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.

Serendipity in diagnostic imaging: magnetic resonance imaging of the breast.

BACKGROUND: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the breast has been proposed as a noninvasive diagnostic test for evaluation of suspicious ("index") lesions noted on mammography and/or clinical breast examination (CBE). However, women may have incidental ("serendipitous") lesions detected by MRI that are not found on mammography or CBE. To understand better whether or not biopsy procedures should be performed to evaluate serendipitous lesions, we estimated the breast cancer risk for women with this type of lesion. METHODS: A decision analysis model was used to estimate the positive predictive value (i.e., the chance that a woman with a serendipitous lesion has cancer) of MRI for serendipitous lesions in women who had an abnormal mammogram and/or CBE suspicious for cancer (where a biopsy procedure is recommended). We restricted the analysis to data from women whose index lesions were noncancerous and used meta-analysis of published medical literature to determine the likelihood ratios (measures of how test results change the probability of having cancer) for MRI and the combination of CBE and mammography. The positive predictive value of MRI was calculated using the U.S. population prevalence of cancer (derived from registry data) and the likelihood ratios of the diagnostic tests. RESULTS: Under a wide variety of assumptions, the positive predictive value of MRI was extremely low for serendipitous lesions. For instance, assuming sensitivity and specificity values for MRI of 95.6% and 68.6%, respectively, approximately four of 1000 55- to 59-year-old women with serendipitous lesions would be expected to have cancer (positive predictive value = 0.44%, 95% confidence interval = 0.24%-0.67%). CONCLUSION: In women with a suspicious lesion discovered by mammography and/or CBE that is found to be benign, serendipitous breast lesions detected by MRI are extremely unlikely to represent invasive breast cancer. Immediate biopsy of such serendipitous lesions may, therefore, not be required.

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.

Association between HIV infection and cervical neoplasia: implications for clinical care of women at risk for both conditions.

OBJECTIVE: Both AIDS and cervical neoplasia (CN) can result from sexual transmission of HIV infection and may affect similar groups of women. Available data on the association between AIDS and CN have practical implications for gynecological care. We review these data to provide an estimate of the magnitude of the association between CN and HIV infection. DESIGN: Twenty-one studies were reviewed, including reports and abstracts published from January 1986 to July 1990. Of these, five included a comparison group and had sufficient data for inclusion in the analysis. RESULTS: All five controlled studies reported a significant association between HIV infection and CN. One included women with both intraepithelial and invasive lesions; the other four considered women with intraepithelial lesions only. The summary odds ratio indicated that the odds of HIV-infected women having CN are 4.9 (95% confidence interval, 3.0-8.2) times that of HIV-negative women. CONCLUSIONS: Research is needed to clarify etiological relationships and the role of human papillomavirus in the causal pathway of the observed association. Meanwhile, available data are sufficient to encourage regular Papanicolaou's smear screening of HIV-infected women, and HIV testing and counseling of women with CN considered at risk for HIV infection.

Interventions targeted toward patients to increase mammography use.

The objective of this study was to determine the effects of patient-based mammography screening strategies. We performed a meta-analysis and included United States studies that met the following criteria: (a) randomized or concurrent control design; (b) defined outcomes; and (c) data available for reanalysis. Interventions were classified as behavioral, cognitive, or sociological and further categorized by the type of control group (active versus usual care), number of interventions, and mode of intervention (interactive versus static). Data were combined using DerSimonian and Laird random effects models to yield summary effect sizes. A total of 63 interventions in 43 studies met the inclusion criteria. Behavioral interventions increased screening by 13.2% [95% confidence interval (CI), 4.7-21.2] compared with usual care, and by 13.0% (95% CI, 8.7-17.4) when using multiple strategies and 5.6% (95% CI, 0.6-10.6) when using a single intervention compared to active controls. Cognitive interventions using generic education strategies had little impact on screening, but those that used theory-based education (e.g., health belief model) increased rates by 23.6% (95% CI, 16.4-30.1) compared with usual care. Sociological interventions also increased screening rates. Interventions using a theoretical framework were the most effective in increasing screening rates. The ability of these interventions to increase screening among subgroups and improve rates of ongoing screening, as well as the costs of these strategies, is unknown and is an important area for future research.

Effectiveness of interventions designed to increase mammography use: a meta-analysis of provider-targeted strategies.

The objective of this study was to determine the effectiveness of interventions targeted at providers to enhance the use of mammography. We performed a meta-analysis and included United States studies that used a randomized or nonrandomized concurrent control design, had defined outcomes, and presented data that could be abstracted for reanalysis. Interventions were classified as behavioral, cognitive, or sociological and further categorized by the type of control group (active versus usual care). Data were combined using DerSimonian and Laird random effects models to yield summary effect sizes. Thirty-five studies met the inclusion criteria. All types of interventions targeted at providers were effective in increasing mammography rates. Behavioral interventions increased screening by 13.2% [95% confidence interval (CI), 7.8-18.4] as compared with usual care and by 6.8% (95% CI, 4.8-8.7) as compared with active controls. Cognitive intervention strategies improved mammography rates by 18.6% (95% CI, 12.8-24.4). Sociological interventions also had a similar magnitude of effect on screening rates (13.1% increase; 95% CI, 6.8-19.3). Interventions targeting both patients and providers were not significantly better at increasing screening than those targeting providers alone, and multiple approaches (e.g., behavioral and cognitive) were generally not more effective than a single approach. All interventions targeted at physicians were effective in increasing screening rates. Decisions to use a particular approach will depend on resources, expertise, feasibility, and cost effectiveness.

Is HIV infection a cofactor for cervical squamous cell neoplasia?

The objective of this study was to test the hypothesis that HIV interacts with human papilloma virus (HPV) to increase the odds of cervical neoplasia. The study design was a meta-analysis using data pooled from published sources. Studies published between January 1986 and March 1998 were eligible for inclusion if they included data on neoplasia (cytology-based), HIV (defined by laboratory and/or standard clinical criteria), and HPV (assessed by PCR, Southern blot, dot-blot hybridization, or cytology of an otherwise well designed study) among nonpregnant women. Blinded data abstraction was performed independently by the investigators. There were 15 studies that were eligible and presented data in a format that could be abstracted for analysis. Data were pooled using a Mantel-Haenszel summary odds ratio (OR); generalized estimation regression equations were used to examine independent effects of HIV and HPV. Overall, based on the Mantel-Haenszel ORs, there was a strong overall association between HPV and neoplasia [OR, 8.1; 95% confidence interval (CI), 6.5-10.1]. Stratifying by HIV status, HIV-positive women had higher odds of disease (OR, 8.8; 95% CI, 6.3-12.5) than HIV-negative women (OR, 5.0; 95% CI, 3.7-6.8). In the regression model, there was an interaction between HPV and HIV (P = 0.01); immunosuppression also tended to predict neoplasia (P = 0.058). HIV seems to be a cofactor in the association between HPV and cervical neoplasia; this effect may vary by level of immune function. These speculations are biologically plausible. Additional data from large, well designed studies are needed to confirm these hypotheses.

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.

Pap smear screening in women 65 and older.

Pap smear screening in women 65 years of age and older is controversial. To assess the need to offer screening in this group, we examined Pap results of women 65 and older whose charts were reviewed as part of a cancer screening study in two San Francisco hospitals. Two hundred thirty women (41%) were 65 years of age or older (mean age, 73). Compared with younger women, they were less likely to have had a Pap smear during the past 3 years (61% versus 72%), less likely to have seen a gynecologist (24% versus 34%), and were more likely to have refused Pap screening (11% versus 5%). Of the 140 women who had Paps, five showed atypia (class II). None exhibited dysplasia or carcinoma in situ. Those with atypia were all nonwhite. One had had a hysterectomy; two had a history of previously abnormal Paps. Overall, women with a history of abnormal Paps were far more likely to be screened (91% versus 58%). Those who had had a hysterectomy were significantly less likely to be screened (51% versus 68%). These results showed a low rate of cervical dysplasia/carcinoma in older, low-income women. Although our sample was small, the low rate of abnormals may reflect the relatively high rate of prior screening in this population. Because older women are not likely to see gynecologists, primary care physicians should continue Pap screening in older women (including those with a history of hysterectomy) until a history of repeated, technically adequate, normal Pap smears is documented.

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.

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.

Historical and methodological perspectives on cancer outcomes research.

Outcomes research is the study of the net effects of the health care process on the health and well-being of individuals and populations. It encompasses a wide breadth of issues, including measurement of patient preferences and health status, broadly referred to as quality of life. Evaluation of health-related quality of life in research studies has been facilitated by the development of a number of measurement tools. In addition to general health tools, cancer-related tools are available, some of which include cancer site-specific or symptom-specific measures. Preference assessment, from the perspective of the patient or general population, is necessary to incorporate quality of life into economic analyses. Various techniques are available to assign preference values to outcomes; metrics such as quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) are then used to combine quality and quantity of life into a usable value for economic analyses. In the future, quality of life and economic measurements should be incorporated into phase III trials, effectiveness trials, and observational studies.

Cost-effective policies for cervical cancer screening. An international review.

Screening programmes for cervical cancer have been credited with reducing the incidence of and mortality from cervical cancer. The main components of these screening programmes are: (i) their level of organisation; (ii) the age at which women begin screening; (iii) the age at which women discontinue screening; (iv) the interval between repeat screens; (v) the frequency at which the programmes provide screening; and (vi) the response to an abnormal screening test. However, not all screening programmes are equally efficient and differences in programme components can result in big differences in their cost effectiveness. Studies that employ cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) to examine the efficiency of different programme components can inform the development of cost-effective programmes. This article presents findings of an international review of cost-effectiveness studies of cervical cancer screening. These studies consistently find that certain types of programmes are more cost effective than others. Programmes that are centrally organised and implemented by the public sector are reported to be more cost effective than those that use public funds for screening at other medical visits (convenience screening), or those that provide guidelines for healthcare professionals and the public to promote spontaneous discretionary screening. There is also substantial agreement about the cost effectiveness of other programme components. When multiple screenings are possible, studies report that they should generally begin at age 25 to 35 years and end at age 65 to 70 years, although it is important that older women have 3 normal Papanicolaou (Pap) smears before the discontinuation of screening. The interval for repeat screens that is reported to provide the best balance between cost and life-years saved is between 3 and 5 years. However, when a choice must be made between screening more women fewer times, or screening fewer women more times, most studies indicate that it is more cost effective to prioritize resources to obtain at least one screening for each woman. The screening of previously unscreened and high-risk populations has been shown to be especially cost effective. Despite this agreement, many studies report that models of the cost effectiveness of screening for cervical cancer are sensitive to a number of parameters. Changes in the attendance rate of the programme, the quality of the Pap smear, and the cost of the Pap smear can markedly change the cost effectiveness of a screening programme. Finally, this review discusses different perspectives of social choice analysis (e.g. CEA and cost-benefit analysis), when the objective is to prevent cervical cancer and the options are to screen, detect and treat, to reduce behavioural risk factors, and/or to pursue promising biological research.

Cervical cancer: how often--and why--to screen older women.

Cervical cancer continues to be an important cause of avoidable cancer deaths in older women. Despite the benefits of screening in reducing morbidity and mortality, older patients are under-represented in screening programs. Most professional groups recommend an annual Pap smear for all women, with no upper age limit. In most cases, women can safely undergo triennial screening after several annual negative smears. Screening is well-accepted among older patients, as up to 92% will accept a Pap smear offered in a clinical setting. To insure that screening is cost-effective, use sensitive and specific testing methods and limit screening to appropriate candidates.

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.

The cost-effectiveness of cervical cancer screening for low-income elderly women.

Controversy surrounds prevention policy for the elderly. While some cost-effectiveness analyses have been done for the general elderly population, to our knowledge no study has examined the provision of preventive services to a low-income elderly population. We conducted a study of the cost-effectiveness of a cervical cancer screening program for infrequently screened elderly women attending an urban municipal hospital clinic. The results of Papanicolaou testing were abnormal (malignant or premalignant) in 11 of 816 women screened. This early detection of cervical neoplasia saved +5907 and 3.7 years of life per 100 Papanicolaou tests. When average medical costs per year of life extended by screening were included, the program cost +2874 per year of life saved. Comprehensive sensitivity analyses performed on competing medical and economic points of view did not change the conclusion of a favorable cost-effectiveness ratio for screening. Our findings indicate that the benefits from some prevention programs for the elderly can offset the costs of these programs. More research is needed to guide public policy on prevention for selected population groups.

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.

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.