Evaluation of the Completeness of Managed Care Data to Identify Cancer Diagnoses and Treatments for Patients in the SEER-Medicare Data.

BACKGROUND: The utility of codes on Medicare Advantage (MA) data to capture cancer diagnoses and treatment for cancer patients is unknown. OBJECTIVE: This study compared cancer diagnoses and treatments on MA encounter data (MA data) with the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End-Results (SEER) data. SUBJECTS: Subjects were patients enrolled in either MA or Medicare fee-for-service (MFFS) when diagnosed with incident breast, colorectal, prostate, or lung cancer, 2015-2017, in a SEER cancer registry. MEASURES: MA data, from 2 months before to 12 months following SEER diagnosis, were reviewed to identify cancer diagnoses, surgery, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy (RT). MA data were compared with SEER to determine their sensitivity to capture cancer diagnoses and sensitivity/specificity to identify surgeries. The agreement between SEER and Medicare data regarding receipt of chemotherapy and RT was measured by Kappa statistics. A similar comparison to SEER diagnoses/treatments was made using MFFS claims to provide context for the SEER-MA comparison. RESULTS: The study included 186,449 patients, 38% in MA. MA data had 92%+ sensitivity to identify SEER cancer diagnosis and 90%+ sensitivity for cancer surgery. Specificity for surgery was >84%, except for breast cancer (52%). Kappa statistics for agreement between SEER and MA data regarding chemotherapy varied by cancer, 0.61-0.82, and for receipt of RT exceeded 0.75 for all cancers. Results observed for MFFS claims were similar to those in MA data. CONCLUSION: For 4 common cancers, MA data included most cancer diagnoses and general types of cancer treatment reported in the SEER data. More research is needed to assess additional cancers and detailed treatments.

The Utility of Pathology Reports to Identify Persons With Cancer Recurrence.

BACKGROUND: Cancer recurrence is an important measure of the impact of cancer treatment. However, no population-based data on recurrence are available. Pathology reports could potentially identify cancer recurrences. Their utility to capture recurrences is unknown. OBJECTIVE: This analysis assesses the sensitivity of pathology reports to identify patients with cancer recurrence and the stage at recurrence. SUBJECTS: The study includes patients with recurrent breast (n=214) or colorectal (n=203) cancers. RESEARCH DESIGN: This retrospective analysis included patients from a population-based cancer registry who were part of the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research (PCOR) Study, a project that followed cancer patients in-depth for 5 years after diagnosis to identify recurrences. MEASURES: Information abstracted from pathology reports for patients with recurrence was compared with their PCOR data (gold standard) to determine what percent had a pathology report at the time of recurrence, the sensitivity of text in the report to identify recurrence, and if the stage at recurrence could be determined from the pathology report. RESULTS: One half of cancer patients had a pathology report near the time of recurrence. For patients with a pathology report, the report's sensitivity to identify recurrence was 98.1% for breast cancer cases and 95.7% for colorectal cancer cases. The specific stage at recurrence from the pathology report had a moderate agreement with gold-standard data. CONCLUSIONS: Pathology reports alone cannot measure population-based recurrence of solid cancers but can identify specific cohorts of recurrent cancer patients. As electronic submission of pathology reports increases, these reports may identify specific recurrent patients in near real-time.

Stage and mortality of low-income patients with cancer: Evidence from SEER-Medicaid.

BACKGROUND: A national data source for identifying patients with cancer enrolled in Medicaid is needed to evaluate cancer care for low-income, publicly insured patients. In this study, a population-based data set of patients diagnosed with cancer and enrolled in Medicaid was created and evaluated. The objective was to compare the characteristics of patients with cancer identified in Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) data and linked to the Medicaid Analytic eXtract (MAX) Personal Summary files with the characteristics of patients who were not linked to the MAX file. METHODS: All persons in 14 SEER registries diagnosed with cancer from 2006 to 2013 who were or were not linked to the 2006-2013 nationwide MAX files were selected, and patient demographic characteristics were compared for 3 age groups. Common cancer sites and the timing of Medicaid enrollment with respect to patients' cancer diagnoses were reported, and the stage at diagnosis and 4-year mortality were compared by 3 categories of Medicaid enrollment. RESULTS: Approximately 18% of the sample was enrolled in Medicaid within 25 months of diagnosis. Enrollees had a greater proportion of racial/ethnic minorities in comparison with patients who were not enrolled. A late-stage diagnosis was more common among Medicaid patients and particularly among those who enrolled after their diagnosis. For every common cancer site, mortality was highest in the sample of Medicaid patients who enrolled after their diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: The Medicaid enrollment data newly added to SEER records enhance researchers' ability to investigate research questions related to Medicaid policies and care delivery. For patients enrolled before their diagnosis, Medicaid appears to offer protection against late-stage disease and mortality.

New Opportunities for Cancer Health Services Research: Linking the SEER-Medicare Data to the Nursing Home Minimum Data Set.

BACKGROUND: The Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER)-Medicare data combine clinical information from population-based cancer registries with Medicare claims. These data have been used in many studies to understand cancer screening, treatment, outcomes, and costs. However, until recently, these data included limited information related to the characteristics and outcomes of cancer patients residing in or admitted to nursing homes. OBJECTIVES: To provide an overview of the new linkage between SEER-Medicare data and the Minimum Data Set (MDS), a nursing home resident assessment instrument detailing residents' physical, psychological, and psychosocial functioning as well as any therapies or treatments received. RESEARCH DESIGN: This is a descriptive, retrospective cohort study. SUBJECTS: Persons in SEER-Medicare diagnosed with cancer from 2004 to 2013 were linked to the 2011-2014 MDS, with 17% of SEER-Medicare patients linked to the MDS data. During 2011-2014, we identified 318,617 cancer patients receiving care in a nursing home and 256,947 cancer patients newly admitted to a total of 10,953 nursing homes. Of these patients, approximately two thirds were Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries. RESULTS: The timing from cancer diagnoses to nursing home admission varied by cancer. In total, 93% of all patients were admitted directly to a nursing home from an acute care hospital. The majority of patients were cognitively intact, 21% reported some level of depression, and 9% had severe functional limitations. CONCLUSIONS: The new SEER-Medicare-MDS dataset provides a valuable resource for understanding the postacute and long-term care experiences of cancer patients receiving care in United States' nursing homes.

Creating a National Provider Identifier (NPI) to Unique Physician Identification Number (UPIN) Crosswalk for Medicare Data.

INTRODUCTION: Many health services researchers are interested in assessing long term, individual physician treatment patterns, particularly for cancer care. In 2007, Medicare changed the physician identifier used on billed services from the Unique Physician Identification Number (UPIN) to the National Provider Identifier (NPI), precluding the ability to use Medicare claims data to evaluate individual physician treatment patterns across this transition period. METHODS: Using the 2007-2008 carrier (physician) claims from the linked Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) cancer registry-Medicare data and Medicare's NPI and UPIN Directories, we created a crosswalk that paired physician NPIs included in SEER-Medicare data with UPINs. We evaluated the ability to identify an NPI-UPIN match by physician sex and specialty. RESULTS: We identified 470,313 unique NPIs in the 2007-2008 SEER-Medicare carrier claims and found a UPIN match for 90.1% of these NPIs (n=423,842) based on 3 approaches: (1) NPI and UPIN coreported on the SEER-Medicare claims; (2) UPINs reported on the NPI Directory; or (3) a name match between the NPI and UPIN Directories. A total of 46.6% (n=219,315) of NPIs matched to the same UPIN across all 3 approaches, 34.1% (n=160,277) agreed across 2 approaches, and 9.4% (n=44,250) had a match identified by 1 approach only. NPIs were paired to UPINs less frequently for women and primary care physicians compared with other specialists. DISCUSSION: National Cancer Institute has created a crosswalk resource available to researchers that links NPIs and UPINs based on the SEER-Medicare data. In addition, the documented process could be used to create other NPI-UPIN crosswalks using data beyond SEER-Medicare.

Trends in the receipt of guideline care and survival for women with ovarian cancer: A population-based study.

BACKGROUND: We assessed trends in the receipt of guideline care and 2-year cause-specific survival for women diagnosed with ovarian cancer. METHODS: This retrospective cohort analysis used National Cancer Institute's Patterns of Care studies data for women diagnosed with ovarian cancer in 2002 and 2011 (weighted n=6427). Data included patient characteristics, treatment type, and provider characteristics. We used logistic regression to evaluate the association of year of diagnosis with receipt of guideline surgery, multiagent chemotherapy, or both. Two-year cause-specific survival, 2002-2013, was assessed using SEER data. RESULTS: The adjusted rate of women who received stage-appropriate surgery, 48%, was unchanged from 2002 to 2011. Gynecologic oncologist (GO) consultations increased from 43% (2002) to 78% (2011). GO consultation was a significant predictor for receipt of guideline care, although only 40% of women who saw a GO received guideline surgery and chemotherapy. The percent of women who received guideline surgery and chemotherapy increased significantly from 32% in 2002 to 37% in 2011. From 2002 to 2011, 2-year cause-specific ovarian cancer survival was unchanged for Stages I-III cancers, with slight improvement for Stage IV cancers. CONCLUSION: Receipt of guideline care has improved modestly from 2002-2011 for women with ovarian cancer. Current treatment is far below clinical recommendations and may explain limited improvement in 2-year cause-specific survival. Most women consulted a GO in 2011 yet did not receive guideline care. There needs to be a better understanding of the decision-making process about treatment during the consultation with GOs and other factors precluding receipt of guideline care.

Trends in the Treatment of Metastatic Colon and Rectal Cancer in Elderly Patients.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the use and costs of antineoplastic regimens for elderly patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We report population-based trends over a 10-year period in the treatment, survival, and costs in mCRC patients, stratified by ages 65-74 and 75+. METHODS: We used Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare data for persons diagnosed with metastatic colon (N=16117) or rectal cancer (N=4008) between 2000 and 2009. We estimated the adjusted percent of patients who received antineoplastic agents, by type, number, and their costs 12 months following diagnosis. We report the percent of patients who received 3 or more of commonly prescribed agents and estimate survival for the 24-month period following diagnosis by age and treatment. RESULTS: The percentage that received 3 or more agents increased from 3% to 73% in colon patients aged 65-74 and from 2% to 53% in patients 75+. Similar increases were observed in rectal patients. Average 1-year costs per patient in 2009 were $106,461 and $102,680 for colon and rectal cancers, respectively, reflecting an increase of 32% and 20%, for patients who received antineoplastic agents. Median survival increased by about 6 and 10 months, respectively, for colon and rectal patients aged 65-74 who received antineoplastic agents, but an improvement of only 1 month of median survival was observed for patients 75+. CONCLUSIONS: Expensive multiple agent regimens are increasingly used in older mCRC patients. For patients aged 64-75 years, these treatments may be associated with several months of additional life, but patients aged 75+ may incur considerable expense without any survival benefit.

Sensitivity of Medicare Claims to Identify Cancer Recurrence in Elderly Colorectal and Breast Cancer Patients.

BACKGROUND: Researchers are increasingly interested in using observational data to evaluate cancer outcomes following treatment, including cancer recurrence and disease-free survival. Because population-based cancer registries do not collect recurrence data, recurrence is often imputed from health claims, primarily by identifying later cancer treatments after initial treatment. The validity of this approach has not been established. RESEARCH DESIGN: We used the linked Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare data to assess the sensitivity of Medicare claims for cancer recurrence in patients very likely to have had a recurrence. We selected newly diagnosed stage II/III colorectal (n=6910) and female breast cancer (n=3826) patients during 1994-2003 who received initial cancer surgery, had a treatment break, and then died from cancer in 1994-2008. We reviewed all claims from the treatment break until death for indicators of recurrence. We focused on additional cancer treatment (surgery, chemotherapy, radiation therapy) as the primary indicator, and used multivariate logistic regression analysis to evaluate patient factors associated with additional treatment. We also assessed metastasis diagnoses and end-of-life care as recurrence indicators. RESULTS: Additional treatment was the first indicator of recurrence for 38.8% of colorectal patients and 35.2% of breast cancer patients. Patients aged 70 and older were less likely to have additional treatment (P < 0.05), in adjusted analyses. Over 20% of patients either had no recurrence indicator before death or had end-of-life care as their first indicator. CONCLUSIONS: Identifying recurrence through additional cancer treatment in Medicare claims will miss a large percentage of patients with recurrences; particularly those who are older.

Comparison of SEER Treatment Data With Medicare Claims.

BACKGROUND: The population-based Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) registries collect information on first-course treatment, including surgery, chemotherapy, radiation therapy, and hormone therapy. However, the SEER program does not release data on chemotherapy or hormone therapy due to uncertainties regarding data completeness. Activities are ongoing to investigate the opportunity to supplement SEER treatment data with other data sources. METHODS: Using the linked SEER-Medicare data, we examined the validity of the SEER data to identify receipt of chemotherapy and radiation therapy among those aged 65 and older diagnosed from 2000 to 2006 with bladder, female breast, colorectal, lung, ovarian, pancreas, or prostate cancer and hormone therapy among men diagnosed with prostate cancer at age 65 or older. Treatment collected by SEER was compared with treatment as determined by Medicare claims, using Medicare claims as the gold standard. The κ, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive values, and negative predictive values were calculated for the receipt of each treatment modality. RESULTS: The overall sensitivity of SEER data to identify chemotherapy, radiation, and hormone therapy receipt was moderate (68%, 80%, and 69%, respectively) and varied by cancer site, stage, and patient characteristics. The overall positive predictive value was high (>85%) for all treatment types and cancer sites except chemotherapy for prostate cancer. CONCLUSIONS: SEER data should not generally be used for comparisons of treated and untreated individuals or to estimate the proportion of treated individuals in the population. Augmenting SEER data with other data sources will provide the most accurate treatment information.

Metabolic syndrome increases risk of Barrett esophagus in the absence of gastroesophageal reflux: an analysis of SEER-Medicare Data.

GOALS: To evaluate the association between metabolic syndrome (MetS) and risk of Barrett esophagus (BE) using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare linked database compared with 2 control groups--Medicare population controls and endoscopy controls. BACKGROUND: BE principally arises as an adaptation to the proinflammatory state induced by gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). The relationship between obesity and BE is presumed to be mediated by GERD. However, evidence suggests central adiposity also increases risk of BE independent of GERD. Central adiposity is one risk factor defining MetS, which confers a systemic proinflammatory state--a potential GERD-independent mechanism by which obesity could increase the risk of BE. STUDY: MetS was defined as diagnosis of at least 3 of the following conditions: obesity, elevated triglycerides, high blood pressure, and elevated fasting glucose. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate adjusted odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: In 2198 incident BE cases, prior MetS was significantly associated with BE (odds ratio, 1.20; 95% confidence interval: 1.07, 1.36) compared with population controls. However, GERD status modified the association; among those without prior GERD, MetS increased risk of BE by 34%; however, no association was observed among those with a prior GERD diagnosis (P-value for effect modification <0.001). MetS was not associated with risk of BE compared with endoscopy controls. CONCLUSIONS: MetS increased the risk of BE compared with population controls, an association driven by and confined to the non-GERD stratum. MetS may mediate an association between central adiposity and BE for those without GERD.

An international comparison of costs of end-of-life care for advanced lung cancer patients using health administrative data.

BACKGROUND: Patterns of end-of-life cancer care differ in Canada and the United States; yet little is known about differences in service-specific and overall costs. AIM: The aim of this study was to compare end-of-life costs in Ontario, Canada, and the United States, using administrative health data. DESIGN: Advanced-stage nonsmall cell lung cancer patients who died from cancer at age ⩾ 65.5 years in 2001-2005 were selected from the US Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare database (N = 16,858) and the Ontario Cancer Registry (N = 8643). We estimated total and service-specific costs (2009 US dollars) in each of the last 6 months of life from the public payer perspectives for short-term and long-term survivors (lived < 180 and ⩾ 180 days post-diagnosis, respectively). Services were defined for comparisons between systems. RESULTS: Mean monthly costs increased as death approached, were higher in short-term than long-term survivors, and were generally higher in the United States than in Ontario until the month before death, when they were similar (long-term survivors: US$10,464 and US$10,094 (p = 0.53), short-term survivors US$14,455 and US$12,836 (p = 0.11), in Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare and Ontario, respectively). Costs for Medicare hospice and Ontario's palliative care components were similar and increased closer to death. Inpatient hospitalization was the main cost driver with similar costs in both cohorts, despite lower utilization in the United States. The compositions of many services and costs differed. CONCLUSION: Costs for nonsmall cell lung cancer patients were slightly higher in the United States than Ontario until 1 month before death. Administrative data allow exploration and international comparisons of reimbursement policies, health-care delivery, and costs at the end of life.

Gallstones, cholecystectomy, and risk of digestive system cancers.

Gallstones and cholecystectomy may be related to digestive system cancer through inflammation, altered bile flux, and changes in metabolic hormone levels. Although gallstones are recognized causes of gallbladder cancer, associations with other cancers of the digestive system are poorly established. We used the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare linked database (1992-2005), which includes 17 cancer registries that cover approximately 26% of the US population, to identify first primary cancers (n = 236,850) occurring in persons aged ≥66 years and 100,000 cancer-free population-based controls frequency-matched by calendar year, age, and gender. Odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were calculated using logistic regression analysis, adjusting for the matching factors. Gallstones and cholecystectomy were associated with increased risk of noncardia gastric cancer (odds ratio (OR) = 1.21 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.11, 1.32) and OR = 1.26 (95% CI: 1.13, 1.40), respectively), small-intestine carcinoid (OR = 1.27 (95% CI: 1.01, 1.60) and OR = 1.78 (95% CI: 1.41, 2.25)), liver cancer (OR = 2.35 (95% CI: 2.18, 2.54) and OR = 1.26 (95% CI: 1.12, 1.41)), and pancreatic cancer (OR = 1.24 (95% CI: 1.16, 1.31) and OR = 1.23 (95% CI: 1.15, 1.33)). Colorectal cancer risk associated with gallstones and cholecystectomy decreased with increasing distance from the common bile duct (P-trend < 0.001). Hence, gallstones and cholecystectomy are associated with the risk of cancers occurring throughout the digestive tract.

Validating billing/encounter codes as indicators of lung, colorectal, breast, and prostate cancer recurrence using 2 large contemporary cohorts.

BACKGROUND: A substantial proportion of cancer-related mortality is attributable to recurrent, not de novo metastatic disease, yet we know relatively little about these patients. To fill this gap, investigators often use administrative codes for secondary malignant neoplasm or chemotherapy to identify recurrent cases in population-based datasets. However, these algorithms have not been validated in large, contemporary, routine care cohorts. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the validity of secondary malignant neoplasm and chemotherapy codes as indicators of recurrence after definitive local therapy for stage I-III lung, colorectal, breast, and prostate cancer. RESEARCH DESIGN, SUBJECTS, AND MEASURES: We assessed the sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value (PPV) of these codes 14 and 60 months after diagnosis using 2 administrative datasets linked with gold-standard recurrence status information: CanCORS/Medicare (diagnoses 2003-2005) and HMO/Cancer Research Network (diagnoses 2000-2005). RESULTS: We identified 929 CanCORS/Medicare patients and 5298 HMO/CRN patients. Sensitivity, specificity, and PPV ranged widely depending on which codes were included and the type of cancer. For patients with lung, colorectal, and breast cancer, the combination of secondary malignant neoplasm and chemotherapy codes was the most sensitive (75%-85%); no code-set was highly sensitive and highly specific. For prostate cancer, no code-set offered even moderate sensitivity (≤ 19%). CONCLUSIONS: Secondary malignant neoplasm and chemotherapy codes could not identify recurrent cancer without some risk of misclassification. Findings based on existing algorithms should be interpreted with caution. More work is needed to develop a valid algorithm that can be used to characterize outcomes and define patient cohorts for comparative effectiveness research studies.

Intraperitoneal chemotherapy among women in the Medicare population with epithelial ovarian cancer.

BACKGROUND: Intraperitoneal combined with intravenous chemotherapy (IV/IP) for primary treatment of epithelial ovarian cancer results in a substantial survival advantage for women who are optimally debulked surgically, compared with standard IV only therapy (IV). Little is known about the use of this therapy in the Medicare population. METHODS: We used the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database to identify 4665 women aged 66 and older with epithelial ovarian cancer diagnosed between 2005-2009, with their Medicare claims. We defined receipt of any IV/IP chemotherapy when there was claims evidence of any receipt of such treatment within 12 months of the date of diagnosis. We used descriptive statistics to examine factors associated with treatment and health services use. RESULTS: Among 3561 women with Stage III or IV epithelial ovarian cancer who received any chemotherapy, only 124 (3.5%) received IV/IP chemotherapy. The use of IV/IP chemotherapy did not increase over the period of the study. In this cohort, younger women, those with fewer comorbidities, whites, and those living in Census tracts with higher income were more likely to receive IV/IP chemotherapy. Among women who received any IV/IP chemotherapy, we did not find an increase in acute care services (hospitalizations, emergency department visits, or ICU stays). CONCLUSION: During the period between 2005 and 2009, few women in the Medicare population living within observed SEER areas received IV/IP chemotherapy, and the use of this therapy did not increase. We observed marked racial and sociodemographic differences in access to this therapy.

Polypectomy techniques, endoscopist characteristics, and serious gastrointestinal adverse events.

BACKGROUND: A use of polypectomy techniques by endoscopist specialty (primary care, surgery, and gastroenterology) and experience (volume), and associations with serious gastrointestinal adverse events, were examined. METHODS: A retrospective follow-up study with ambulatory surgery and hospital discharge datasets from Florida, 1999-2001, was used. Thirty-day hospitalizations due to colonic perforations and gastrointestinal bleeding were investigated for 323,585 patients. RESULTS: Primary care endoscopists and surgeons used hot biopsy forceps/ablation, while gastroenterologists provided snare polypectomy or complex colonoscopy. Low-volume endoscopists were more likely to use simpler rather than complex procedures. For hot forceps/ablation and snare polypectomy, low- and medium-volume endoscopists reported higher odds of adverse events. For complex colonoscopy, higher odds of adverse events were reported for primary care endoscopists (1.74 [95% CI, 1.18-2.56]) relative to gastroenterologists. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopists regardless of specialty and experience can safely use cold biopsy forceps. For hot biopsy and snare polypectomy, low volume, but not specialty, contributed to increased odds of adverse events. For complex colonoscopy, primary care specialty, but not low volume, added to the odds of adverse events. Comparable outcomes were reported for surgeons and gastroenterologists. Cross-training and continuing medical education of primary care endoscopists in high-volume endoscopy settings are recommended for complex colonoscopy procedures.

Association of Major Adverse Financial Events and Later-Stage Cancer Diagnosis in the United States.

PURPOSE: This study assessed the prevalence of specific major adverse financial events (AFEs)-bankruptcies, liens, and evictions-before a cancer diagnosis and their association with later-stage cancer at diagnosis. METHODS: Patients age 20-69 years diagnosed with cancer during 2014-2015 were identified from the Seattle, Louisiana, and Georgia SEER population-based cancer registries. Registry data were linked with LexisNexis consumer data to identify patients with a history of court-documented AFEs before cancer diagnosis. The association of AFEs and later-stage cancer diagnoses (stages III/IV) was assessed using separate sex-specific multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Among 101,649 patients with cancer linked to LexisNexis data, 36,791 (36.2%) had a major AFE reported before diagnosis. The mean and median timing of the AFE closest to diagnosis were 93 and 77 months, respectively. AFEs were most common among non-Hispanic Black, unmarried, and low-income patients. Individuals with previous AFEs were more likely to be diagnosed with later-stage cancer than individuals with no AFE (males-odds ratio [OR], 1.09 [95% CI, 1.03 to 1.14]; P < .001; females-OR, 1.18 [95% CI, 1.13 to 1.24]; P < .0001) after adjusting for age, race, marital status, income, registry, and cancer type. Associations between AFEs prediagnosis and later-stage disease did not vary by AFE timing. CONCLUSION: One third of newly diagnosed patients with cancer had a major AFE before their diagnosis. Patients with AFEs were more likely to have later-stage diagnosis, even accounting for traditional measures of socioeconomic status that influence the stage at diagnosis. The prevalence of prediagnosis AFEs underscores financial vulnerability of patients with cancer before their diagnosis, before any subsequent financial burden associated with cancer treatment.

Determinants of adjuvant oxaliplatin receipt among older stage II and III colorectal cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Controversy exists regarding adjuvant oxaliplatin treatment among older patients with stage II and III colorectal cancer (CRC). This study sought to identify patient/tumor, physician, hospital, and geographic factors associated with oxaliplatin use among older patients. METHODS: Individuals diagnosed at age > 65 with stage II or III CRC from 2004 through 2007 undergoing surgical resection and receiving adjuvant chemotherapy were identified using the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results program (SEER)-Medicare database, which includes patient/tumor and hospital characteristics. Physician information was obtained from the American Medical Association. Poisson regression was used to identify independent predictors of oxaliplatin receipt. The discriminatory ability of each category of characteristics to predict oxaliplatin receipt was assessed by comparing the area under the receiver operating curve from logistic regression models. RESULTS: We identified 4388 individuals who underwent surgical resection at 773 hospitals and received chemotherapy from 1517 physicians. Adjuvant oxaliplatin use was higher among stage III (colon = 56%, rectum = 51%) compared to stage II patients (colon = 37%, rectum = 35%). Overall, patients who were older; diagnosed before 2006; separated, divorced, or widowed; living in a higher poverty census tract or in the East or Midwest; or with higher levels of comorbidity were less likely to receive oxaliplatin. Patient factors and calendar year accounted for most of the variation in oxaliplatin receipt (area under the curve = 75.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant oxaliplatin use increased rapidly from 2004 through 2007 despite uncertainties regarding its effectiveness in older patients. Physician and hospital characteristics had little influence on adjuvant oxaliplatin receipt among older patients.

Identifying specific chemotherapeutic agents in Medicare data: a validation study.

BACKGROUND: Large health care databases are increasingly used to examine the dissemination and benefits and harms of chemotherapy treatment in routine practice, particularly among patients excluded from trials (eg, the elderly). Misclassification of chemotherapy could bias estimates of frequency and association, warranting an updated assessment. METHODS: We evaluated the validity of Medicare claims to identify receipt of chemotherapy and specific agents delivered to elderly stage II/III colorectal (CRC), in situ/early-stage breast, non-small-cell lung, and ovarian cancer patients using the National Cancer Institute's Patterns of Care studies (POC) as the gold standard. The POC collected data on chemotherapy treatment by reabstracting hospital records, contacting physicians, and reviewing medical records. Patients' POC data were linked and compared with their Medicare claims for 2 to 12 months postdiagnosis. κ, sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values and 95% confidence intervals were calculated for the receipt of any chemotherapy and specific agents. RESULTS: Sensitivity and specificity of Medicare claims to identify any chemotherapy were high across all cancer sites. We found substantial variation in validity across agents, by site and administration modality. Capecitabine, an oral CRC treatment, was identified in claims with high specificity (98%) but low sensitivity (47%), whereas oxaliplatin, an intravenously administered CRC agent had higher sensitivity (75%) and similar specificity (97%). CONCLUSIONS: Receipt of chemotherapy and specific intravenous agents can be identified using Medicare claims, showing improvement from prior reports; yet, variation exists. Future studies should assess newly approved agents and the impact of coverage decisions for these agents under the Medicare Part D program.

Blood transfusions and the subsequent risk of cancers in the United States elderly.

BACKGROUND: Blood transfusions are common in older adults and also may modulate the immune system. However, the impact of transfusion on cancer risk in the elderly has not been studied. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Cancer risk after blood transfusion was evaluated in a US population-based case-control study using 552,951 elderly cases identified from cancer registries and 100,000 frequency-matched controls. Transfusions received 0 to 12, 13 to 30, and 31 to 48 months before cancer diagnosis or selection date were identified using Medicare claims. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using logistic regression models. A Bonferroni correction adjusted for multiple testing. RESULTS: Transfusions received 0 to 12 months before cancer diagnosis and/or selection were associated with significantly elevated risk of cancer overall (OR,2.05; 95% CI, 1.95-2.16) and cancer of the stomach; cancer of the colon; cancer of the liver, kidney, renal pelvis, and/or ureter; lymphoma; myeloma; and leukemia. No significant associations for cancer overall were observed for the two earlier intervals. No site was associated with transfusions received 13 to 30 or 31 to 48 months before diagnosis and/or selection. Nonetheless, overall cancer risk increased with the number of transfused periods (p-trend<0.0001). CONCLUSION: Risk of overall cancer and specific sites was elevated 0 to 12 months after blood transfusion and associated with multiple transfusions, possibly due to reverse causation, that is, incipient cancers or cancer precursors causing anemia.

Association of polypectomy techniques, endoscopist volume, and facility type with colonoscopy complications.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Serious GI adverse events in the outpatient setting were examined by polypectomy technique, endoscopist volume, and facility type (ambulatory surgery center and hospital outpatient department). DESIGN: Retrospective follow-up study. SETTING: Ambulatory surgery and hospital discharge datasets from Florida (1997-2004) were used. PATIENTS: A total of 2,315,126 outpatient colonoscopies performed in patients of all ages and payers were examined. MAIN OUTCOME: Thirty-day hospitalizations because of colonic perforations and GI bleeding, measured as cumulative and specific outcomes, were investigated. RESULTS: Compared with simple colonoscopy, the adjusted risks of cumulative adverse events were greater with the use of cold forceps (1.21 [95% CI, 1.01-1.44]), ablation (3.75 [95% CI, 2.97-4.72]), hot forceps (5.63 [95% CI, 4.97-6.39]), snares (7.75 [95% CI, 6.95-8.64]), or complex colonoscopy (8.83 [95% CI, 7.70-10.12]). Low-volume endoscopists had higher risks of adverse events (1.18 [95% CI, 1.07-1.30]). A higher risk of adverse events was associated with procedures performed in ambulatory surgery centers (1.27 [95% CI, 1.16-1.40]). Important findings were also reported for the analyses stratified by specific outcomes and procedures. LIMITATION: The study was constrained by limitations inherent in administrative data pertaining to a single state. CONCLUSIONS: As the complexity of polypectomy increases, a higher risk of adverse events is reported. Using lower risk procedures when clinically appropriate or referring patients to high-volume endoscopists can reduce the rates of perforations and GI bleeding. Given the large number of colonoscopies performed in the United States, it is critical that the rates of adverse events be considered when choosing procedures.