced significantly higher costs compared with COT patients without POU in the first year of follow-up. The greatest difference in costs was observed around identification of POU.

Advanced imaging among health maintenance organization enrollees with cancer.

PURPOSE: Fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare expenditures for advanced imaging studies (defined as computed tomography [CT], magnetic resonance imaging [MRI], positron emission tomography [PET] scans, and nuclear medicine studies [NM]) rapidly increased in the past two decades for patients with cancer. Imaging rates are unknown for patients with cancer, whether under or over age 65 years, in health maintenance organizations (HMOs), where incentives may differ. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Incident cases of breast, colorectal, lung, prostate, leukemia, and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) cancers diagnosed in 2003 and 2006 from four HMOs in the Cancer Research Network were used to determine 2-year overall mean imaging counts and average total imaging costs per HMO enrollee by cancer type for those under and over age 65. RESULTS: There were 44,446 incident cancer patient cases, with a median age of 75 (interquartile range, 71-81), and 454,029 imaging procedures were performed. The mean number of images per patient increased from 7.4 in 2003 to 12.9 in 2006. Rates of imaging were similar across age groups, with the exception of greater use of echocardiograms and NM studies in younger patients with breast cancer and greater use of PET among younger patients with lung cancer. Advanced imaging accounted for approximately 41% of all imaging, or approximately 85% of the $8.7 million in imaging expenditures. Costs were nearly $2,000 per HMO enrollee; costs for younger patients with NHL, leukemia, and lung cancer were nearly $1,000 more in 2003. CONCLUSION: Rates of advanced imaging appear comparable among FFS and HMO participants of any age with these six cancers.