Hepatitis C Virus Screening: Factors Associated With Test Completion in a Large Academic Health Care System.

OBJECTIVES: In 2012, onetime hepatitis C virus (HCV) screening was recommended for all baby boomers (people born during 1945-1965) in the United States, but only 4.0%-12.9% of baby boomers have ever had a screening ordered by a health care provider. This study examined the HCV screening prevalence among adult patients in a large academic health care system and assessed factors associated with the completion of screening when ordered for baby boomers. METHODS: We defined HCV screening completion as the completion of an HCV antibody test when it was ordered. We used electronic health records to examine HCV screening completion rates among adults (N = 106 630) from August 1, 2015, through July 31, 2020, by birth cohort. Among baby boomers whose health care provider ordered HCV screening, we examined frequency and percentages of HCV screening completion by sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. We conducted univariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses to assess factors associated with HCV screening completion among baby boomers. RESULTS: During the study period, 73.0% of baby boomers completed HCV screening when it was ordered. HCV completion did not differ by sex or race and ethnicity among baby boomers. Baby boomers with Medicare supplemental health insurance compared with commercial health insurance (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.87) and those seeing only advanced practice professionals compared with specialty care physicians (aOR = 2.24) were more likely to complete HCV screening when it was ordered. CONCLUSIONS: Noncompletion of HCV screening is one of many barriers along the HCV treatment continuum. Our findings suggest a need for interventions targeting systems, health care providers, and patients to increase HCV screening rates in the United States.

Trends in Insurance Status during Initial Presentation of Testicular Carcinoma: Examining Health Outcomes and Implications of Health Reform for Young Adults in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: We evaluated trends in insurance status, and assessed socioeconomic factors associated with clinically metastatic testicular cancer presentation and potential barriers to treatment in the United States. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was queried for patients with testicular germ cell tumors diagnosed from 2004 to 2014. Temporal trends and forecast of insurance status were examined in the years before and after the ACA (Affordable Care Act) was enacted. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess predictors of clinically metastatic presentation. RESULTS: A total of 58,348 patients were identified with 37.95% presenting with clinically metastatic disease. The uninsured rate remained relatively unchanged during the years before and after the ACA was enacted (11.7% vs 11.9%, respectively). Predictors for clinically metastatic presentation were Medicaid (OR 2.12, 95% CI 1.80-2.50), Medicare (OR 1.35, 95% CI 1.13-1.60) and uninsured status (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.22-1.64) compared to privately insured patients. A forecast model revealed no significant changes in the uninsured rate (11.58% to 11.60%) for 2015 through 2017. CONCLUSIONS: Socioeconomic disparities continue to be barriers for young adults presenting with testicular cancer in the United States. Longer prospective followup will be required to assess the impact of payer status with the reportedly increased health coverage fostered by the ACA.

A Cost-Effective Mindfulness Stress Reduction Program: A Randomized Control Trial for Breast Cancer Survivors.

Many breast cancer survivors continue to experience residual symptoms including anxiety, cognitive impairment, depression, fatigue, and pain. In this study, the cost-effectiveness of a Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction intervention for breast cancer survivors was examined. The cost of the program was assessed from the societal perspective, accounting for both direct medical and patient opportunity costs. The cost per quality-adjusted life year was relatively low compared to the cost-utility findings of other published breast cancer interventions. The program appears to provide for significantly improved health-related quality of life at a comparativelv low cost.

Predicting the risk of chemotherapy toxicity in older patients: the Chemotherapy Risk Assessment Scale for High-Age Patients (CRASH) score.

BACKGROUND: Tools are lacking to assess the individual risk of severe toxicity from chemotherapy. Such tools would be especially useful for older patients, who vary considerably in terms of health status and functional reserve. METHODS: The authors conducted a prospective, multicentric study of patients aged ≥70 years who were starting chemotherapy. Grade 4 hematologic (H) or grade 3/4 nonhematologic (NH) toxicity according to version 3.0 of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events was defined as severe. Twenty-four parameters were assessed. Toxicity of the regimen (Chemotox) was adjusted using an index to estimate the average per-patient risk of chemotherapy toxicity (the MAX2 index). In total, 562 patients were accrued, and 518 patients were evaluable and were split randomly (2:1 ratio) into a derivation cohort and a validation cohort. RESULTS: Severe toxicity was observed in 64% of patients. The Chemotherapy Risk Assessment Scale for High-Age Patients (CRASH) score was constructed along 2 subscores: H toxicity and NH toxicity. Predictors of H toxicity were lymphocytes, aspartate aminotransferase level, Instrumental Activities of Daily Living score, lactate dehydrogenase level, diastolic blood pressure, and Chemotox. The best model included the 4 latter predictors (risk categories: low, 7%; medium-low, 23%; medium-high, 54%; and high, 100%, respectively; P(trend) < .001). Predictors of NH toxicity were hemoglobin, creatinine clearance, albumin, self-rated health, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance, Mini-Mental Status score, Mini-Nutritional Assessment score, and Chemotox. The 4 latter predictors provided the best model (risk categories: 33%, 46%, 67%, and 93%, respectively; P(trend) < .001). The combined risk categories were 50%, 58%, 77%, and 79%, respectively; P(trend) < .001). Bootstrap internal validation and independent sample validation demonstrated stable risk categorization and P(trend) < .001. CONCLUSIONS: The CRASH score distinguished several risk levels of severe toxicity. The split score discriminated better than the combined score. To the authors' knowledge, this is the first score systematically integrating both chemotherapy and patient risk for older patients and has a potential for future clinical application.