Medical Financial Hardship Intensity and Financial Sacrifice Associated with Cancer in the United States.

BACKGROUND: With rising costs of cancer care, this study aims to estimate the prevalence of, and factors associated with, medical financial hardship intensity and financial sacrifices due to cancer in the United States. METHODS: We identified 963 cancer survivors from the 2016 Medical Expenditures Panel Survey - Experiences with Cancer. Medical financial hardship due to cancer was measured in material (e.g., filed for bankruptcy), psychological (e.g., worry about paying bills and finances), and behavioral (e.g., delaying or forgoing care due to cost) domains. Nonmedical financial sacrifices included changes in spending and use of savings. Multivariable logistic models were used to identify characteristics associated with hardship intensity and sacrifices stratified by age group (18-64 or 65+ years). RESULTS: Among cancer survivors ages 18 to 64 years, 53.6%, 28.4%, and 11.4% reported at least one, two, or all three domains of hardship, respectively. Among survivors ages 65+ years, corresponding percentages were 42.0%, 12.7%, and 4.0%, respectively. Moreover, financial sacrifices due to cancer were more common in survivors ages 18 to 64 years (54.2%) than in survivors 65+ years (38.4%; P < 0.001). Factors significantly associated with hardship intensity in multivariable analyses included low income and educational attainment, racial/ethnic minority, comorbidity, lack of private insurance coverage, extended employment change, and recent cancer treatment. Most were also significantly associated with financial sacrifices. CONCLUSIONS: Medical financial hardship and financial sacrifices are substantial among cancer survivors in the United States, particularly for younger survivors. IMPACT: Efforts to mitigate financial hardship for cancer survivors are warranted, especially for those at high risk.

The social and economic toll of cancer survivorship: a complex web of financial sacrifice.

PURPOSE: To assess the financial outcomes and associated social and economic effects on cancer survivors and their families. METHODS: We assessed the responses of 1656 cancer survivors to a survey with both closed- and open-ended questions about cancer-related financial sacrifices they and their family experienced and evaluated differences in financial sacrifice by reported levels of cancer-related debt. RESULTS: The most commonly reported financial sacrifices included cutbacks on household budgets, challenges with health care insurance and costs, career/self-advancement constraints, reduction/depletion of assets, and inability to pay bills. Survivors who incurred $10,000 or more in debt were significantly more likely to report social and economic impacts, including housing concerns and strained relationships. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis demonstrates both the frequency with which cancer survivors and families must make financial sacrifices as a result of their cancer, and the variety of forms that this sacrifice can take, even for individuals who have health insurance. The many types of financial hardship create challenges that are unique to each survivor and family. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Interventions that allow for personalized assistance with the specific financial and social needs of cancer survivors and their families have the potential to address a critical aspect of the long-term wellbeing of this important population.

Comparison of Comorbid Medical Conditions in the National Cancer Database and the SEER-Medicare Database.

BACKGROUND: Physicians routinely factor comorbidities into diagnostic and treatment decisions. Analyses of treatment patterns and outcomes using the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB) usually adjust for comorbidities; however, the completeness of comorbidity ascertainment in the NCDB has never been assessed. We compared the prevalence of comorbidities captured in the NCDB and Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare among female breast, non-small-cell lung, and colorectal cancer patients aged ≥66. METHODS: In the NCDB, ten fields were searched for comorbidities. In the SEER-Medicare dataset, Medicare claims were used to identify comorbidities for two time periods: 12 months prior to diagnosis (Prior) and Index claim alone. Chi-square tests were used to compare comorbidity prevalence using propensity score-matched subsamples from each dataset. Kaplan-Meier survival analyses by Charlson-Deyo comorbidity score and data source were conducted. RESULTS: Comorbidity prevalence in NCDB did not differ significantly from that identified in SEER-Medicare Index claims across all three cancer sites, except for congestive heart failure, chronic pulmonary disease, and renal disease. However, when compared to the prevalence identified through SEER-Medicare Prior claims, comorbidity prevalence in the NCDB was lower. Overall survival rates by NCDB comorbidity scores were nearly identical to those based on SEER-Medicare Index claims but were lower than those based on SEER-Medicare Prior claims, particularly in higher comorbidity score categories. CONCLUSIONS: The study found overall similarity of comorbidity prevalence between NCDB and SEER-Medicare Index claims, but much less similarity between NCDB and SEER-Medicare Prior claims. Future researchers should understand the limitation of comorbidities ascertained in the NCDB and interpret results accordingly.

For Working-Age Cancer Survivors, Medical Debt And Bankruptcy Create Financial Hardships.

The rising medical costs associated with cancer have led to considerable financial hardship for patients and their families in the United States. Using data from the LIVESTRONG 2012 survey of 4,719 cancer survivors ages 18-64, we examined the proportions of survivors who reported going into debt or filing for bankruptcy as a result of cancer, as well as the amount of debt incurred. Approximately one-third of the survivors had gone into debt, and 3 percent had filed for bankruptcy. Of those who had gone into debt, 55 percent incurred obligations of $10,000 or more. Cancer survivors who were younger, had lower incomes, and had public health insurance were more likely to go into debt or file for bankruptcy, compared to those who were older, had higher incomes, and had private insurance, respectively. Future longitudinal population-based studies are needed to improve understanding of financial hardship among US working-age cancer survivors throughout the cancer care trajectory and, ultimately, to help stakeholders develop evidence-based interventions and policies to reduce the financial hardship of cancer.

Access to Cancer Care and General Medical Care Services Among Cancer Survivors in the United States: An Analysis of 2011 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey Data.

OBJECTIVES: Cancer survivors require appropriate health care to manage their unique health needs. This study describes access to cancer care among cancer survivors in the United States and compares access to general medical care between cancer survivors and people who have no history of cancer. METHODS: We assessed access to general medical care using the core 2011 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS). We assessed access to cancer care using the MEPS Experiences With Cancer Survey. We used multivariable logistic regression to compare access to general medical care among 2 groups of cancer survivors (those who reported having access to all necessary cancer care [n = 1088] and those who did not [n = 70]) with self-reported access to general medical care among people who had no history of cancer (n = 22 434). RESULTS: Of the 1158 cancer survivors, 70 (6.0%) reported that they did not receive all necessary cancer care. Adjusted analyses found that cancer survivors who reported not receiving all necessary cancer care were also less likely to report receiving general medical care (78.0%) than cancer survivors who reported having access to necessary cancer care (87.1%) and people who had no history of cancer (87.8%). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides nationally representative data on the proportion of cancer survivors who have access to necessary cancer care and yields insight into factors that impede survivors' access to both cancer care and general medical care. This study is a reference for future work on access to care.

Financial Hardship Associated With Cancer in the United States: Findings From a Population-Based Sample of Adult Cancer Survivors.

PURPOSE: To estimate the prevalence of financial hardship associated with cancer in the United States and identify characteristics of cancer survivors associated with financial hardship. METHODS: We identified 1,202 adult cancer survivors diagnosed or treated at ≥ 18 years of age from the 2011 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey Experiences With Cancer questionnaire. Material financial hardship was measured by ever (1) borrowing money or going into debt, (2) filing for bankruptcy, (3) being unable to cover one's share of medical care costs, or (4) making other financial sacrifices because of cancer, its treatment, and lasting effects of treatment. Psychological financial hardship was measured as ever worrying about paying large medical bills. We examined factors associated with any material or psychological financial hardship using separate multivariable logistic regression models stratified by age group (18 to 64 and ≥ 65 years). RESULTS: Material financial hardship was more common in cancer survivors age 18 to 64 years than in those ≥ 65 years of age (28.4% v 13.8%; P < .001), as was psychological financial hardship (31.9% v 14.7%, P < .001). In adjusted analyses, cancer survivors age 18 to 64 years who were younger, female, nonwhite, and treated more recently and who had changed employment because of cancer were significantly more likely to report any material financial hardship. Cancer survivors who were uninsured, had lower family income, and were treated more recently were more likely to report psychological financial hardship. Among cancer survivors ≥ 65 years of age, those who were younger were more likely to report any financial hardship. CONCLUSION: Cancer survivors, especially the working-age population, commonly experience material and psychological financial hardship.

Healthcare Expenditure Burden Among Non-elderly Cancer Survivors, 2008-2012.

INTRODUCTION: There is increasing concern regarding the financial burden of cancer on patients and their families. This study presents nationally representative estimates of annual out-of-pocket (OOP) burden among non-elderly cancer survivors and assesses the association between high OOP burden and access to care and preventive service utilization. METHODS: Using the 2008-2012 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, 4,271 cancer survivors and 96,780 individuals without a history of cancer were identified, all aged 18-64 years. High annual OOP burden was defined as spending >20% of annual family income on OOP healthcare costs. Associations between high OOP burden and access to care were evaluated with multivariable logistic regression. Analyses were conducted in 2015. RESULTS: Compared with individuals without a cancer history, cancer survivors were more likely to report a high OOP burden (4.3% vs 3.4%, p=0.009) in adjusted analyses. High OOP burden was more common among cancer survivors who were poor (18.4%), with either public insurance (7.9%) or uninsured (5.7%), and not working (10.2%). Among cancer survivors, high OOP burden was associated with being unable to obtain necessary medical care (19.2% vs 12.5%, p=0.002), delaying necessary medical care (21.6% vs 13.8%, p=0.002), and lower breast cancer screening rates among age-appropriate women (63.2% vs 75.9%, p=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: High OOP burden is more common among adults with a cancer history than those without a cancer history. High OOP burden was associated with being unable to obtain necessary medical care, delaying necessary medical care, and lower breast cancer screening rates among women.

Utilization and Outcomes of BRCA Genetic Testing and Counseling in a National Commercially Insured Population: The ABOUT Study.

IMPORTANCE: BRCA genetic testing has substantial public health impact, yet little is known of the real-world experiences of the more than 100 000 Americans undergoing testing annually. OBJECTIVE: To identify factors associated with use of BRCA testing, assess whether delivery of genetic counseling and testing services adheres to professional guidelines, and measure the impact on patient-reported outcomes. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The American BRCA Outcomes and Utilization of Testing (ABOUT) Study analyzed data from a consecutive national series of 11 159 women whose clinicians ordered BRCA testing between December 2011 and December 2012. Aetna mailed recruitment information across the United States to commercial health plan members whose clinicians had ordered BRCA testing. A total of 3874 women (34.7%) completed questionnaires. Deidentified clinician-reported data from all respondents and a random sample of 2613 nonrespondents were also analyzed. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The proportion of eligible participants who met testing criteria and respondents' report of receiving genetic counseling by a genetics clinician and its association with BRCA knowledge, understanding, and satisfaction were assessed. RESULTS: Among 3628 women respondents whose clinicians ordered comprehensive BRCA testing, most were white non-Hispanic (2502 [69.0%]), college educated (2953 [81.4%]), married (2751 [75.8%]), and had higher incomes (2011 [55.4%]). Approximately 16.4% (596) did not meet testing criteria. Mutations were identified in 161 (5.3%) of these women who received comprehensive testing. Only 1334 (36.8%) reported receiving genetic counseling from a genetics clinician prior to testing; the lowest rates (130 [12.3%]) were among patients of obstetrician/gynecologists. The most commonly reported reason for not receiving this clinical service was lack of clinician recommendation. Those who received it demonstrated greater knowledge about BRCA (mean score difference adjusted for demographics and clinician specialty, ß = 0.99 [95% CI, 0.83-1.14]; P < .001) and expressed greater understanding (ß = 0.47 [95% CI, 0.41-0.54]; P < .001) and satisfaction (ß = 2.21 [95% CI, 1.60-2.81]; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Despite improved patient knowledge, understanding, and satisfaction among patients who receive genetic counseling provided by a genetics clinician, as well as multiple guidelines emphasizing the importance of genetic counseling, most US women undergoing BRCA genetic testing do not receive this clinical service. Lack of physician recommendation is the most commonly reported reason. These findings demonstrate important gaps in clinical genetics services. Recently mandated coverage of genetic counseling services as a preventive service without patient cost sharing should contribute to improving clinical genetics services and associated outcomes in the future.

Utilization of surveillance after polypectomy in the medicare population--a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Surveillance in patients with previous polypectomy was underused in the Medicare population in 1994. This study investigates whether expansion of Medicare reimbursement for colonoscopy screening in high-risk individuals has reduced the inappropriate use of surveillance. METHODS: We used Kaplan-Meier analysis to estimate time to surveillance and polyp recurrence rates for Medicare beneficiaries with a colonoscopy with polypectomy between 1998 and 2003 who were followed through 2008 for receipt of surveillance colonoscopy. Generalized Estimating Equations were used to estimate risk factors for: 1) failing to undergo surveillance and 2) polyp recurrence among these individuals. Analyses were stratified into three 2-year cohorts based on baseline colonoscopy date. RESULTS: Medicare beneficiaries undergoing a colonoscopy with polypectomy in the 1998-1999 (n = 4,136), 2000-2001 (n = 3,538) and 2002-2003 (n = 4,655) cohorts had respective probabilities of 30%, 26% and 20% (p<0.001) of subsequent surveillance events within 3 years. At the same time, 58%, 52% and 45% (p<0.001) of beneficiaries received a surveillance event within 5 years. Polyp recurrence rates after 5 years were 36%, 30% and 26% (p<0.001) respectively. Older age (≥ 70 years), female gender, later cohort (2000-2001 & 2002-2003), and severe comorbidity were the most important risk factors for failure to undergo a surveillance event. Male gender and early cohort (1998-1999) were the most important risk factors for polyp recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: Expansion of Medicare reimbursement for colonoscopy screening in high-risk individuals has not reduced underutilization of surveillance in the Medicare population. It is important to take action now to improve this situation, because polyp recurrence is substantial in this population.

Medical costs and productivity losses of cancer survivors--United States, 2008-2011.

The number of persons in the United States with a history of cancer has increased from 3 million in 1971 to approximately 13.4 million in 2012, representing 4.6% of the population. Given the advances in early detection and treatment of cancer and the aging of the U.S. population, the number of cancer survivors is projected to increase by >30% during the next decade, to approximately 18 million. Cancer survivors face many challenges with medical care follow-up, managing the long-term and late effects of treatments, monitoring for recurrence, and an increased risk for additional cancers. These survivors also face economic challenges, including limitations in work and daily activities, obtaining health insurance coverage and accessing health care, and increasing medical care costs. To estimate annual medical costs and productivity losses among male and female cancer survivors and persons without a cancer history, CDC, along with other organizations, analyzed data from the 2008-2011 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS), sponsored by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. The results indicate that the economic burden of cancer survivorship is substantial among all survivors. For male cancer survivors, during 2008-2011, average annual medical costs and productivity losses resulting from health problems per person and adjusted to 2011 dollars were significantly higher among cancer survivors than among persons without a cancer history, by $4,187 and $1,459, respectively; for females, the estimated annual costs per person were $3,293 and $1,330 higher among cancer survivors than among persons without a cancer history, respectively. These findings suggest the need to develop and evaluate health and employment intervention programs aimed at improving outcomes for cancer survivors and their families.

Annual patient time costs associated with medical care among cancer survivors in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Although patient time costs are recommended for inclusion in cost-effectiveness analyses, these data are not routinely collected. We used nationally representative data and a medical service-based approach to estimate the annual patient time costs among cancer survivors. METHODS: We identified adult 6699 cancer survivors and 86,412 individuals without a cancer history ages 18 years or more from 2008-2011 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS). Service use was categorized as hospitalizations, emergency room use, provider visits, ambulatory surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation therapy. Service time estimates were applied to frequencies for each service category and the US median wage rate in 2011 was used to value time. We evaluated the association between cancer survivorship and service use frequencies and patient time costs with multivariable regression models, stratified by age group (18-64 and 65+ y). Sensitivity analyses evaluated different approaches for valuing time. RESULTS: Cancer survivors were more likely to have hospitalizations, emergency room visits, ambulatory surgeries, and provider visits in the past year than individuals without a cancer history in adjusted analyses (P<0.05). Annual patient time was higher for cancer survivors than individuals without a cancer history among those aged 18-64 years (30.2 vs. 13.6 h; P<0.001) and 65+ years (55.1 vs. 36.6 h; P<0.001), as were annual patient time costs (18-64 y: $500 vs. $226; P<0.001 and 65+ y: $913 vs. $607; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Cancer survivors had greater annual medical service use and patient time costs than individuals without a cancer history. This medical service-based approach for estimating annual time costs can also be applied to other conditions.

Association of reimbursement policy and urologists' characteristics with the use of medical androgen deprivation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Physician characteristics and changes in drug reimbursement rates have been shown to influence practice patterns regardless of clinical guidelines, patient, clinical, or sociodemographic factors. We concurrently examined the association between urologists׳ characteristics and non-evidence-based use of primary medical androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for clinically localized patients with prostate cancer, before and after the 2003 Medicare Modernization Act׳s reductions in ADT reimbursement rates. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare-linked database and the American Medical Association Physician Masterfile are used in a retrospective analysis of 12,255 patients diagnosed between 2001 and 2007 with clinical stage T1-T2, low- to intermediate-grade prostate cancer, and the 1,863 urologists who treated them. Logistic multilevel regression analyses are used to evaluate the association of urologists׳ characteristics on ADT use among patients within 6 months of diagnosis. RESULTS: Overall, 3,866 (32%) patients received non-evidence-based ADT. After adjusting for patient and urologist characteristics, patients treated by urologists with no medical school affiliations, compared with those treated by urologists with major medical school affiliations, are significantly more likely to receive non-evidence-based medical ADT (odds ratio = 2.35; 95% CI: 1.71-3.23; P<0.0001). Non-US-trained urologists are also more likely to prescribe non-evidence-based medical ADT (odds ratio = 1.64; 95% CI: 1.33-2.04; P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated by non-medical school-affiliated or non-US-trained urologists or both are significantly more likely to receive non-evidence-based ADT before and after the passage of the Medicare Modernization Act. Better strategies to encourage evidence-based ADT use on clinically localized patients with prostate cancer may be of benefit especially among non-medical school-affiliated or non-US-trained urologists or both.

Diagnosis date agreement between SEER and Medicare claims data: impact on treatment.

BACKGROUND: A prior assessment of concordance between the diagnosis month in SEER records and Medicare claims found reasonable agreement; however, no assessment of the impact of discordance on cancer treatment ascertainment was conducted. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the concordance between the SEER diagnosis date (Sdx) and Medicare claim-derived diagnosis date and the impact of discordance on identification of treatment received. METHODS: The first Medicare claim date with a cancer diagnosis (Mdx) was compared with the Sdx among patients diagnosed with breast, colorectal, or lung cancer. The Mdx was considered concordant with the Sdx if the Mdx was within 16 days. Claims within 4 months after both the Mdx and Sdx were examined to collect treatment information. Treatment rate agreement was measured by κ-statistics. RESULTS: Among 50,731 breast, 51,025 colorectal, and 61,384 lung cancer patients, the Sdx and Mdx were concordant in 79%, 86%, and 73% of cases, respectively. Most discordant Mdx cases were identified in the month after the SEER diagnosis month. A small proportion of cases (7%-12%) preceded the SEER diagnosis month. Agreement for receipt of surgery was very good across all 3 cancer sites (κ>0.88) and was excellent for radiation therapy (κ>0.96). CONCLUSIONS: Although most cases were concordant for both diagnosis date and treatment ascertainment, there was still a small proportion of cases discordant for both diagnosis date and treatment identification. This study underscores the importance of examining claims in the months preceding diagnosis in the SEER-Medicare dataset to ensure patients are appropriately selected for analysis.

Economic burden of cancer survivorship among adults in the United States.

PURPOSE: To present nationally representative estimates of the impact of cancer survivorship on medical expenditures and lost productivity among adults in the United States. METHODS: Using the 2008 to 2010 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, we identified 4,960 cancer survivors and 64,431 individuals without a history of cancer age ≥ 18 years. Direct medical costs were measured using annual health care expenditures and examined by source of payment and service type. Indirect morbidity costs were estimated from lost productivity as a result of employment disability, missed work days, and lost household productivity. We evaluated the economic burden of cancer survivorship by estimating excess costs among cancer survivors, stratified by time since diagnosis (recently diagnosed [≤ 1 year] and previously diagnosed [> 1 year]), compared with individuals without a history of cancer using multivariable regression models stratified by age (18 to 64 and ≥ 65 years), controlling for age, sex, race/ethnicity, education, and comorbidities. RESULTS: In 2008 to 2010, the annual excess economic burden of cancer survivorship among recently diagnosed cancer survivors was $16,213 per survivor age 18 to 64 years and $16,441 per survivor age ≥ 65 years. Among previously diagnosed cancer survivors, the annual excess burden was $4,427 per survivor age 18 to 64 years and $4,519 per survivor age ≥ 65 years. Excess medical expenditures composed the largest share of the economic burden among cancer survivors, particularly among those recently diagnosed. CONCLUSION: The economic impact of cancer survivorship is considerable and is also high years after a cancer diagnosis. Efforts to reduce the economic burden caused by cancer will be increasingly important given the growing population of cancer survivors.

Access to preventive health care for cancer survivors.

BACKGROUND: Access to health care, particularly effective primary and secondary preventive care, is critical for cancer survivors, in order to minimize the adverse sequelae of cancer and its treatment. PURPOSE: The goal of the study was to evaluate the association between cancer survivorship and access to primary and preventive health care. METHODS: Cancer survivors (n=4960) and individuals without a cancer history (n=64,431) aged ≥ 18 years, from the 2008-2010 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS), were evaluated. Multiple measures of access and preventive services use were compared. The association between cancer survivorship and access and preventive services was evaluated with multivariate logistic regression models, stratified by age group (18-64 years and ≥ 65 years), controlling for the effects of age, gender, race/ethnicity, education, marital status, and comorbidities. Data were analyzed in 2013. RESULTS: Cancer survivors aged ≥ 65 years had equivalent or greater access and preventive services use than individuals without a cancer history, in adjusted analyses. However, among those aged 18-64 years with private health insurance, cancer survivors were more likely than other individuals to have a usual source of care and to use preventive services, whereas uninsured or publicly insured cancer survivors were generally less likely to have a usual source of care and to use preventive services than were uninsured or publicly insured adults without a cancer history. CONCLUSIONS: Although access and preventive care use in cancer survivors is generally equivalent or greater compared to that of other individuals, disparities for uninsured and publicly insured cancer survivors aged 18-64 years suggest that improvements in survivor care are needed.

Determinants of the combined use of external beam radiotherapy and brachytherapy for low-risk, clinically localized prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer treatment choices have been shown to vary by physician and patient characteristics. For patients with low-risk, clinically localized prostate cancer, the authors examined the impact of their clinical, sociodemographic, and radiation oncologists' (RO) characteristics on the likelihood that the patients would receive combined external beam radiotherapy and brachytherapy, a treatment regimen that is at variance with clinical guidelines. METHODS: The Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER)-Medicare linked database and the American Medical Association Physician Masterfile were used in a retrospective analysis of 5531 patients with low-risk, clinically localized prostate cancer who were diagnosed between 2004 and 2007, and the 708 ROs who treated them. Hierarchical logistic regression analyses were used to evaluate the relationship between patient and RO characteristics and the use of combined therapy within 6 months of diagnosis. RESULTS: Overall, 356 patients (6.4%) received combined therapy. Nonclinical factors were found to be associated with combined therapy. After adjusting for patient and RO characteristics, the odds of receiving combined therapy for patients residing in Georgia were found to be significantly greater than for all other SEER regions. Black patients were significantly less likely to receive combined therapy (odds ratio, 0.62; 95% confidence interval, 0.40-0.96 [P= .03]) compared with white patients. In addition, ROs accounted for 36.6% of the variation in patients receiving combined therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Geographic and sociodemographic factors were found to be significantly associated with guideline-discordant combined therapy for patients diagnosed with low-risk, clinically localized prostate cancer. Which RO a patient consults is important in determining whether they receive combined therapy.

Association between the availability of medical oncologists and initiation of chemotherapy for patients with stage III colon cancer.

PURPOSE: Although the number of medical oncologists (MOs) has steadily increased over time, and adjuvant chemotherapy provides significant survival benefit for patients with stage III colon cancer, many patients still do not receive chemotherapy. Uneven geographic distribution of MOs may contribute to decreasing access to cancer care. This study explored the association of MO availability by hospital service area (HSA) of patient residence and access to chemotherapy treatment. METHODS: Using the linked SEER-Medicare database, the study identified 9,262 patients who were age ≥66 years and underwent colectomy for stage III colon cancer diagnosed from 2000 to 2005. MOs were identified by physician specialty codes. HSAs are geographic areas that are relatively self-contained with respect to routine hospital care. Multivariate logistic regression was used to investigate the association between MO availability by HSA of patient residence and initiation of chemotherapy. RESULTS: Within 3 months after colectomy, 5,622 patients (60.7%) initiated chemotherapy. Adjusting for clinical and patient characteristics, patients residing in an HSA with ≥ one MO had an increased likelihood of initiating chemotherapy within 3 months after colectomy compared with those living in areas with no MOs (one to two MOs: OR, 1.451 [P < .01]; three to eight MOs: OR, 1.497 [P < .01]; ≥ nine MOs: OR, 1.322 [P < .01]). CONCLUSION: Results suggest that the availability of ≥ one MO within the HSA in which a patient resides was associated with greater access to chemotherapy after surgery.