Geographic Accessibility and Completion of Initial Low-Dose CT-Based Lung Cancer Screening in an Urban Safety-Net Population.

BACKGROUND: Recent modifications to low-dose CT (LDCT)-based lung cancer screening guidelines increase the number of eligible individuals, particularly among racial and ethnic minorities. Because these populations disproportionately live in metropolitan areas, we analyzed the association between travel time and initial LDCT completion within an integrated, urban safety-net health care system. METHODS: Using Esri's StreetMap Premium, OpenStreetMap, and the r5r package in R, we determined projected private vehicle and public transportation travel times between patient residence and the screening facility for LDCT ordered in March 2017 through December 2022 at Parkland Memorial Hospital in Dallas, Texas. We characterized associations between travel time and LDCT completion in univariable and multivariable analyses. We tested these associations in a simulation of 10,000 permutations of private vehicle and public transportation distribution. RESULTS: A total of 2,287 patients were included in the analysis, of whom 1,553 (68%) completed the initial ordered LDCT. Mean age was 63 years, and 73% were underrepresented minorities. Median travel time from patient residence to the LDCT screening facility was 17 minutes by private vehicle and 67 minutes by public transportation. There was a small difference in travel time to the LDCT screening facility by public transportation for patients who completed LDCT versus those who did not (67 vs 66 min, respectively; P=.04) but no difference in travel time by private vehicle for these patients (17 min for both; P=.67). In multivariable analysis, LDCT completion was not associated with projected travel time to the LDCT facility by private vehicle (odds ratio, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.82-1.25) or public transportation (odds ratio, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.89-1.44). Similar results were noted across travel-type permutations. Black individuals were 29% less likely to complete LDCT screening compared with White individuals. CONCLUSIONS: In an urban population comprising predominantly underrepresented minorities, projected travel time is not associated with initial LDCT completion in an integrated health care system. Other reasons for differences in LDCT completion warrant investigation.

Reimbursement Matters: Overcoming Barriers to Clinical Trial Accrual.

BACKGROUND: Accrual to cancer clinical trials is suboptimal. Few data exist regarding whether financial reimbursement might increase accruals. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess perceptions about reimbursement to overcome barriers to trial accrual. RESEARCH DESIGN: This was a cross-sectional survey. SUBJECTS: Oncologists identified from the American Medical Association Physician Masterfile. MEASURES: We report descriptive statistics, associations of physician characteristics with perceptions of reimbursement, domains, and subthemes of free-text comments. RESULTS: Respondents (n=1030) were mostly medical oncologists (59.4%), ages 35-54 (67%), and male (75%). Overall, 30% reported discussing trials with >25% of patients. Barriers perceived were administrative/regulatory, physician/staff time, and eligibility criteria. National Cancer Institute cooperative group participants and practice owners were more likely to endorse higher reimbursement. Respondents indicated targeted reimbursement would help improve infrastructure, but also noted potential ethical problems with reimbursement for discussion (40.7%) and accrual (85.9%). Free-text comments addressed reimbursement sources, recipients, and concerns about the real and apparent conflict of interest. CONCLUSIONS: Though concerns about a potential conflict of interest remain paramount and must be addressed in any new system of reimbursement, oncologists believe reimbursement to enhance infrastructure could help overcome barriers to trial accrual.

Experience, Perceptions, and Recommendations Concerning COVID-19-Related Clinical Research Adjustments.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 public health emergency, the FDA and NIH altered clinical trial requirements to protect participants and manage study conduct. Given their detailed knowledge of research protocols and regular contact with patients, clinicians, and sponsors, clinical research professionals offer important perspectives on these changes. METHODS: We developed and distributed an anonymous survey assessing COVID-19-related clinical trial adjustment experiences, perceptions, and recommendations to Clinical Research Office personnel at the Harold C. Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center. Responses were compared using the Fisher exact test. RESULTS: A total of 94 of 109 contacted research personnel (87%) responded. Among these individuals, 58% had >5 years' professional experience in clinical research, and 56% had personal experience with a COVID-19-related change. Respondents perceived that these changes had a positive impact on patient safety; treatment efficacy; patient and staff experience; and communication with patients, investigators, and sponsors. More than 90% felt that positive changes should be continued after COVID-19. For remote consent, telehealth, therapy shipment, off-site diagnostics, and remote monitoring, individuals with personal experience with the specific change and individuals with >5 years' professional experience were numerically more likely to recommend continuing the adjustment, and these differences were significant for telehealth (P=.04) and therapy shipment (P=.02). CONCLUSIONS: Clinical research professionals perceive that COVID-19-related clinical trial adjustments positively impact multiple aspects of study conduct. Those with greatest experience-both specific to COVID-19-related changes and more generally-are more likely to recommend that these adjustments continue in the future.

Polypharmacy and patterns of prescription medication use among cancer survivors.

BACKGROUND: The population of cancer survivors is rapidly growing in the United States. Long-term and late effects of cancer, combined with the ongoing management of other chronic conditions, make survivors particularly vulnerable to polypharmacy and its adverse effects. In the current study, the authors examined patterns of prescription medication use and polypharmacy in a population-based sample of cancer survivors. METHODS: Using data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS), the authors matched cancer survivors (5216 survivors) with noncancer controls (19,588 controls) by age, sex, and survey year. Polypharmacy was defined as ≥5 unique medications. The authors estimated the percentage of respondents prescribed medications within therapeutic classes and total prescription expenditures. RESULTS: A higher percentage of cancer survivors were prescribed ≥5 unique medications (64.0%; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 62.3%-65.8%) compared with noncancer controls (51.5%; 95% CI, 50.4%-52.6%), including drugs with abuse potential. Across all therapeutic classes, a higher percentage of newly (≤1 year since diagnosis) and previously (>1 years since diagnosis) diagnosed survivors were prescribed medications compared with controls, with large differences observed with regard to central nervous system agents (65.8% [95% CI, 62.3%-69.3%] vs 57.4% [95% CI, 55.3%-59.5%] vs 46.0% [95% CI, 45.0%-46.9%]). Specifically, nearly 10% of survivors were prescribed benzodiazepines and/or opioids compared with approximately 5% of controls. Survivors had more than double the prescription expenditures (median of $1633 vs $784 among controls). Findings persisted across age and comorbidity categories. CONCLUSIONS: Cancer survivors were prescribed a higher number of unique medications, including drugs with abuse potential, thereby increasing their risk of adverse drug events, financial toxicity, poor adherence, and drug-drug interactions. Cancer 2018;124:2850-2857. © 2018 American Cancer Society.

Care coordination for complex cancer survivors in an integrated safety-net system: a study protocol.

BACKGROUND: The growing numbers of cancer survivors challenge delivery of high-quality survivorship care by healthcare systems. Innovative ways to improve care coordination for patients with cancer and multiple chronic conditions ("complex cancer survivors") are needed to achieve better care outcomes, improve patient experience of care, and lower cost. Our study, Project CONNECT, will adapt and implement three evidence-based care coordination strategies, shown to be effective for primary care conditions, among complex cancer survivors. Specifically, the purpose of this study is to: 1) Implement a system-level EHR-driven intervention for 500 complex cancer survivors at Parkland; 2) Test effectiveness of the strategies on system- and patient-level outcomes measured before and after implementation; and 3) Elucidate system and patient factors that facilitate or hinder implementation and result in differences in experiences of care coordination between complex patients with and without cancer. METHODS: Project CONNECT is a quasi-experimental implementation study among 500 breast and colorectal cancer survivors with at least one of the following chronic conditions: diabetes, hypertension, chronic lung disease, chronic kidney disease, or heart disease. We will implement three evidence-based care coordination strategies in a large, county integrated safety-net health system: 1) an EHR-driven registry to facilitate patient transitions between primary and oncology care; 2) co-locating a nurse practitioner trained in care coordination within a complex care team; 3) and enhancing teamwork through coaching. Segmented regression analysis will evaluate change in system-level (i.e. composite care quality score) and patient-level outcomes (i.e. self-reported care coordination). To evaluate implementation, we will merge quantitative findings with structured observations and physician and patient interviews. DISCUSSION: This study will result in an evaluation toolkit identifying key model elements, barriers, and facilitators that can be used to guide care coordination interventions in other safety-net settings. Because Parkland is a vanguard of safety-net healthcare nationally, findings will be widely applicable as other safety-nets move toward increased integration, enhanced EHR capability, and experience with growing patient diversity. Our proposal recognizes the complexity of interventions and scaffolds evidence-based strategies together to meet the needs of complex patients, systems of care, and service integration. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02943265 . Registered 24 October 2016.

Residential racial segregation and mortality among black, white, and Hispanic urban breast cancer patients in Texas, 1995 to 2009.

BACKGROUND: The authors investigated whether residential segregation (the degree to which racial/ethnic groups live separately from one another in a geographic area) 1) was associated with mortality among urban women with breast cancer, 2) explained racial/ethnic disparities in mortality, and 3) whether its association with mortality varied by race/ethnicity. METHODS: Using Texas Cancer Registry data, all-cause mortality and breast-cancer mortality were examined among 109,749 urban black, Hispanic, and white women aged ≥50 years who were diagnosed with breast cancer from 1995 to 2009. Racial (black) segregation and ethnic (Hispanic) segregation of patient's neighborhoods were measured and were compared with the larger metropolitan statistical area using the location quotient measure. Shared frailty Cox proportional hazard models were used to nest patients within residential neighborhoods (census tract) and were controlled for race/ethnicity, age, diagnosis year, tumor stage, grade, histology, neighborhood poverty, and county-level mammography availability. RESULTS: Greater black segregation and Hispanic segregation were adversely associated with cause-specific mortality and all-cause mortality. For example, in adjusted models, Hispanic segregation was associated with cause-specific mortality (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.24; 95% confidence interval, 1.05-1.46). Compared with whites, blacks had higher mortality for both outcomes, whereas Hispanics demonstrated equivalent (cause-specific) or lower (all-cause) mortality. Segregation did not explain racial/ethnic disparities in mortality. Within each race/ethnicity strata, segregation was either adversely associated with mortality or was not significant. CONCLUSIONS: Among urban women with breast cancer in Texas, segregation has an independent, adverse association with mortality, and the effect of segregation varies by patient race/ethnicity. The novel application of a small-area measure of relative racial segregation should be examined in other cancer types with documented racial/ethnic disparities across varied geographic areas.

Stigma among patients with lung cancer: a patient-reported measurement model.

BACKGROUND: Although stigma may have negative psychosocial and behavioral outcomes for patients with lung cancer, its measurement has been limited. A conceptual model of lung cancer stigma and a patient-reported outcome measure are needed to mitigate these sequelae. This study identified key stigma-related themes to provide a blueprint for item development through a thematic analysis of semi-structured interviews and focus groups with lung cancer patients. METHODS: Participants were recruited from two outpatient oncology clinics and included (i) 42 lung cancer patients who participated in individual interviews and (ii) 5 focus groups (inclusive of 23 new lung cancer patients). Never smokers, long-term quitters, recent quitters, and current smokers participated. Individual interviews facilitated theme development and a conceptual model of lung cancer stigma, whereas subsequent focus groups provided feedback on the conceptual model. Qualitative data analyses included iterative coding and validation with existing theory. RESULTS: Two main thematic elements emerged from interviews with lung cancer patients: perceived (felt) stigma and internalized (self) stigma. Discussions of perceived stigma were pervasive, whereas those of internalized stigma were more commonly endorsed among current and recently quit smokers. Participants also discussed maladaptive (e.g., decreased disclosure) and adaptive (e.g., increased advocacy) stigma-related consequences. CONCLUSIONS: Results indicate widespread acknowledgment of perceived stigma among lung cancer patients but varying degrees of internalized stigma and associated consequences. Next steps for patient-reported outcome measure development are item consolidation, item development, expert input, and cognitive interviews before field testing and psychometric analysis. Future work should address stigma-related consequences and interventions for reducing lung cancer stigma.

States' use of local population health data: comparing the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System and independent state health surveys.

OBJECTIVES: To identify and compare key features of independent comprehensive state health surveys (SHS) with those of the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) for addressing the need for statewide and local population health data. METHODS: We developed inclusion criteria, systematically collected information about federal and SHS that met these criteria, and obtained supplemental information from SHS leaders. RESULTS: We identified comprehensive independent SHS in 11 states and BRFSS surveys in all 50 states. The independent SHS meet important statewide and local data needs, filling 3 key health data gaps in the BRFSS: lack of adequate data on special populations such as children, lack of data on specific localities, and limited depth and scope of health topics surveyed on key issues such as health insurance coverage. Unlike BRFSS, independent SHS have limited comparability with each other. CONCLUSIONS: The BRFSS and independent SHS each meet some key state and local data needs but result in data gaps and inefficient use of resources. Surveys could more effectively and efficiently meet future needs for comparable data to monitor health care reform and address health disparities if they were coordinated across states and at the national, state, and local levels.

Assessing Barriers and Facilitators to Lung Cancer Screening: Initial Findings from a Patient Navigation Intervention.

Low-dose computed tomography-based lung cancer screening represents a complex clinical undertaking that could require multiple referrals, appointments, and time-intensive procedures. These steps may pose difficulties and raise concerns among patients, particularly minority, under-, and uninsured populations. The authors implemented patient navigation to identify and address these challenges. They conducted a pragmatic randomized controlled trial of telephone-based navigation for lung cancer screening in an integrated, urban safety-net health care system. Following standardized protocols, bilingual (Spanish and English) navigators educated, motivated, and empowered patients to traverse the health system. Navigators made systematic contact with patients, recording standardized call characteristics in a study-specific database. Call type, duration, and content were recorded. Univariable and multivariable multinomial logistic regression was performed to investigate associations between call characteristics and reported barriers. Among 225 patients (mean age 63 years, 46% female, 70% racial/ethnic minority) assigned navigation, a total of 559 barriers to screening were identified during 806 telephone calls. The most common barrier categories were personal (46%), provider (30%), and practical (17%). System (6%) and psychosocial (1%) barriers were described by English-speaking patients, but not by Spanish-speaking patients. Over the course of the lung cancer screening process, provider-related barriers decreased 80% (P = 0.008). The authors conclude that patients undergoing lung cancer screening frequently report personal and health care provider-related barriers to successful participation. Barrier types may differ among patient populations and over the course of the screening process. Further understanding of these concerns may increase screening uptake and adherence. Clinical Trial Registration number: (NCT02758054).

Colorectal Cancer Incidence, Inequalities, and Prevention Priorities in Urban Texas: Surveillance Study With the "surveil" Software Package.

BACKGROUND: Monitoring disease incidence rates over time with population surveillance data is fundamental to public health research and practice. Bayesian disease monitoring methods provide advantages over conventional methods including greater flexibility in model specification and the ability to conduct formal inference on model-derived quantities of interest. However, software platforms for Bayesian inference are often inaccessible to nonspecialists. OBJECTIVE: To increase the accessibility of Bayesian methods among health surveillance researchers, we introduce a Bayesian methodology and open source software package, surveil, for time-series modeling of disease incidence and mortality. Given case count and population-at-risk data, the software enables health researchers to draw inferences about underlying risk and derivative quantities including age-standardized rates, annual and cumulative percent change, and measures of inequality. METHODS: We specify a Poisson likelihood for case counts and model trends in log-risk using the first-difference (random-walk) prior. Models in the surveil R package were built using the Stan modeling language. We demonstrate the methodology and software by analyzing age-standardized colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence rates by race and ethnicity for non-Latino Black (Black), non-Latino White (White), and Hispanic/Latino (of any race) adults aged 50-79 years in Texas's 4 largest metropolitan statistical areas between 1999 and 2018. RESULTS: Our analysis revealed a cumulative decline of 31% (95% CI -37% to -25%) in CRC risk among Black adults, 17% (95% CI -23% to -11%) for Latino adults, and 35% (95% CI -38% to -31%) for White adults from 1999 to 2018. None of the 3 observed groups experienced significant incidence reduction in the final 4 years of the study (2015-2018). The Black-White rate difference (per 100,000) was 44 (95% CI 30-57) in 1999 and 35 (95% CI 28-43) in 2018. Cumulatively, the Black-White gap accounts for 3983 CRC cases (95% CI 3746-4219) or 31% (95% CI 29%-32%) of total CRC incidence among Black adults in this period. CONCLUSIONS: Stalled progress on CRC prevention and excess CRC risk among Black residents warrant special attention as cancer prevention and control priorities in urban Texas. Our methodology and software can help the public and health agencies monitor health inequalities and evaluate progress toward disease prevention goals. Advantages of the methodology over current common practice include the following: (1) the absence of piecewise linearity constraints on the model space, and (2) formal inference can be undertaken on any model-derived quantities of interest using Bayesian methods.

Prevalence and correlates of false-positive results after 3-D screening mammography among uninsured women in a community outreach program.

False-positive results have been rarely investigated among uninsured minority women who undergo 3-D screening mammography. Here, we analyzed data from 21,022 women participating in the Breast Screening and Patient Navigation (BSPAN) program of North Texas with an aim to report prevalence and correlates of false-positive results after 3-D screening mammography, stratified by age. False-positives were defined as a negative diagnostic mammogram or a negative biopsy within 1 year of a positive screen. We used multivariable logistic regression to assess associations of demographic and clinical covariates and false positive results for age groups 40-49 and 50-64 years. Prevalence of false-positive results was 11.8% and 9.6% in the 40-49 and 50-64 age groups, respectively. Multivariable logistic regression demonstrated that, in the 40-49 age group, women who were non-menopausal, did not use hormone replacement therapy (HRT), and had self-reported prior mammograms had higher odds of false-positive results than those who were menopausal, used HRT and had no self-reported prior mammograms, respectively. In the 50-64 age group, women with a prior self-reported diagnostic mammogram had higher odds of false-positive results than those without a prior self-reported diagnostic mammogram. This study establishes contemporary evidence regarding prevalence and correlates of false-positive results after 3-D mammography in the unique BSPAN population, and demonstrate that use of 3-D mammography is not enough to reduce false-positive rates among uninsured women served through community outreach programs. Further research is needed to explore improved techniques to reduce false-positive rates, and ensure optimal use of scarce resources in outreach programs.

Long-term Mammography Adherence among Uninsured Women Enrolled in the Breast Screening and Patient Navigation (BSPAN) Program.

BACKGROUND: The Breast Screening and Patient Navigation (BSPAN) Program provides access to no-cost breast cancer screening services to uninsured women in North Texas. Using data from the longitudinal BSPAN program (2012-2019), we assessed prevalence and correlates of (i) baseline adherence and (ii) longitudinal adherence to screening mammograms. METHODS: Outcomes were baseline adherence (adherent if women received second mammogram 9-30 months after the index mammogram) and longitudinal adherence (assessed among baseline adherent women and defined as being adherent 39 months from the index mammogram). We used multivariable logistic regression and multivariable Cox proportional hazards model to assess associations of sociodemographic and clinical characteristics with baseline and longitudinal adherence, respectively. RESULTS: Of 19,292 women, only 5,382 (27.9%) were baseline adherent. Baseline adherence was more likely among women who were partnered, preferred speaking Spanish, had poor reading ability, had prior Papanicolaou (PAP) testing, and prior screening mammograms, compared with women who were non-partnered, preferred speaking English, had good reading ability, had no prior PAP testing, and no prior screening mammograms, respectively. Of those who were baseline adherent, 4,364 (81.1%) women demonstrated longitudinal adherence. Correlates of longitudinal adherence were similar to those from baseline adherence. CONCLUSIONS: A large proportion of baseline adherent women (>80%) achieved longitudinal adherence, which highlights the importance of concentrating resources during the second mammogram in the progression toward continued adherence. IMPACT: Results from our unique dataset provide realistic mammography adherence rates and may be generalizable to other areas introducing no-cost screening to low-income women, independent of any regular patient-centered medical home.

Longitudinal Experience With and Impressions of COVID-19-Related Clinical Research Changes.

PURPOSE: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to profound changes in clinical research, including remote consent, telehealth, off-site procedures, shipment of therapy, and remote study monitoring. We assessed longitudinal perceptions of these adjustments among clinical research professionals. METHODS: We distributed an anonymous survey assessing experiences, perceptions, and recommendations regarding COVID-19-related clinical research adjustments to cancer clinical research office personnel in May 2020 and again in November 2020. Responses were compared using Fisher's exact and Mann-Whitney U tests. RESULTS: A total of 90 of 102 invited research personnel (88%) responded. Fifty-three (59%) reported participating in both initial and follow-up surveys. The proportion of respondents reporting personal experience with COVID-19-related adjustments increased over time, particularly for remote initial consent (29% v 4%), remote reconsent (24% v 9%), and remote study monitoring (36% v 22%). Perceived impact of COVID-19-related adjustments on data quality (P = .02) and patient experience (P = .002) improved significantly. However, perceived effect on patient safety (P = .02) and respondent's experience (P = .09) became less favorable. Individuals with personal experience with the adjustment were more likely to recommend continuing remote consent (62% v 38%; P = .04), remote monitoring (69% v 45%; P = .05), and therapy shipment (67% v 35%; P = .01) after the COVID-19 pandemic, with nonsignificant trends for off-site diagnostics (44% v 24%; P = .13) and telehealth visits (66% v 45%; P = .08). CONCLUSION: More than 6 months into the global pandemic, perceptions of COVID-19-related clinical research changes remain favorable. Experienced individuals are more likely to recommend that these changes continue in the future.

Prevalence And Impact of Medical Comorbidities in A Real-World Lung Cancer Screening Population.

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer screening trials generally enroll motivated, relatively healthy, and adherent populations. We therefore evaluated the prevalence and effects of comorbidities in a real-world population undergoing low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) scans. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We calculated the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) of patients for whom an initial low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) for lung cancer screening was ordered between February 2017 and February 2019 in an integrated safety-net healthcare system. We examined the association between CCI and initial LDCT completion using multivariable logistic regression, assessed the association between specific medical comorbidity and LDCT completion using Chi-square test or Fisher's exact test as appropriate, and examined the association between CCI and LDCT Lung-RADS results using Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: A total of 1358 patients were included in the analysis. Mean age was 63 years, 57% were women, and 50% were Black. Patients had moderate comorbidity burden (median CCI 3) with chronic pulmonary disease the most common comorbidity. Overall, 943 LDCT (70%) were completed. There was no difference in 30-day, 90-day, or 1-year completion rates of initial LDCT according to CCI. However, 30-day LDCT completion rates did increase over time (P < .001). Lung-RADS scores were not associated with CCI. CONCLUSION: In a real-world setting, patients undergoing lung cancer screening have moderate comorbidity burden. The degree and type of medical comorbidity are not associated with initial screening completion or results. Timeliness of LDCT completion may improve as program experience increases.

Hospital Surgical Volume Is Poorly Correlated With Delivery of Multimodal Treatment for Localized Pancreatic Cancer: A National Retrospective Cohort Study.

Using Donabedian's quality of care model, this study assessed process (hospital multimodal treatment) and structure (hospital surgical case volume) measures to evaluate localized pancreatic cancer outcomes. Background: Treatment at high surgical volume hospitals has been shown to improve short-term outcomes. However, multimodal treatment-surgery and chemotherapy-is the standard of care yet only received by 35% of US patients and has not been examined at the hospital level. Methods: The National Cancer Database was used to identify a cohort of clinical stage I pancreatic cancer patients eligible for multimodal treatment from 2004 to 2016. Hospital multimodal treatment was defined as the number of patients receiving surgery and chemotherapy by the number of eligible patients per hospital. Descriptive statistics and survival analyses were conducted. Results: A total of 16,771 patients met inclusion criteria, of whom 68.0% received curative-intent surgery and 35.8% received multimodal treatment. There was poor correlation between hospital surgical volume and delivery of multimodal treatment (Spearman correlation 0.214; P < 0.001). Of patients cared for at the highest surgical volume hospitals, 18.8% and 52.1% were treated at hospitals with low (0%-25%) and moderate (>25%-50%) multimodal treatment delivery, respectively. Higher hospital multimodal treatment delivery was associated with improved overall survival. Discussion: Although the volume-outcome relationship for pancreatic cancer has demonstrated improved outcomes, this work identified poor correlation between hospital surgical volume and delivery of multimodal treatment. The role of care coordination in the delivery of multimodal treatment warrants further investigation as it is associated with improved survival for patients with localized pancreatic cancer.

Enhancing access to and diversity in cancer clinical trials through a financial reimbursement program: Protocol to evaluate a novel program.

As clinical trials have become more complex, with increasing numbers of required procedures and clinic visits, gaining access to promising new treatments has become even more challenging for many individuals. To address these barriers, we implemented a financial reimbursement and outreach program designed to increase the number and diversity of participants in cancer clinical trials at centers in Dallas, Houston, and Philadelphia. As endorsed by U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Texas and Pennsylvania State Legislatures, the program provides financial reimbursement for non-clinical costs (e.g., travel, lodging) to patients on cancer clinical trials with household income up to 700% the Federal poverty rate. The research study described here, centered at the Dallas site, evaluates program impact by assessing (1) numbers and diversity of patients enrolled to cancer clinical trials before and after program implementation; (2) characteristics of patients offered participation in the program who do versus do not enroll; (3) characteristics of patients enrolled in the program who do versus do not complete the reimbursement process. To evaluate perceived barriers and facilitators of program participation, we will conduct semi-structured interviews and administer the Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity Patient Reported Outcome Measure (COST PROM) and the Short Assessment of Health Literacy (SAHL). This program will examine how reimbursement of non-clinical costs can improve access to cancer clinical trials, with the eventual goal of increasing trial enrollment, diversity, representativeness, and generalizability.

Patterns and Results of Triage Advice Before Emergency Department Visits Made by Patients With Cancer.

PURPOSE: Patients with cancer undergoing treatment frequently visit the emergency department (ED) for commonly anticipated complaints (eg, pain, nausea, and vomiting). Nearly all Medicare Oncology Care Model (OCM) participants prioritized ED use reduction, and the OCM requires that patients have 24-hour telephone access to a clinician, but actual reductions in ED visits have been mixed. Little is known about the use of telephone triage for acute care. METHODS: We identified adults aged 18+ years newly diagnosed with cancer, linked to ED visits from a single institution within 6 months after diagnosis, and then analyzed the telephone and secure electronic messages in the preceding 24 hours. We coded interactions to classify the reason for the call, the main ED referrer, and other attempted management. We compared the acuity of patient self-referred versus clinician-referred ED visits by modeling hospitalization and ED visit severity. RESULTS: From 2011 to 2018, 3,247 adults made 5,371 ED visits to the university hospital and self-referred to the ED 58.5% of the time. Clinicians referred to outpatient or oncology urgent care for 10.3% of calls but referred to the ED for 61.3%. Patient self-referred ED visits were likely to be hospitalized (adjusted Odds Ratio [aOR], 0.89, 95% CI, 0.64 to 1.22) and were not more severe (aOR, 0.75, 95% CI, 0.55 to 1.02) than clinician referred. CONCLUSION: Although patients self-referred for six of every 10 ED visits, self-referred visits were not more severe. When patients called for advice, clinicians regularly recommended the ED. More should be done to understand barriers that patients and clinicians experience when trying to access non-ED acute care.

Cancer prevention, risk reduction, and control: opportunities for the next decade of health care delivery research.

In this commentary, we discuss opportunities to optimize cancer care delivery in the next decade building from evidence and advancements in the conceptualization and implementation of multi-level translational behavioral interventions. We summarize critical issues and discoveries describing new directions for translational behavioral research in the coming decade based on the promise of the accelerated application of this evidence within learning health systems. To illustrate these advances, we discuss cancer prevention, risk reduction (particularly precision prevention and early detection), and cancer treatment and survivorship (particularly risk- and need-stratified comprehensive care) and propose opportunities to equitably improve outcomes while addressing clinician shortages and cross-system coordination. We also discuss the impacts of COVID-19 and potential advances of scientific knowledge in the context of existing evidence, the need for adaptation, and potential areas of innovation to meet the needs of converging crises (e.g., fragmented care, workforce shortages, ongoing pandemic) in cancer health care delivery. Finally, we discuss new areas for exploration by applying key lessons gleaned from implementation efforts guided by advances in behavioral health.

Clinician Variation in Ordering and Completion of Low-Dose Computed Tomography for Lung Cancer Screening in a Safety-Net Medical System.

BACKGROUND: Less than 5% of eligible individuals in the United States undergo lung cancer screening. Variation in clinicians' participation in lung cancer screening has not been determined. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We studied medical providers who ordered ≥ 1 low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) for lung cancer screening from February 2017 through February 2019 in an integrated safety-net healthcare system. We analyzed associations between provider characteristics and LDCT orders and completion using chi-square, Fisher exact, and Student t tests, as well as ANOVA and multinomial logistic regression. RESULTS: Among an estimated 194 adult primary care physicians, 144 (74%) ordered at least 1 LDCT, as did 39 specialists. These 183 medical providers ordered 1594 LDCT (median, 4; interquartile range, 2-9). In univariate and multivariate models, family practice providers (P < .001) and providers aged ≥ 50 years (P = .03) ordered more LDCT than did other clinicians. Across providers, the median proportion of ordered LDCT that were completed was 67%. The total or preceding number of LDCT ordered by a clinician was not associated with the likelihood of LDCT completion. CONCLUSION: In an integrated safety-net healthcare system, most adult primary care providers order LDCT. The number of LDCT ordered varies widely among clinicians, and a substantial proportion of ordered LDCT are not completed.

Current Practices for Screening and Addressing Financial Hardship within the NCI Community Oncology Research Program.

BACKGROUND: Cancer-related financial hardship is associated with poor care outcomes and reduced quality of life for patients and families. Scalable intervention development to address financial hardship requires knowledge of current screening practices and services within community cancer care. METHODS: The NCI Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) 2017 Landscape Assessment survey assessed financial screening and financial navigation practices within U.S. community oncology practices. Logistic models evaluated associations between financial hardship screening and availability of a cancer-specific financial navigator and practice group characteristics (e.g., safety-net designation, critical access hospital, proportion of racial and ethnic minority patients served). RESULTS: Of 221 participating NCORP practice groups, 72% reported a financial screening process and 50% had a cancer-specific financial navigator. Practice groups with more than 10% of new patients with cancer enrolled in Medicaid (adjOR = 2.81, P = 0.02) and with less than 30% racial/ethnic minority cancer patient composition (adjOR = 3.91, P < 0.01) were more likely to screen for financial concerns. Practice groups with less than 30% racial/ethnic minority cancer patient composition (adjOR = 2.37, P < 0.01) were more likely to have a dedicated financial navigator or counselor for patients with cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Most NCORP practice groups screen for financial concerns and half have a cancer-specific financial navigator. Practices serving more racial or ethnic minority patients are less likely to screen and have a designated financial navigator. IMPACT: The effectiveness of financial screening and navigation for mitigating financial hardship could be tested within NCORP, along with specific interventions to address cancer care inequities.See related commentary by Yabroff et al., p. 593.