Medical care disruptions during the first six months of the COVID-19 pandemic: the experience of older breast cancer survivors.

PURPOSE: Older cancer survivors required medical care during the COVID-19 pandemic, but there are limited data on medical care in this age group. METHODS: We evaluated care disruptions in a longitudinal cohort of non-metastatic breast cancer survivors aged 60-98 from five US regions (n = 321). Survivors completed a web-based or telephone survey from May 27, 2020 to September 11, 2020. Care disruptions included interruptions in seeing or speaking to doctors, receiving medical treatment or supportive therapies, or filling prescriptions since the pandemic began. Logistic regression models evaluated associations between care disruptions and education, medical, psychosocial, and COVID-19-related factors. Multivariate models included age, county COVID-19 death rates, comorbidity, and post-diagnosis time. RESULTS: There was a high response rate (n = 262, 81.6%). Survivors were 32.2 months post-diagnosis (SD 17.5, range 4-73). Nearly half (48%) reported a medical disruption. The unadjusted odds of care disruptions were higher with each year of education (OR 1.22, 95% CI 1.08-1.37, p = < 0.001) and increased depression by CES-D score (OR 1.04, CI 1.003-1.08, p = 0.033) while increased tangible support decreased the odds of disruptions (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.97-0.99, p = 0.012). There was a trend between disruptions and comorbidities (unadjusted OR 1.13 per comorbidity, 95% CI 0.99-1.29, p = 0.07). Adjusting for covariates, higher education years (OR1.23, 95% CI 1.09-1.39, p = 0.001) and tangible social support (OR 0.98 95% CI 0.97-1.00, p = 0.006) remained significantly associated with having care disruptions. CONCLUSION: Older breast cancer survivors reported high rates of medical care disruptions during the COVID-19 pandemic and psychosocial factors were associated with care disruptions. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT03451383.

Medical Care Disruptions During the First Six-Months of the COVID19 Pandemic: The Experience of Older Breast Cancer Survivors.

PurposeOlder cancer survivors required medical care during the COVID-19 pandemic despite infection risks, but there are limited data on medical care in this age group. METHODS: We evaluated care disruptions in a longitudinal cohort of non-metastatic breast cancer survivors ages 60-98 from five US regions (n=321). Survivors completed a web-based or telephone survey from May 27, 2020 to September 11, 2020. Care disruptions included self-reported interruptions in ability to see doctors, receive treatment or supportive therapies, or fill prescriptions. Logistic regression models evaluated bivariate and multivariate associations between care disruptions and education, medical, psychosocial and COVID-19-related factors. Multivariate models included age, county COVID-19 rates, comorbidity and post-diagnosis time. RESULTS: There was a high response rate (n=262, 81.6%). Survivors were 32.2 months post-diagnosis (SD 17.5, range 4-73). Nearly half (48%) reported a medical disruption. The unadjusted odds of care disruptions were significantly higher with more education (OR 1.23 per one-year increase, 95% CI 1.09-1.39, p =0.001) and greater depression (OR 1.04 per one-point increase in CES-D score, CI 1.003-1.08, p=0.033); tangible support decreased the odds of disruptions (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.97-0.99 per one-point increase, p=0.012). There was a trend for associations between disruptions and comorbidity (unadjusted OR 1.13 per 1 added comorbidity, 95% CI 0.99-1.29, p=0.07). Adjusting for covariates, only higher education (p=0.001) and tangible social support (p=0.006) remained significantly associated with having care disruptions. CONCLUSIONS: Older breast cancer survivors reported high rates of medical care disruptions during the COVID-19 pandemic and psychosocial factors were associated with care disruptions.

Patient and provider barriers to colorectal cancer screening in the primary care safety-net.

OBJECTIVES: This study examines patient and provider barriers to screening for colorectal cancer among low-income uninsured African-Americans aged 50 years or older in an urban safety-net primary care clinic, with the goal of informing a future intervention. METHODS: Four focus groups were conducted among 40 patients from, or living in the immediate neighborhood of, a primary care clinic for uninsured residents of Washington, DC. An additional focus group was conducted among primary care providers from the same clinic. Using semistructured open-ended questions, moderators elicited perceptions of barriers and promoters of colorectal cancer screening and suggestions to improve adherence to screening guidelines. The focus groups were audio-taped and transcribed verbatim. The transcripts were independently coded by two reviewers using established qualitative methodology. RESULTS: Patient and provider comments from the five focus groups fell into one of eight content areas: primary care characteristics (36% of comments), procedural issues related to screening (16% of comments), knowledge (14% of comments), cost/insurance coverage (13%), ordering of priorities (12%), attitudes (5%), information sources (2%), and perceptions of discrimination (2%). Involving various members of the primary care team in colorectal cancer screening processes, and using reminders with feedback, were identified as promising avenues for future interventions in the safety-net setting. Patients and providers cited the lack of referral sources for colonoscopy for follow-up of abnormal fecal occult blood tests (FOBT), and lack of treatment sources as major barriers to the initiation of colorectal cancer screening in uninsured populations. CONCLUSIONS: Organizational level interventions, such as a team approach to colorectal cancer screening, are important areas identified for future colorectal cancer screening interventions in the safety-net primary care setting. Larger policy efforts to provide coverage for screening, diagnosis, and treatment among the uninsured are critical to implementing adequate colorectal cancer screening for this population.

Medicare fees and small area variations in breast-conserving surgery among elderly women.

This study used data from Medicare files, the American Hospital Association's Annual Survey of Hospitals, and the 1990 census to investigate whether Medicare fees for breast-conserving surgery (BCS) and mastectomy (MST) affected the rate of BCS across 799 3-digit ZIP code areas in 1994. The full model, which was based on the conceptual framework of the supply of and demand for different treatments, explained 51 percent of the variation in BCS rates. Medicare fees were statistically significant and had the hypothesized effects: a 10 percent higher BCS fee was associated with a 7 to 10 percent higher BCS rate, while a 10 percent higher MST fee was associated with a 2 to 3 percent lower proportion receiving BCS. Other significant economic variables were proximity to a radiation therapy hospital, a teaching hospital or a cancer center, and the percentage of elderly women with incomes below the poverty rate, which were negatively related to the BCS rate. Variations in age, race, and metropolitan populations had small or insignificant effects. The single most important was the percentage of cases with one or more comorbidities.

The emotional consequences of false positive mammography: African-American women's reactions in their own words.

High false positive rates associated with screening for breast cancer in the United States have an unintended psychological consequence for women (Lerman et al., 1991) that has raised concerns in recent years (Sox, 1998). This study uses inductive qualitative analysis of open-ended interviews with 45 African American women living in New York City who were part of a larger study of women and their experiences after receiving an abnormal mammogram. Themes resulting from the analyses included: inadequate provider-patient communication, anxieties exacerbated by waiting and wondering, and fears of iatrogenic effects of follow-up tests such as biopsies and repeat mammograms. While more research is needed on message-framing strategies for women entering mammographic testing and follow-up, modest changes in service delivery such as improved medical communication can help to alleviate fears and enhance trust.

Cost of genetic counseling and testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2 breast cancer susceptibility mutations.

Counseling and predictive testing are now available for the recently isolated BRCA1 and BRCA2 breast cancer susceptibility genes. We examined the societal costs of providing this counseling and testing to women at risk of having a breast cancer susceptibility mutation. Genetic counselors in a research program prospectively monitored the time necessary to provide counseling and results disclosure. A time-motion study was used to determine time spent on phone calls, preparation, and documentation for counseling. Study participants were surveyed to determine travel time and need for dependent care during counseling. The test cost was calculated using the charge for full BRCA1/2 gene sequencing (Myriad Genetics, Inc.) multiplied by a Medicare-based cost-to-charge ratio. Counselors spent an average of 4.2 h providing genetic counseling for women at risk of having a susceptibility mutation. Genetic counseling without testing cost on average $213, whereas counseling, testing, and disclosure of results totaled $2057. A brief physician-based counseling instead of genetic counselor-based counseling would produce only small reductions in total costs. Providing counseling and testing to the study population averaged $8034 per mutation found. The cost of testing and counseling exceeded $2000. The counseling portion of the cost comprised only 16% of the total cost, with the remainder representing costs associated with testing; thus, alternatives to full genetic counseling that shorten counseling time are unlikely to have a large impact on the overall cost of counseling and testing. The cost of detecting a mutation within a population of women is highly dependent on the prevalence of the mutation in the population.

The art and science of incorporating cost effectiveness into evidence-based recommendations for clinical preventive services.

As medical technology continues to expand and the cost of using all effective clinical services exceeds available resources, decisions about health care delivery may increasingly rely on assessing the cost-effectiveness of medical services. Cost-effectiveness is particularly relevant for decisions about how to implement preventive services, because these decisions typically represent major investments in the future health of large populations. As such, decisions regarding the implementation of preventive services frequently involve, implicitly if not explicitly, consideration of costs. Cost-effectiveness analysis summarizes the expected benefits, harms, and costs of alternative strategies to improve health and has become an important tool for explicitly incorporating economic considerations into clinical decision making. Acknowledging the usefulness of this tool, the third U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) has initiated a process for systematically reviewing cost-effectiveness analyses as an aid in making recommendations about clinical preventive services. In this paper, we provide an overview and examples of roles for using cost-effectiveness analyses to inform preventive services recommendations, discuss limitations of cost-effectiveness data in shaping evidence-based preventive health care policies, outline the USPSTF approach to using cost-effectiveness analyses, and discuss the methods the USPSTF is developing to assess the quality and results of cost-effectiveness studies. While this paper focuses on clinical preventive services (i.e., screening, counseling, immunizations, and chemoprevention), the framework we have developed should be broadly portable to other health care services.

Measuring and predicting surgeons' practice styles for breast cancer treatment in older women.

BACKGROUND: Few measures exist to assess physicians' practice style, and there are few data on physicians' practice styles and patterns of care. OBJECTIVES: To use clinical vignettes to measure surgeons' "propensity" for local treatments for early-stage breast cancer and to describe factors associated with propensity. RESEARCH DESIGN AND SUBJECTS: A cross-sectional mailed survey with telephone follow-up of a random sample of 1,000 surgeons treating Medicare beneficiaries in fee-for-service settings. MEASURES: Outcome measures include treatment propensity, self-reported practice, and actual treatment received by the surgeons' patients. RESULTS: Propensities were significantly associated with actual treatment, controlling for covariates. Area Medicare fees were the strongest predictor of propensity, followed by region, attitudes, volume, and gender. For instance, after other factors were considered, surgeons practicing in areas with the highest breast-conserving surgery (BCS) fees were 8.61 (95% CI 2.26-32.73) times more likely to have a BCS propensity than surgeons in areas with the lowest fees. Surgeons with the strongest beliefs in patient participation in treatment decisions were nearly 6 times (95% CI 1.67-20.84) more likely to have a BCS propensity than surgeons with the lowest such beliefs, controlling for covariates. Male surgeons were also independently more likely to have a mastectomy propensity than female surgeons. CONCLUSIONS: Surgeons' propensities explain some of the observed variations in breast cancer treatment patterns among older women. Standardized scenarios provide a practical method to measure practice style and could be used to evaluate physician contributions to shared decision making, practice patterns, costs and outcomes, and adherence to guidelines.

Constructs of burden of illness in older patients with breast cancer: a comparison of measurement methods.

OBJECTIVE: The burden of illness can influence treatment decisions, but there are limited data comparing the performance of different illness burden measures. We assessed the correlations between five previously validated measures of illness burden and global health and physical function and evaluated how each measure correlates with breast cancer treatment patterns in older women. DATA SOURCE: A cohort of 718 women > 67 years with early-stage breast cancer formed the study group. STUDY DESIGN/DATA COLLECTION METHODS: The study made a cross-sectional comparison of illness burden measures (Charlson index, Index of Co-existent Diseases, cardiopulmonary burden of illness, patient-specific life expectancy, and disease counts) and physical function and self-rated global health status. Data were collected from records and patient interviews. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: All of the measures were significantly correlated with each other and with physical function and self-rated health (p < .001). After controlling for age and stage, life expectancy had the largest effect on surgical treatment, followed by self-rated physical function and health; life expectancy was also independent of physical function. For instance, women with higher life expectancy and better self-rated physical function and health were more likely to receive breast conservation and radiation than sicker women. Women with higher physical functioning were more likely to receive adjuvant chemotherapy than women with lower functioning. CONCLUSIONS: Several measures of illness burden were associated with breast cancer therapy, but each measure accounted for only a small amount of variance in treatment patterns. Future work is needed to develop and validate measures of burden of illness that are feasible, comprehensive, and relevant for diverse clinical and health services objectives.

Advancing age and cervical cancer screening and prognosis.

OBJECTIVES: To determine associations between advancing age and screening behavior and prognosis in long-term members of a prepaid health plan diagnosed with invasive cervical cancer (ICC). DESIGN: Case series. SETTING: Prepaid health plan. PARTICIPANTS: All women diagnosed with ICC at Kaiser Permanente Medical Care Program-Northern California health plan from 1988 to 1994. MEASUREMENTS: From medical records, we recorded participants' age, stage at diagnosis, tumor histology, and results of and reasons for all previous cervical smears. We limited our analysis to women who had been members of the health plan for at least 30 of the 36 months preceding diagnosis (n = 455). RESULTS: Women in older age groups were less likely than younger women to have been screened within the 3 years before diagnosis (P = .005 for trend). Nonadherence to follow-up of abnormal cervical smears was uncommon (17/455, 3.7%) and not age related (P = .932 for trend). The proportions of ICC that were interval cancers, defined as ICC diagnosed within 3 years of a negative screening smear, were highest in women under age 30 (P = .004 for trend). In multivariate analyses controlling for stage at diagnosis, women age 60 and older were not more likely to die of ICC within 3 years of diagnosis than were women younger than age 60 (odds ratio 1.30, 95% confidence interval 0.75-2.28). CONCLUSION: The disproportionate burden of cervical cancer observed in older women appears to be largely attributable to lack of screening within the 3 years before diagnosis.

Inreach and outreach interventions to improve mammography use.

OBJECTIVE: to assess the effectiveness of patient-targeted interventions in increasing mammography use when performed outside (outreach) or inside the primary care medical setting (inreach). METHODS: We performed a meta-analysis of controlled interventions to increase mammography use in patients in the United States published between 1980 and February 2001. Interventions were classified by setting (inreach or outreach), mechanism of action (behavioral, cognitive, sociologic, or a combination), type of control group (active or usual care), number of strategies, and mode of delivery (static or interactive). Summary estimates were calculated with DerSimonian and Laird random effects models for each group of interventions. RESULTS: We included 66 studies with 98 separate interventions. Inreach and outreach interventions were equally effective in increasing mammography use. Compared to active controls, behavioral interventions with multiple strategies increased mammography use by 14.0% (95% CI, 8.7-19.2) in inreach and 18.7% (95% CI, 4.9-32.4) in outreach settings. Theory-based educational strategies delivered interactively increased mammography use by 10.7% (95% CI, 6.8-14.7) and 19.9% (95% CI, 10.6-29.1) in inreach and outreach settings, respectively. Interventions that combined behavioral and theory-based educational strategies with usual care controls increased mammography use by 14.0% (95% CI, 7.9-20.2) in inreach and 27.3% (95% CI, 14.7-40.0) in outreach settings. Finally, sociologic interventions increased mammography use by 10.7% (95% CI, 3.4-18.0) and 9.1% (95% CI, 1.7-13.3) in inreach and outreach settings, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Inreach and outreach interventions to increase mammography use were similarly effective within intervention categories based on mechanism of action, mode of delivery, and type of control group. Ultimate decisions about intervention strategies will depend on the characteristics of the target population, practical considerations, and relative cost-effectiveness.

Screening mammography and breast cancer treatment patterns in older women.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of mammography screening on treatment options received by a cohort of older breast cancer patients. SETTING AND POPULATION: We studied 718 newly diagnosed breast cancer patients, 67 years and over, diagnosed with TNM Stage I and II disease between 1995 and 1997 at 29 hospitals in five regions. METHODS: Data were collected from patients, surgeons, and medical records. A breast cancer diagnosis was considered to have been by screening mammography if so reported by both patient and medical records. Bivariate and logistic regression were used to identify predictors of a women having her cancer detected by screening mammography and the relationships between mode of detection, stage of disease at diagnosis, and local treatment. RESULTS: Women with high school or greater education were 1.75 times (95%, CI 1.11-2.75) more likely to have their cancers diagnosed by screening mammography than women who had not completed high school, controlling for other factors. Screening found earlier stage disease: 96% of women with mammographically diagnosed cancer had T1 lesions, compared to 81% of women diagnosed by other means (p = 0.001). Women with mammography detected lesions were more likely to have ductal cancer, and to be referred to radiation oncologists more than women diagnosed by other means. Controlling for stage and histology, screening remained associated with a higher likelihood of receiving breast conserving surgery (BCS) with radiation (RT) (OR 1.56, 95%, CI 1.10-2.22) than other local therapies. CONCLUSIONS: Beyond the impact on stage, ductal cancers were more likely to be diagnosed by screening. Mammographically detected lesions were associated with referrals to radiation oncologists and higher rates of BCS and RT. Research is needed to explain the residual independent effects of mammography screening on breast cancer treatment.

The positive predictive value of cervical smears in previously screened postmenopausal women: the Heart and Estrogen/progestin Replacement Study (HERS).

BACKGROUND: The benefits and risks of performing annual cervical smears on postmenopausal women are not well defined. The independent effect of hormone replacement therapy on development of cytologic abnormalities is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To determine the positive predictive value of cervical smears in previously screened postmenopausal women and to determine the effect of oral estrogen plus progestin on incident cervical cytologic abnormalities. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study (incidence) and randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (hormone therapy). SETTING: 20 U.S. outpatient and community clinical centers. PARTICIPANTS: 2561 women with a uterus and normal cytologic characteristics at baseline. INTERVENTIONS: Annual smears; oral conjugated equine estrogens, 0. 625 mg/d, plus medroxyprogesterone acetate, 2.5 mg/d, or identical placebo. MEASUREMENTS: Incident cytologic abnormalities (atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance, atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance, low-grade squamous epithelial lesion, and high-grade squamous epithelial lesion) and final histologic diagnoses. RESULTS: The incidence of new cytologic abnormalities in the 2 years following a normal smear was 110 per 4895 person-years (23 per 1000 person-years [95% CI, 18 to 27 per 1000 person-years]). Among the 103 women with known histologic diagnoses, one had mild to moderate dysplasia. The positive predictive value of any smear abnormality identified 1 year after a normal smear, therefore, was 0% (CI, 0% to 5.0%) (0 of 78 women); the positive predictive value of abnormalities found within 2 years was 0.9% (CI, 0.0% to 3.0%) (1 of 110 women). In hormone-treated compared with non-hormone-treated women, the incidence of cytologic abnormalities was nonsignificantly higher (relative hazard, 1.36 [CI, 0.93 to 1.99]), largely because of a nonsignificant 58% greater incidence of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (relative hazard, 1.58 [CI, 0.99 to 2.52]). CONCLUSIONS: Because of a poor positive predictive value, cervical smears should not be performed within 2 years of normal cytologic results in postmenopausal women. Therapy with oral estrogen plus progestin does not significantly affect the incidence of cytologic abnormalities.

Effectiveness of interventions to improve follow-up after abnormal cervical cancer screening.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the effectiveness of interventions designed to improve follow-up after an abnormal Pap smear. METHODS: We performed a qualitative meta-analysis of interventions designed to improve follow-up after an abnormal Pap smear and included studies that met the following criteria: randomized or concurrently controlled study design, defined outcomes, and data available for abstraction. Interventions were classified as behavioral, cognitive, sociologic, or combined strategies (e.g., behavioral and cognitive). Abnormal Pap smears were defined as any test result requiring additional follow-up. Effectiveness was measured by the rate of compliance with recommended follow-up. RESULTS: Twenty-two interventions in 10 studies met the inclusion criteria. Cognitive interventions utilizing interactive telephone counseling were the most effective, improving compliance by 24 to 31%. Behavioral interventions, such as patient reminders, were also effective, increasing follow-up by up to 18%. Not all of these results achieved statistical significance. The single sociologic intervention we identified used video-taped peer discussions to provide a message about abnormal Pap smears and appropriate follow-up. This intervention was not associated with increased follow-up after an abnormal test. The effectiveness of interventions using multiple types of strategies to improve follow-up was inconsistent. CONCLUSIONS: Cognitive strategies led to the greatest improvement in compliance with follow-up of abnormal Pap smear screening tests. Extension of similar interventions to follow-up of abnormal breast and colon cancer screening, development of physician- and system-targeted interventions, and evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of these strategies are important priorities for future research.

Breast and cervical cancer screening for older women: recommendations and challenges for the 21st century.

The incidence of both breast and cervical cancer increases with age, and older socioeconomically disadvantaged and minority women are most likely to develop or die of these diseases. Early detection has the potential to decrease the disproportionate burden of disease in these vulnerable groups at a reasonable cost to society. Yet despite impressive overall gains in use of mammography and Pap smears, older women, especially older minority women, remain underrepresented in screening programs. Physician recommendation is one of the most powerful predictors of screening across all age, socioeconomic, and ethnic groups. The overwhelming majority of older women, make one or more physician visits each year, each of which represents an opportunity to screen for breast and cervical cancer. Although older women will accept screening if it is offered by their providers, physicians are less likely to offer it to them than to their younger, white patients. Conflicting professional recommendations for screening older women, leaving older women out of clinical trials of screening efficacy, competing causes of mortality with increasing age, and possible negative attitudes held by physicians and patients all contribute to the underscreening of older women. Cancer control challenges for the next century include defining groups of women most likely to benefit from screening (based on age, disease risk, competing mortality, and quality of life), improving regular use of early detection, educating providers, and conducting research on age-mediated differences in breast or cervical cancer biology that could affect screening recommendations.

Patterns of breast carcinoma treatment in older women: patient preference and clinical and physical influences.

BACKGROUND: Older women have high rates of breast carcinoma, and there are substantial variations in the patterns of care for this population group. METHODS: The authors studied 718 breast carcinoma patients age 67 years and older who were diagnosed with localized disease between 1995 and 1997 from 29 hospitals in 5 regions. Data were collected from patients, charts, and surgeons. Logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate determinants of treatment. RESULTS: Women who were concerned about body image were 1.8 times more likely (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.1-2.8) to receive breast conservation surgery and radiotherapy than women without this preference, controlling for other factors. In contrast, women who preferred receiving no therapy beyond surgery were 3.9 times more likely (95% CI, 2.9-6.1) to undergo mastectomy than other women, after considering other factors. Radiotherapy was omitted after breast conservation 3.4 times more often (95% CI, 2.0-5.6) among women age 80 years and older than among women ages 67-79 years, controlling for covariates. Black women tended to have radiotherapy omitted after breast conservation surgery 2.0 times more often (95% CI, 0.9-4.4) than white women (P = 0.09). Women age 80 years and older also were 70% less likely (odds ratio = 0.3; 95% CI, 0.1-0.8) to receive chemotherapy than women ages 67-79 years, controlling for health, functional status, and other covariates. CONCLUSIONS: After considering other factors, patient preferences and age were found to be associated with breast carcinoma treatment patterns in older women. Further research and training are needed to provide care for the growing population of older women that is both clinically appropriate and consonant with a woman's preferences.

Equitable access to cancer services: A review of barriers to quality care.

BACKGROUND: Barriers to cancer care have been documented in nearly all settings and populations; such barriers represent potentially avoidable morbidity or mortality. A conceptual framework was used to describe patient, provider, and system barriers to cancer services. METHODS: A review of the English language literature on cancer care from 1980-1998 was conducted; key research was summarized for each domain in the conceptual model. RESULTS: Key patient barriers are related to old age, minority race, and low socioeconomic class; the common pathways by which these sociodemographic factors appear to mediate cancer outcomes include social class and race-related or class-related attitudes. Providers are often ill-prepared to communicate the complexities of cancer care to their diverse patient populations; constraints of the medical care system also can impede the delivery of care. To the authors' knowledge the impact of the rapid growth in managed care organizations (MCOs) on access to care has yet to be evaluated fully. Although MCOs historically have provided high levels of cancer screening in healthy populations, to the authors' knowledge there are fewer data regarding outcomes for elderly and poor populations and for treatment services. CONCLUSIONS: Additional research is needed to develop and test interventions to overcome barriers to care and evaluate the impact of the growth of managed care on access to cancer care for diverse populations.

Proposed agenda for the measurement of quality-of-care outcomes in oncology practice.

Cancer is an important disease, and health care services have the potential to improve the quality and quantity of life for cancer patients. The delivery of these services also has recently been well codified. Given this framework, cancer care presents a unique opportunity for clinicians to develop and test outcome measures across diverse practice settings. Recently, the Institute of Medicine released a report reviewing the quality of cancer care in the United States and called for further development and monitoring of quality indicators. Thus, as we move into the 21st century, professional and regulatory agencies will be seeking to expand process measures and develop and validate outcomes-oriented measures for cancer and other diseases. For such measures to be clinically relevant and feasible, it is key that the oncology community take an active leadership role in this process. To set the stage for such activities, this article first reviews broad methodologic concerns involved in selecting measures of the quality of care, using breast cancer to exemplify key issues. We then use the case of breast cancer to review the different phases of cancer care and provide examples of phase-specific measures that, after careful operationalization, testing, and validation, could be used as the basis of an agenda for measuring the quality of breast cancer care in oncology practice. The diffusion of process and outcome measures into practice; the practicality, reliability, and validity of these measures; and the impact that these indicators have on practice patterns and the health of populations will be key to evaluating the success of such quality-of-care paradigms. Ultimately, improved quality of care should translate into morbidity and mortality reductions.