Area Vulnerability and Disparities in Therapy for Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma.

Importance: Area-level measures of sociodemographic disadvantage may be associated with racial and ethnic disparities with respect to receipt of treatment for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) but have not been investigated previously, to our knowledge. Objective: To assess the association between area-level measures of social vulnerability and racial and ethnic disparities in the treatment of US Medicare beneficiaries with mRCC from 2015 through 2019. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study included Medicare beneficiaries older than 65 years who were diagnosed with mRCC from January 2015 through December 2019 and were enrolled in fee-for-service Medicare Parts A, B, and D from 1 year before through 1 year after presumed diagnosis or until death. Data were analyzed from November 22, 2022, through January 26, 2024. Exposures: Five different county-level measures of disadvantage and 4 zip code-level measures of vulnerability or deprivation and segregation were used to dichotomize whether an individual resided in the most vulnerable quartile according to each metric. Patient-level factors included age, race and ethnicity, sex, diagnosis year, comorbidities, frailty, Medicare and Medicaid dual enrollment eligibility, and Medicare Part D low-income subsidy (LIS). Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were receipt and type of systemic therapy (oral anticancer agent or immunotherapy from 2 months before to 1 year after diagnosis of mRCC) as a function of patient and area-level characteristics. Multivariable regression analyses were used to adjust for patient factors, and odds ratios (ORs) from logistic regression and relative risk ratios (RRRs) from multinomial logistic regression are reported. Results: The sample included 15 407 patients (mean [SD] age, 75.6 [6.8] years), of whom 9360 (60.8%) were men; 6931 (45.0%), older than 75 years; 93 (0.6%), American Indian or Alaska Native; 257 (1.7%), Asian or Pacific Islander; 757 (4.9%), Hispanic; 1017 (6.6%), non-Hispanic Black; 12 966 (84.2%), non-Hispanic White; 121 (0.8%), other; and 196 (1.3%), unknown. Overall, 8317 patients (54.0%) received some type of systemic therapy. After adjusting for individual factors, no county or zip code-level measures of social vulnerability, deprivation, or segregation were associated with disparities in treatment. In contrast, patient-level factors, including female sex (OR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.73-0.84) and LIS (OR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.36-0.65), were associated with lack of treatment, with particularly limited access to immunotherapy for patients with LIS (RRR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.14-0.43). Associations between individual-level factors and treatment in multivariable analysis were not mediated by the addition of area-level metrics. Disparities by race and ethnicity were consistently and only observed within the most vulnerable areas, as indicated by the top quartile of each vulnerability deprivation index. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of older Medicare patients diagnosed with mRCC, individual-level demographics, including race and ethnicity, sex, and income, were associated with receipt of systemic therapy, whereas area-level measures were not. However, individual-level racial and ethnic disparities were largely limited to socially vulnerable areas, suggesting that efforts to improve racial and ethnic disparities may be most effective when targeted to socially vulnerable areas.

Trends in new and persistent opioid use in older adults with and without cancer.

BACKGROUND: The impact of ongoing efforts to decrease opioid use on patients with cancer remains undefined. Our objective was to determine trends in new and additional opioid use in patients with and without cancer. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used data from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program-Medicare for opioid-naive patients with solid tumor malignancies diagnosed from 2012 through 2017 and a random sample of patients without cancer. We identified 238 470 eligible patients with cancer and further focused on 4 clinical strata: patients without cancer, patients with metastatic cancer, patients with nonmetastatic cancer treated with surgery alone ("surgery alone"), and patients with nonmetastatic cancer treated with surgery plus chemotherapy or radiation therapy ("surgery+"). We identified new, early additional, and long-term additional opioid use and calculated the change in predicted probability of these outcomes from 2012 to 2017. RESULTS: New opioid use was higher in patients with cancer (46.4%) than in those without (6.9%) (P < .001). From 2012 to 2017, the predicted probability of new opioid use was more stable in the cancer strata (relative declines: 0.1% surgery alone; 2.4% surgery+; 8.8% metastatic cancer), than in the noncancer stratum (20.0%) (P < .001 for each cancer to noncancer comparison). Early additional use declined among surgery patients (‒14.9% and ‒17.5% for surgery alone and surgery+, respectively) but was stable among patients with metastatic disease (‒2.8%, P = .50). CONCLUSIONS: Opioid prescribing declined over time at a slower rate in patients with cancer than in patients without cancer. Our study suggests important but tempered effects of the changing opioid climate on patients with cancer.

Characteristics, healthcare utilization, and outcomes of patients with HER2-low breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Treatment for HER2-low [defined as ImmunoHistoChemistry (IHC) 1 + or 2 + and negative/normal in Situ Hybridization (ISH)] breast cancer patients is rapidly evolving, yet we lack critical information about the HER2-low population. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of women aged 18 years or older diagnosed with breast cancer between 2010 and 2016 in North Carolina. Analyses were conducted for the overall cohort and a stage IV sub-cohort. We examined demographic and clinical characteristics, and characterized prevalence of HER2-low disease and healthcare utilization. We estimated adjusted rate ratios for the association between HER2 classifications and utilization outcomes, and hazard ratios for 3-year all cause mortality (stage IV only). RESULTS: The overall and stage IV cohorts included 12,965 and 635 patients, respectively. HER2-low patients represented more than half of both cohorts (59% overall, 53% stage IV). HER2-low patients were more likely than IHC 0 patients to have hormone receptor (HR)-positive disease. In the stage IV cohort, HER2-low patients were more likely to be Black (26% vs. 16% IHC 0, p = 0.0159). In both cohorts, rates of hospitalizations were slightly higher among HER2-low patients. There were no survival differences between HER2-low and IHC 0 among stage IV patients. CONCLUSION: New treatment options for HER2-low breast cancer may have potential for significant impact at the population level particularly for patients with stage IV disease. In light of racial differences between HER2-low and IHC 0 patients observed in our cohort, research- and practice-based efforts to ensure equitable adoption of new treatment guidelines for patients with HER2-low metastatic breast cancer will be essential.

Relative Burden of Cancer and Noncancer Mortality Among Long-Term Survivors of Breast, Prostate, and Colorectal Cancer in the US.

Importance: Improvements in cancer outcomes have led to a need to better understand long-term oncologic and nononcologic outcomes and quantify cancer-specific vs noncancer-specific mortality risks among long-term survivors. Objective: To assess absolute and relative cancer-specific vs noncancer-specific mortality rates among long-term survivors of cancer, as well as associated risk factors. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study included 627 702 patients in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results cancer registry with breast, prostate, or colorectal cancer who received a diagnosis between January 1, 2003, and December 31, 2014, who received definitive treatment for localized disease and who were alive 5 years after their initial diagnosis (ie, long-term survivors of cancer). Statistical analysis was conducted from November 2022 to January 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: Survival time ratios (TRs) were calculated using accelerated failure time models, and the primary outcome of interest examined was death from index cancer vs alternative (nonindex cancer) mortality across breast, prostate, colon, and rectal cancer cohorts. Secondary outcomes included subgroup mortality in cancer-specific risk groups, categorized based on prognostic factors, and proportion of deaths due to cancer-specific vs noncancer-specific causes. Independent variables included age, sex, race and ethnicity, income, residence, stage, grade, estrogen receptor status, progesterone receptor status, prostate-specific antigen level, and Gleason score. Follow-up ended in 2019. Results: The study included 627 702 patients (mean [SD] age, 61.1 [12.3] years; 434 848 women [69.3%]): 364 230 with breast cancer, 118 839 with prostate cancer, and 144 633 with colorectal cancer who survived 5 years or more from an initial diagnosis of early-stage cancer. Factors associated with shorter median cancer-specific survival included stage III disease for breast cancer (TR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.53-0.55) and colorectal cancer (colon: TR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.58-0.62; rectal: TR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.69-0.74), as well as a Gleason score of 8 or higher for prostate cancer (TR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.58-0.63). For all cancer cohorts, patients at low risk had at least a 3-fold higher noncancer-specific mortality compared with cancer-specific mortality at 10 years of diagnosis. Patients at high risk had a higher cumulative incidence of cancer-specific mortality than noncancer-specific mortality in all cancer cohorts except prostate. Conclusions and Relevance: This study is the first to date to examine competing oncologic and nononcologic risks focusing on long-term adult survivors of cancer. Knowledge of the relative risks facing long-term survivors may help provide pragmatic guidance to patients and clinicians regarding the importance of ongoing primary and oncologic-focused care.

Disparities in immune and targeted therapy utilization for older US patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

Disparities in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) outcomes persist in the era of oral anticancer agents (OAAs) and immunotherapies (IOs). We examined variation in the utilization of mRCC systemic therapies among US Medicare beneficiaries from 2015 to 2019. Logistic regression models evaluated the association between therapy receipt and demographic covariates including patient race, ethnicity, and sex. In total, 15 407 patients met study criteria. After multivariable adjustment, non-Hispanic Black race and ethnicity was associated with reduced IO (adjusted relative risk ratio [aRRR] = 0.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.61 to 0.95; P = .015) and OAA receipt (aRRR = 0.76, 95% CI = 0.64 to 0.90; P = .002) compared with non-Hispanic White race and ethnicity. Female sex was associated with reduced IO (aRRR = 0.73, 95% CI = 0.66 to 0.81; P < .001) and OAA receipt (aRRR = 0.74, 95% CI = 0.68 to 0.81; P < .001) compared with male sex. Thus, disparities by race, ethnicity, and sex were observed in mRCC systemic therapy utilization for Medicare beneficiaries from 2015 to 2019.

Factors Associated With Receipt of Molecular Testing and its Impact on Time to Initial Systemic Therapy in Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Despite recommendations for molecular testing irrespective of patient characteristics, differences exist in receipt of molecular testing for oncogenic drivers amongst metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC) patients. Exploration into these differences and their effects on treatment is needed to identify opportunities for improvement. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adult patients diagnosed with mNSCLC between 2011 and 2018 using PCORnet's Rapid Cycle Research Project dataset (n = 3600). Log-binomial, Cox proportional hazards (PH), and time-varying Cox regression models were used to ascertain whether molecular testing was received, and time from diagnosis to molecular testing and/or initial systemic treatment in the context of patient age, sex, race/ethnicity, and multiple comorbidities status. RESULTS: The majority of patients in this cohort were ≤ 65 years of age (median [25th, 75th]: 64 [57, 71]), male (54.3%), non-Hispanic white individuals (81.6%), with > 2 comorbidities in addition to mNSCLC (54.1%). About half the cohort received molecular testing (49.9%). Patients who received molecular testing had a 59% higher probability of initial systemic treatment than patients who were yet to receive testing. Multiple comorbidity status was positively associated with receipt of molecular testing (RR, 1.27; 95% CI 1.08, 1.49). CONCLUSION: Receipt of molecular testing in academic centers was associated with earlier initiation of systemic treatment. This finding underscores the need to increase molecular testing rates amongst mNSCLC patients during a clinically relevant period. Further studies to validate these findings in community centers are warranted.

Clinician Perspectives on Managing Chronic Pain After Curative-Intent Cancer Treatment.

PURPOSE: Among cancer survivors who have completed curative-intent treatment, the high prevalence and adverse consequences of chronic pain are well documented. Yet, research on clinicians' experiences with and perspectives on managing chronic pain among cancer survivors is critically lacking. METHODS: We conducted semistructured interviews with 17 clinicians (six oncology, three palliative care, and eight primary care) affiliated with an academic medical center. Interview questions addressed clinicians' experiences with and perspectives on managing chronic pain (with or without opioid therapy) during the transition from active treatment to survivorship. A multidisciplinary team conducted content analysis of interview transcripts to identify and refine themes related to current practices and challenges in managing chronic pain in this context. RESULTS: Overall, clinicians perceived chronic pain to be relatively uncommon among cancer survivors. Identified challenges included a lack of clarity about which clinician (or clinicians) are best positioned to manage chronic pain among cancer survivors, and (relatedly) complexities introduced by long-term opioid management, with many clinicians describing this practice as outside their skill set. Additionally, although most clinicians recognized chronic pain as a biopsychosocial phenomenon, they described challenges with effectively managing psychosocial stressors, including difficulty accessing mental or behavioral health services for cancer survivors. CONCLUSION: Discovered challenges highlight unmet needs related to cancer survivor-clinician communication about chronic pain and the absence of a chronic pain management home for cancer survivors, including those requiring long-term opioid therapy. Research evaluating routine pain monitoring and accessible, tailored models of multimodal pain care in survivorship may help to address these challenges.

Genetic testing in privately insured women with surgically treated breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Rates of BRCA1 and BRCA2 prevalence among women with breast cancer vary by age, hormone receptor status, and family history. Recommendations for genetic testing have varied between overlapping guidelines, payor coverage policies, and have evolved over time, resulting in unclear implications for adoption into routine breast cancer care. METHODS: Using a large, private insurer database, we examined rates of BRCA1/BRCA2 genetic testing in women with newly diagnosed invasive breast cancer undergoing surgery from 2015 through 2019. RESULTS: Testing increased among women 50 years or older from 26 to 38%, remained stable at 66% in both 2015 and 2019 in the under 50 population, and was slightly decreased in women under age 45 years. CONCLUSION: Among privately insured patients with breast cancer, rates are increasing in older women, but appear persistently underused in younger women.

End-of-Life Care for Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma in the Era of Oral Anticancer Therapy.

PURPOSE: New therapies including oral anticancer agents (OAAs) have improved outcomes for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). However, little is known about the quality of end-of-life (EOL) care and systemic therapy use at EOL in patients receiving OAAs or with mRCC. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed EOL care for decedents with mRCC in two parallel cohorts: (1) patients (RCC diagnosed 2004-2015) from the University of North Carolina's Cancer Information and Population Health Resource (CIPHR) and (2) patients (diagnosed 2007-2015) from SEER-Medicare. We assessed hospice use in the last 30 days of life and existing measures of poor-quality EOL care: systemic therapy, hospital admission, intensive care unit admission, and > 1 ED visit in the last 30 days of life; hospice initiation in the last 3 days of life; and in-hospital death. Associations between OAA use, patient and provider characteristics, and EOL care were examined using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: We identified 410 decedents in the CIPHR cohort (53.4% received OAA) and 1,508 in SEER-Medicare (43.5% received OAA). Prior OAA use was associated with increased systemic therapy in the last 30 days of life in both cohorts (CIPHR: 26.5% v 11.0%; P < .001; SEER-Medicare: 23.4% v 11.7%; P < .001), increased in-hospital death in CIPHR, and increased hospice in the last 30 days in SEER-Medicare. Older patients were less likely to receive systemic therapy or be admitted in the last 30 days or die in hospital. CONCLUSION: Patients with mRCC who received OAAs and younger patients experienced more aggressive EOL care, suggesting opportunities to optimize high-quality EOL care in these groups.

Racial and Ethnic Variation in COVID-19 Vaccination Uptake Among Medicare Beneficiaries with Cancer History.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to estimate COVID-19 vaccination rate among Medicare beneficiaries with cancer history and determine whether COVID-19 vaccine uptake is higher among non-Hispanic White beneficiaries compared with racially and ethnically minoritized beneficiaries. METHODS: We used US representative, cross-sectional data from the Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey COVID-19 Winter 2021 Rapid Response Community Supplement Survey. A total of 1,863 respondents with self-reported cancer history (other than skin cancer) were included. The outcome was self-reported receipt of at least one coronavirus vaccine dose since vaccines became available. The key independent variable of interest was self-reported race and ethnicity. We applied sample weights to account for the survey design and provide population estimates to 9.6 million beneficiaries with cancer history. Weighted descriptive statistics and multivariable logistic regression analyses were conducted. RESULTS: During the first 4 months of vaccine availability, 69.6% of beneficiaries received at least one vaccine dose of which 65.4% had two vaccine doses. A larger proportion of non-Hispanic White beneficiaries (71.9%) had at least one vaccine dose compared with non-Hispanic Black (60.4%) and Hispanic (57.4%) beneficiaries. An estimated 30.4% of beneficiaries were still unvaccinated, that represents approximately 2.9 million unvaccinated beneficiaries with cancer history. Hispanic beneficiaries were 42% (OR: 0.58; 95% CI: 0.33-0.99; p = .048) less likely to be vaccinated compared with non-Hispanic White beneficiaries. CONCLUSIONS: Results indicate racial and ethnic differences in vaccine uptake among Medicare beneficiaries with cancer history. Effective strategies are needed to help increase vaccine confidence and uptake among adults with cancer history.

Concurrent prescribing of opioids with other sedating medications after cancer diagnosis: a population-level analysis.

PURPOSE: Cancer is a major reason for concurrent prescription of opioids with other sedating medications-particularly benzodiazepines and gabapentinoids-yet population-based assessments of the extent and predictors of concurrent prescribing among clinically and demographically diverse patients with cancer are lacking. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients with non-metastatic cancer using North Carolina cancer registry data linked with Medicare and private insurance claims (2013-2016). We used modified Poisson regression to assess associations of patient characteristic with adjusted relative risk (aRR) of new concurrent prescribing of opioids with benzodiazepines or gabapentinoids after diagnosis. RESULTS: Overall, 15% of patients were concurrently prescribed opioids with benzodiazepines or gabapentinoids. Characteristics independently associated with an increased risk of concurrent prescribing included cancer type (e.g., aRR cervical vs. colorectal cancer: 1.55, 95% CI: 1.12-2.14); prior use of opioids (aRR: 2.43, 95% CI:2.21-2.67), benzodiazepines (aRR: 4.08, 95% CI: 3.72-4.48), or gabapentinoids (3.82, 95% CI: 3.31-4.39), and premorbid mental health conditions, including substance use disorder (aRR: 1.27, 95% CI: 1.05-1.54). Black and Hispanic patients were less likely to experience concurrent prescribing (aRR, Black vs. White: 0.35, 95% CI: 0.15-0.83; aRR, Hispanic vs. White: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.66-0.85). CONCLUSION: Approximately 1 in 7 patients with cancer was concurrently prescribed opioids with other sedating medications. Associations between patient characteristics and risk of concurrent prescribing highlight predictors of concurrent prescribing and suggest a rationale for systematic assessment of substance use history at diagnosis. Future research could explore inequitable pain and symptom management and investigate risk of adverse medication-related events.

Oral Anticancer Agent (OAA) Adherence and Survival in Elderly Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma (mRCC).

OBJECTIVE: To examine real-world adherence to oral anticancer agents (OAAs) and its association with outcomes among Medicare beneficiaries with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). METHODS: SEER-Medicare retrospective cohort study of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) who received an OAA between 2007 and 2015. We examined A) adherence and B) overall and disease-specific 2-year survival landmarked at 3 months after OAA initiation. Adherence was assessed by calculating the proportion of days covered (PDC) within 3 months of OAA initiation, with adherent use being defined as PDC > 80%. RESULTS: A total of 905 patients met study criteria, of whom 445 patients (49.2%) were categorized as adherent to initial OAA treatment. Adjusting for clinical and demographic factors revealed decreased odds of adherence associated with living within an impoverished neighborhood (OR 0.49, CI 0.0.33 - 0.74) and out-of-pocket costs > $200 (OR 0.68, CI 0.47-.98). Adherence was associated with improved 2-year survival in univariate analysis (logrank test, P = .01) and a non-significant trend toward an association with decreased all-cause (HR 0.87, CI 0.72 - 1.05) and RCC-specific survival (HR 0.84, CI 0.69 - 1.03) in multivariable analysis. CONCLUSION: Local poverty levels and high out-of-pocket costs are associated with poor initial adherence to OAA therapy in Medicare beneficiaries with mRCC, which in turn, suggests a trend toward poor overall and disease-specific survival. Efforts to improve outcomes in the broader mRCC population should incorporate OAA adherence and economic factors.

Association between cognitive impairment and oral anticancer agent use in older patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Kidney cancer is the fastest-growing cancer diagnosis in the developed world. About 16% of new cases are stage IV, which has a low five-year survival rate. Many patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) are older and may have mild cognitive impairment or dementia (MCI/D). Given prior reports of patients with dementia initiating less cancer therapy and the importance of oral anticancer agents (OAAs) in mRCC treatment, we investigated the prevalence of preexisting MCI/D in patients with mRCC and their OAA use. METHODS: SEER-Medicare patients were analyzed who were ≥65 years, diagnosed with mRCC between 2007 and 2015, and had Medicare part D coverage. Patterns and predictors of (a) OAA utilization within the 12 months following mRCC diagnosis and (b) adherence (percent of days covered [PDC] ≥ 80%) during the first 90 days following treatment initiation were assessed. RESULTS: Of the 2792 eligible patients, 268 had preexisting MCI/D, and 907 initiated OAA treatment within 12 months of mRCC diagnosis. Patients with preexisting MCI/D were less likely to begin an OAA than those without MCI/D (fully-adjusted HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.38-0.76). Among OAA initiators, a preexisting MCI/D diagnosis did not alter the likelihood that a person would be adherent (adjusted RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.55-1.28). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with preexisting MCI/D were half as likely to start an OAA during the year following mRCC diagnosis than patients without comorbid MCI/D. The 90-day adherence of OAA initiators was not significantly different between those with and without preexisting MCI/D. In light of this, clinicians should assess mRCC patients for cognitive impairment and take steps to optimize OAA utilization by those with MCI/D.

Patient- And Provider-Level Predictors of Survival Among Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Initiating Oral Anticancer Agents.

PURPOSE: In an era of rapid expansion of FDA approvals for oral anticancer agents (OAAs), it is important to understand the factors associated with survival among real-world populations, which include groups not well-represented in pivotal clinical trials of OAAs, such as the elderly, racial minorities, and medically complex patients. Our objective was to evaluate patient- and provider-level characteristics' associations with mortality among a multi-payer cohort of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients who initiated OAAs. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study was conducted using data from the North Carolina state cancer registry linked to multi-payer claims data for the years 2004 to 2015. Provider data were obtained from North Carolina Health Professions Data System and the National Plan & Provider Enumeration System. Included patients were individuals with mRCC who initiated an OAA and survived ≥90 days after beginning treatment. We estimated hazard ratios (HR) and corresponding 95% confidence limits (CL) using Cox hazard models for associations between patient demographics, patient clinical characteristics, provider-level factors, and 2-year all-cause mortality. RESULTS: The cohort included 207 patients with mRCC who received OAAs. In multivariable models, clinical variables such as frailty (HR: 1.36, 95% CL: 1.11-1.67) and de novo metastatic diagnosis (HR: 2.63, 95%CL: 1.67-4.16) were associated with higher all-cause mortality. Additionally, patients solely on Medicare had higher adjusted all-cause mortality compared with patients with any private insurance (HR: 2.35, 95% CL: 1.32-4.18). No provider-level covariates investigated were associated with all-cause mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Within a real-world population of mRCC patients taking OAAs, survival differed based on patient characteristics. In an era of rapid expansion of FDA approvals for OAAs, these real-world data underscore the continued importance of access to high-quality care, particularly for medically complex patients with limited resources.

Patient, provider, and hospital factors associated with oral anti-neoplastic agent initiation and adherence in older patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

INTRODUCTION: Oral anti-neoplastic agents (OAAs) for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) are associated with increased cancer-specific survival. However, racial disparities in survival persist and older adults have the lowest rates of cancer-specific survival. Research from other cancers demonstrates specialty access is associated with high-quality cancer care, but older adults receive cancer treatment less often than younger adults. We therefore examined whether patient, provider, and hospital characteristics were associated with OAA initiation, adherence, and cancer-specific survival after initiation and whether race, ethnicity, and/or age was associated with an increased likelihood of seeing a medical oncologist for diagnosis of mRCC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We used Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)Medicare data to identify patients ≥65 years of age who were diagnosed with mRCC from 2007 to 2015 and enrolled in Medicare Part D. Insurance claims were used to identify receipt of OAAs within twelve months of metastatic diagnosis, calculate proportion of days covered, and to identify the primary cancer provider and hospital. We examined provider and hospital characteristics associated with OAA initiation, adherence, and all-cause mortality after OAA initiation. RESULTS: We identified 2792 patients who met inclusion criteria. Increased OAA initiation was associated with access to a medical oncologist. Patients were less likely to begin OAA treatment if their primary oncologic provider was a urologist (hazard ratio [HR] 0.62; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.49-0.77). Provider/hospital characteristics were not associated with differences in OAA adherence or mortality. Patients who started sorafenib (odds ratio [OR] 0.50; 95% CI 0.29-0.86), were older (aged >81 OR 0.56; 95% CI 0.34-0.92), and those living in high poverty ZIP codes (OR 0.48; 95% CI 0.29-0.80) were less likely to adhere to OAA treatment. Furthermore, provider characteristics did not account for differences in mortality once an OAA was initiated. Last, only age > 81 years was statistically and clinically associated with a decreased relative risk of seeing a medical oncologist (risk ratio [RR] 0.87; CI 0.82-0.92). CONCLUSION: Provider/hospital factors, specifically, being seen by a medical oncologist for mRCC diagnosis, are associated with OAA initiation. Older patients were less likely to see a medical oncologist; however, race and/or ethnicity was not associated with differences in seeing a medical oncologist. Patient factors are more critical to OAA adherence and mortality after OAA initiation than provider/hospital factors.

Evaluation of mild cognitive impairment and dementia in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Dementia and cancer are both more common in adults as they age. As new cancer treatments become more popular, it is important to consider how these treatments might affect older patients. This study evaluates metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) as a risk factor for older adults developing mild cognitive impairment or dementia (MCI/D) and the impact of mRCC-directed therapies on the development of MCI/D. METHODS: We identified patients diagnosed with mRCC in a Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare dataset from 2007 to 2015 and matched them to non-cancer controls. Exclusion criteria included age < 65 years at mRCC diagnosis and diagnosis of MCI/D within the year preceding mRCC diagnosis. The main outcome was time to incident MCI/D within one year of mRCC diagnosis for cases or cohort entry for non-cancer controls. Cox proportional hazards models were used to measure associations between mRCC and incident MCI/D as well as associations of oral anticancer agent (OAA) use with MCI/D development within the mRCC group. RESULTS: Patients with mRCC (n = 2533) were matched to non-cancer controls (n = 7027). mRCC (hazard ratio [HR] 8.52, p < .001), being older (HR 1.05 per 1-year age increase, p < .001), and identifying as Black (HR 1.92, p = .047) were predictive of developing MCI/D. In addition, neither those initiating treatment with OAAs nor those who underwent nephrectomy were more likely to develop MCI/D. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with mRCC were more likely to develop MCI/D than those without mRCC. The medical and surgical therapies evaluated were not associated with increased incidence of MCI/D. The increased incidence of MCI/D in older adults with mRCC may be the result of the pathology itself or risk factors common to the two disease processes.

Opioid Prescribing and Use Among Cancer Survivors: A Mapping Review of Observational and Intervention Studies.

CONTEXT: Recent years show a sharp increase in research on opioid use among cancer survivors, but evidence syntheses are lacking, leaving knowledge gaps. Corresponding research needs are unclear. OBJECTIVES: To provide an evidence synthesis. METHODS: We searched PubMed and Embase, identifying articles related to cancer, and opioid prescribing/use published through September 2020. We screened resulting titles/abstracts. Relevant studies underwent full-text review. Inclusion criteria were quantitative examination of and primary focus on opioid prescribing or use, and explicit inclusion of cancer survivors. Exclusion criteria included end-of-life opioid use and opioid use as a secondary or downstream outcome (for intervention studies). We extracted information on the opioid-related outcome(s) examined (including definitions and terminology used), study design, and methods. RESULTS: Research returned 16,591 articles; 296 were included. Only 22 of 296 studies evaluated an intervention. There were 105 studies evaluating outcomes indicative of potentially high-risk, nonrecommended, or avoidable opioid use, e.g., continuous use-described as chronic use, prolonged use, and persistent use (n = 17); use after completion of curative-intent treatment-described as chronic opioid use, long-term opioid use, persistent opioid use, prolonged opioid use, continued opioid use, late opioid use, post-treatment opioid use (n = 27); use of opioids concurrent with other potentially high-risk medications (n = 13), and opioid misuse (n = 14). CONCLUSIONS: We found lack of consistency in the measurement of and terms used to describe similar opioid use outcomes, and a lack of interventional research targeting well-documented patterns of potentially nonrecommended, potentially avoidable, or potentially high-risk opioid prescribing or use.

Low-touch, team-based care for co-morbidity management in cancer patients: the ONE TEAM randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: As treatments for cancer have improved, more people are surviving cancer. However, compared to people without a history of cancer, cancer survivors are more likely to die of cardiovascular disease (CVD). Increased risk for CVD-related mortality among cancer survivors is partially due to lack of medication adherence and problems that exist in care coordination between cancer specialists, primary care physicians, and cardiologists. METHODS/DESIGN: The Onco-primary care networking to support TEAM-based care (ONE TEAM) study is an 18-month cluster-randomized controlled trial with clustering at the primary care clinic level. ONE TEAM compares the provision of the iGuide intervention to patients and primary care providers versus an education-only control. For phase 1, at the patient level, the intervention includes video vignettes and a live webinar; provider-level interventions include electronic health records-based communication and case-based webinars. Participants will be enrolled from across North Carolina one of their first visits with a cancer specialist (e.g., surgeon, radiation or medical oncologist). We use a sequential multiple assignment randomized trial (SMART) design. Outcomes (measured at the patient level) will include Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS) quality measures of management of three CVD comorbidities using laboratory testing (glycated hemoglobin [A1c], lipid profile) and blood pressure measurements; (2) medication adherence assessed pharmacy refill data using Proportion of Days Covered (PDC); and (3) patient-provider communication (Patient-Centered Communication in Cancer Care, PCC-Ca-36). Primary care clinics in the intervention arm will be considered non-responders if 90% or more of their participating patients do not meet the modified HEDIS quality metrics at the 6-month measurement, assessed once the first enrollee from each practice reaches the 12-month mark. Non-responders will be re-randomized to either continue to receive the iGuide 1 intervention, or to receive the iGuide 2 intervention, which includes tailored videos for participants and specialist consults with primary care providers. DISCUSSION: As the population of cancer survivors grows, ONE TEAM will contribute to closing the CVD outcomes gap among cancer survivors by optimizing and integrating cancer care and primary care teams. ONE TEAM is designed so that it will be possible for others to emulate and implement at scale. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study (NCT04258813) was registered in clinicaltrals.gov on February 6, 2020.

Real-World Utilization of Oral Anticancer Agents and Related Costs in Older Adults with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Substantial racial and socioeconomic disparities in metastatic RCC (mRCC) have persisted following the introduction of targeted oral anticancer agents (OAAs). The relationship between patient characteristics and OAA access and costs that may underlie persistent disparities in mRCC outcomes have not been examined in a nationally representative patient population. METHODS: Retrospective SEER-Medicare analysis of patients diagnosed with mRCC between 2007-2015 over age 65 with Medicare part D prescription drug coverage. Associations between patient characteristics, OAA receipt, and associated costs were analyzed in the 12 months following mRCC diagnosis and adjusted to 2015 dollars. RESULTS: 2,792 patients met inclusion criteria, of which 32.4%received an OAA. Most patients received sunitinib (57%) or pazopanib (28%) as their first oral therapy. Receipt of OAA did not differ by race/ethnicity or socioeconomic indicators. Patients of advanced age (> 80 years), unmarried patients, and patients residing in the Southern US were less likely to receive OAAs. The mean inflation-adjusted 30-day cost to Medicare of a patient's first OAA prescription nearly doubled from $3864 in 2007 to $7482 in 2015, while patient out-of-pocket cost decreased from $2409 to $1477. CONCLUSION: Race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status were not associated with decreased OAA receipt in patients with mRCC; however, residing in the Southern United States was, as was marital status. Surprisingly, the cost to Medicare of an initial OAA prescription nearly doubled from 2007 to 2015, while patient out-of-pocket costs decreased substantially. Shifts in OAA costs may have significant economic implications in the era of personalized medicine.