Background: Colorectal cancers (CRCs) arise from adenomas, which can produce fecal occult blood and can be detected endoscopically, or sessile serrated lesions (SSLs), which rarely bleed and may be more challenging to detect. Models informing CRC screening policy should reflect both pathways, accounting for uncertainty.
Methods: Novel decision-analytic model of the adenoma and serrated pathways for CRC (ANSER) to compare current and emerging screening strategies, accounting for differential test sensitivities for adenomas and SSLs, and uncertainty. Strategies included colonoscopy every 10 years, stool-DNA/FIT (sDNA-FIT) every 1-3 years, or fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) every year from age 45 to 75 years. Outcomes included CRC cases and deaths, cost-effectiveness (cost/quality-adjusted life-year [QALY] gained), and burden-benefit (colonoscopies/life-year gained), with 95% uncertainty intervals (UIs).
Results: ANSER predicted 62.5 (95% UI = 58.8-66.3) lifetime CRC cases and 24.1 (95% UI = 22.5-25.7) CRC deaths/1000 45-year-olds without screening, and 78%-87% CRC mortality reductions with screening. The tests' outcome distributions overlapped for QALYs gained but separated for required colonoscopies and costs. All strategies cost less than $100 000/QALY gained vs no screening. Colonoscopy was the most effective and cost-effective, costing $9300/life-year gained (95% UI = $500-$21 900) vs FIT. sDNA-FIT cost more than $500 000/QALY gained vs FIT. As more CRCs arose from SSLs, colonoscopy remained preferred based on clinical benefit and cost-effectiveness, but cost-effectiveness improved for a next-generation sDNA-FIT.
Conclusion: When the serrated pathway is considered, modeling suggests that colonoscopy is cost-effective vs FIT. In contrast, modeling suggests that sDNA-FIT is not cost-effective vs FIT despite its greater sensitivity for SSLs, even if a substantial minority of CRCs arise from SSLs.
{"title":"Impact of the serrated pathway on the simulated comparative effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening tests.","authors":"Reinier G S Meester, Uri Ladabaum","doi":"10.1093/jncics/pkae077","DOIUrl":"10.1093/jncics/pkae077","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Colorectal cancers (CRCs) arise from adenomas, which can produce fecal occult blood and can be detected endoscopically, or sessile serrated lesions (SSLs), which rarely bleed and may be more challenging to detect. Models informing CRC screening policy should reflect both pathways, accounting for uncertainty.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Novel decision-analytic model of the adenoma and serrated pathways for CRC (ANSER) to compare current and emerging screening strategies, accounting for differential test sensitivities for adenomas and SSLs, and uncertainty. Strategies included colonoscopy every 10 years, stool-DNA/FIT (sDNA-FIT) every 1-3 years, or fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) every year from age 45 to 75 years. Outcomes included CRC cases and deaths, cost-effectiveness (cost/quality-adjusted life-year [QALY] gained), and burden-benefit (colonoscopies/life-year gained), with 95% uncertainty intervals (UIs).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>ANSER predicted 62.5 (95% UI = 58.8-66.3) lifetime CRC cases and 24.1 (95% UI = 22.5-25.7) CRC deaths/1000 45-year-olds without screening, and 78%-87% CRC mortality reductions with screening. The tests' outcome distributions overlapped for QALYs gained but separated for required colonoscopies and costs. All strategies cost less than $100 000/QALY gained vs no screening. Colonoscopy was the most effective and cost-effective, costing $9300/life-year gained (95% UI = $500-$21 900) vs FIT. sDNA-FIT cost more than $500 000/QALY gained vs FIT. As more CRCs arose from SSLs, colonoscopy remained preferred based on clinical benefit and cost-effectiveness, but cost-effectiveness improved for a next-generation sDNA-FIT.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>When the serrated pathway is considered, modeling suggests that colonoscopy is cost-effective vs FIT. In contrast, modeling suggests that sDNA-FIT is not cost-effective vs FIT despite its greater sensitivity for SSLs, even if a substantial minority of CRCs arise from SSLs.</p>","PeriodicalId":14681,"journal":{"name":"JNCI Cancer Spectrum","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2024-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11470154/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142140126","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Daniel H Kwon, Maren T Scheuner, Marissa McPhaul, Eliza Hearst, Saffanat Sumra, Carling Ursem, Evan Walker, Sunny Wang, Franklin W Huang, Rahul R Aggarwal, Jeff Belkora
To better understand veterans' decisions about germline testing, we conducted a single-site, qualitative study of 32 veterans with advanced prostate cancer. Seven days after oncologist-patient discussions about germline testing, we conducted semistructured interviews with patients to explore their decision-making process using an interview guide. Four of 14 veterans with service-connected disability benefits for prostate cancer declined germline testing for fear of losing benefits because their livelihood depended on these benefits. All 18 veterans without service-connected benefits agreed to testing. Veterans declining germline testing based on this concern can lead to suboptimal cancer care because targeted treatments that could improve their outcomes may go unrecognized. Our findings contributed to new language in the Veterans Benefits Administration Compensation and Pension Manual clarifying that genetic testing showing hereditary predisposition is insufficient to deny service-connected benefits for conditions presumed to be caused by military exposures. Clinicians should communicate this protection when counseling veterans about genetic testing.
{"title":"Germline testing for veterans with advanced prostate cancer: concerns about service-connected benefits.","authors":"Daniel H Kwon, Maren T Scheuner, Marissa McPhaul, Eliza Hearst, Saffanat Sumra, Carling Ursem, Evan Walker, Sunny Wang, Franklin W Huang, Rahul R Aggarwal, Jeff Belkora","doi":"10.1093/jncics/pkae079","DOIUrl":"10.1093/jncics/pkae079","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>To better understand veterans' decisions about germline testing, we conducted a single-site, qualitative study of 32 veterans with advanced prostate cancer. Seven days after oncologist-patient discussions about germline testing, we conducted semistructured interviews with patients to explore their decision-making process using an interview guide. Four of 14 veterans with service-connected disability benefits for prostate cancer declined germline testing for fear of losing benefits because their livelihood depended on these benefits. All 18 veterans without service-connected benefits agreed to testing. Veterans declining germline testing based on this concern can lead to suboptimal cancer care because targeted treatments that could improve their outcomes may go unrecognized. Our findings contributed to new language in the Veterans Benefits Administration Compensation and Pension Manual clarifying that genetic testing showing hereditary predisposition is insufficient to deny service-connected benefits for conditions presumed to be caused by military exposures. Clinicians should communicate this protection when counseling veterans about genetic testing.</p>","PeriodicalId":14681,"journal":{"name":"JNCI Cancer Spectrum","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2024-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11487480/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142287462","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Eunji Choi, Yue Hua, Chloe C Su, Julie T Wu, Joel W Neal, Ann N Leung, Leah M Backhus, Christopher Haiman, Loïc Le Marchand, Su-Ying Liang, Heather A Wakelee, Iona Cheng, Summer S Han
Background: Recent therapeutic advances have improved survival among lung cancer (LC) patients, who are now at high risk of second primary lung cancer (SPLC). Hispanics comprise the largest minority in the United States, who have shown a lower LC incidence and mortality than other races, and yet their SPLC risk is poorly understood. We quantified the SPLC incidence patterns among Hispanics vs other races.
Methods: We used data from the Multiethnic Cohort, a population-based cohort of 5 races (African American, Japanese American, Hispanic, Native Hawaiian, and White), recruited between 1993 and 1996 and followed through 2017. We identified patients diagnosed with initial primary lung cancer (IPLC) and SPLC via linkage to Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries. We estimated the 10-year cumulative incidence of IPLC (in the entire cohort) and SPLC (among IPLC patients). A standardized incidence ratio (SIR) was calculated as the ratio of SPLC-to-IPLC incidence by race and ethnicity.
Results: Among 202 692 participants, 6788 (3.3%) developed IPLC over 3 871 417 person-years. The 10-year cumulative IPLC incidence was lower among Hispanics (0.80%, 0.72 to 0.88) vs Whites (1.67%, 1.56 to 1.78) or Blacks (2.44%, 2.28 to 2.60). However, the 10-year SPLC incidence following IPLC was higher among Hispanics (3.11%, 1.62 to 4.61) vs Whites (2.80%, 1.94 to 3.66) or Blacks (2.29%, 1.48 to 3.10), resulting in a significantly higher SIR for Hispanics (SIR = 8.27, 5.05 to 12.78) vs Whites (SIR = 5.60, 4.11 to 7.45) or Blacks (SIR = 3.48, 2.42 to 4.84; P < .001).
Conclusion: Hispanics have a higher SPLC incidence following IPLC than other races, which may be potentially due to better survival after IPLC and extended duration for SPLC development. Continuing surveillance is warranted to reduce racial disparities among LC survivors.
{"title":"Racial and ethnic differences in second primary lung cancer risk among lung cancer survivors.","authors":"Eunji Choi, Yue Hua, Chloe C Su, Julie T Wu, Joel W Neal, Ann N Leung, Leah M Backhus, Christopher Haiman, Loïc Le Marchand, Su-Ying Liang, Heather A Wakelee, Iona Cheng, Summer S Han","doi":"10.1093/jncics/pkae072","DOIUrl":"10.1093/jncics/pkae072","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Recent therapeutic advances have improved survival among lung cancer (LC) patients, who are now at high risk of second primary lung cancer (SPLC). Hispanics comprise the largest minority in the United States, who have shown a lower LC incidence and mortality than other races, and yet their SPLC risk is poorly understood. We quantified the SPLC incidence patterns among Hispanics vs other races.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We used data from the Multiethnic Cohort, a population-based cohort of 5 races (African American, Japanese American, Hispanic, Native Hawaiian, and White), recruited between 1993 and 1996 and followed through 2017. We identified patients diagnosed with initial primary lung cancer (IPLC) and SPLC via linkage to Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries. We estimated the 10-year cumulative incidence of IPLC (in the entire cohort) and SPLC (among IPLC patients). A standardized incidence ratio (SIR) was calculated as the ratio of SPLC-to-IPLC incidence by race and ethnicity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 202 692 participants, 6788 (3.3%) developed IPLC over 3 871 417 person-years. The 10-year cumulative IPLC incidence was lower among Hispanics (0.80%, 0.72 to 0.88) vs Whites (1.67%, 1.56 to 1.78) or Blacks (2.44%, 2.28 to 2.60). However, the 10-year SPLC incidence following IPLC was higher among Hispanics (3.11%, 1.62 to 4.61) vs Whites (2.80%, 1.94 to 3.66) or Blacks (2.29%, 1.48 to 3.10), resulting in a significantly higher SIR for Hispanics (SIR = 8.27, 5.05 to 12.78) vs Whites (SIR = 5.60, 4.11 to 7.45) or Blacks (SIR = 3.48, 2.42 to 4.84; P < .001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Hispanics have a higher SPLC incidence following IPLC than other races, which may be potentially due to better survival after IPLC and extended duration for SPLC development. Continuing surveillance is warranted to reduce racial disparities among LC survivors.</p>","PeriodicalId":14681,"journal":{"name":"JNCI Cancer Spectrum","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2024-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11410193/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142055543","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Christopher D Baggett, Bradford E Jackson, Laura Green, Tzy-Mey Kuo, KyungSu Kim, Xi Zhou, Katherine E Reeder-Hayes, Jennifer L Lund, Stephanie B Wheeler, Andrew F Olshan
Background: The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center has developed a novel data resource, the Cancer Information and Population Health Resource (CIPHR), for conducting catchment area evaluation and cancer population health research that links the North Carolina Central Cancer Registry (NCCCR) to medical and pharmacy claims data from Medicare, Medicaid, and private plans operating within North Carolina. This study's aim was to describe the CIPHR data and provide examples of potential cohorts available in those data.
Methods: We present the underlying populations included in the NCCCR and claims data before linkage and demonstrate estimated sample sizes when these data are linked and commonly used insurance enrollment criteria are applied.
Results: Data for the years 2003-2020 are present in CIPHR and include 947 977 cancer cases from the NCCCR and 21.6 million enrollees in public and private health insurance (cancer and noncancer cases). When limited to first or only cancers (n = 672 377), 86% could be linked to insurance enrollment for at least 1 month during 2003-2020 (n = 582 638), with 62% of individuals linking to enrollment during the month of cancer diagnosis. Among all registry cancer cases, 47% (n = 317 898) had continuous insurance enrollment for at least 12 months before and after cancer diagnosis.
Conclusion: CIPHR illustrates the utility of establishing and maintaining a statewide, comprehensive cancer population health database. This resource serves to characterize the cancer center catchment area and aids in tracking cancer outcomes and trends in care delivery as well as identifying disparities that require intervention and policy focus.
背景:北卡罗来纳大学教堂山分校林伯格综合癌症中心(Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center,LCCC)开发了一种新颖的数据资源--癌症信息与人群健康资源(Cancer Information and Population Health Resource,CIPHR),用于开展覆盖区评估和癌症人群健康研究,该资源将北卡罗来纳州中央癌症登记中心(North Carolina Central Cancer Registry,NCCCR)与医疗保险、医疗补助和北卡罗来纳州私人计划的医疗和药房报销数据联系起来:描述 CIPHR 数据,并举例说明 CIPHR 数据中的潜在队列:我们介绍了 NCCCR 和理赔数据在连接之前所包含的基本人群,并展示了这些数据连接后的估计样本量以及常用的保险注册标准:CIPHR 中有 2003-2020 年的数据,包括 NCCCR 中的 947,977 例癌症病例和 2,160 万公共和私人医疗保险参保者(癌症和非癌症病例)。如果仅限于首次或仅有的癌症(n = 672,377 例),则 86% 的癌症病例可与 2003-2020 年间至少一个月的参保情况联系起来(n = 582,638 例),其中 61% 的病例与癌症诊断当月的参保情况联系起来。在所有登记的癌症病例中,47%(n = 317,898 人)在癌症确诊前后至少 12 个月内连续参加了保险:CIPHR 说明了建立和维护一个全州范围的综合性癌症人群健康数据库的作用。该资源可用于描述癌症中心覆盖区域的特征,并有助于跟踪癌症结果、护理服务趋势以及确定需要干预和政策关注的差异。
{"title":"Cancer information and population health resource: a resource for catchment area data and cancer outcomes research.","authors":"Christopher D Baggett, Bradford E Jackson, Laura Green, Tzy-Mey Kuo, KyungSu Kim, Xi Zhou, Katherine E Reeder-Hayes, Jennifer L Lund, Stephanie B Wheeler, Andrew F Olshan","doi":"10.1093/jncics/pkae069","DOIUrl":"10.1093/jncics/pkae069","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center has developed a novel data resource, the Cancer Information and Population Health Resource (CIPHR), for conducting catchment area evaluation and cancer population health research that links the North Carolina Central Cancer Registry (NCCCR) to medical and pharmacy claims data from Medicare, Medicaid, and private plans operating within North Carolina. This study's aim was to describe the CIPHR data and provide examples of potential cohorts available in those data.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We present the underlying populations included in the NCCCR and claims data before linkage and demonstrate estimated sample sizes when these data are linked and commonly used insurance enrollment criteria are applied.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Data for the years 2003-2020 are present in CIPHR and include 947 977 cancer cases from the NCCCR and 21.6 million enrollees in public and private health insurance (cancer and noncancer cases). When limited to first or only cancers (n = 672 377), 86% could be linked to insurance enrollment for at least 1 month during 2003-2020 (n = 582 638), with 62% of individuals linking to enrollment during the month of cancer diagnosis. Among all registry cancer cases, 47% (n = 317 898) had continuous insurance enrollment for at least 12 months before and after cancer diagnosis.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>CIPHR illustrates the utility of establishing and maintaining a statewide, comprehensive cancer population health database. This resource serves to characterize the cancer center catchment area and aids in tracking cancer outcomes and trends in care delivery as well as identifying disparities that require intervention and policy focus.</p>","PeriodicalId":14681,"journal":{"name":"JNCI Cancer Spectrum","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2024-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11410194/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141982320","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Settling the score: what composite measures of social determinants tell us about hypertension risk.","authors":"William Letsou","doi":"10.1093/jncics/pkae065","DOIUrl":"10.1093/jncics/pkae065","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":14681,"journal":{"name":"JNCI Cancer Spectrum","volume":"8 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2024-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11368122/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142119821","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Catherine Dunn, Michael T Halpern, Daniel Sapkaroski, Peter Gibbs
Background: Quality indicators are essential for measuring and benchmarking the quality of cancer care. Although there are well-established metrics for early-stage colorectal cancer (CRC), few exist for advanced CRC. This scoping review aimed to collate and review all quality indicators for metastatic CRC.
Methods: A dedicated search was performed of Web of Science, PubMed, CINAHL, and relevant gray literature to identify quality indicators for metastatic CRC, evaluating the diagnostic workup, systemic anticancer treatments, surgical approaches, radiation approaches, supportive care, and palliative or terminal care provided to patients.
Results: We identified 11 articles, of which 5 were systematized reviews and 6 concerned the development, validation, or operationalization of quality indicators. Thirty-five distinct quality indicators for metastatic CRC were extracted across 6 domains of care: 1) diagnosis, staging, and treatment planning; 2) systemic anticancer treatment; 3) radiation oncology; 4) surgical approaches; 5) supportive care; and 6) palliative and end-of-life care, with a general quality indicator of overall survival. Of the 35 quality indicators extracted, 8 (23%) were unique to metastatic CRC and 27 (77%) were generic quality indicators across different tumor types but applicable to metastatic CRC.
Conclusion: There are few quality indicators specifically relevant to metastatic CRC. Those that do exist are generally generic process measures used across tumor types and do not measure the nuance or complexity of current multidisciplinary treatment of patients with metastatic CRC.
{"title":"Measuring the quality of care in metastatic colorectal cancer: a scoping review of quality indicators.","authors":"Catherine Dunn, Michael T Halpern, Daniel Sapkaroski, Peter Gibbs","doi":"10.1093/jncics/pkae073","DOIUrl":"10.1093/jncics/pkae073","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Quality indicators are essential for measuring and benchmarking the quality of cancer care. Although there are well-established metrics for early-stage colorectal cancer (CRC), few exist for advanced CRC. This scoping review aimed to collate and review all quality indicators for metastatic CRC.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A dedicated search was performed of Web of Science, PubMed, CINAHL, and relevant gray literature to identify quality indicators for metastatic CRC, evaluating the diagnostic workup, systemic anticancer treatments, surgical approaches, radiation approaches, supportive care, and palliative or terminal care provided to patients.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified 11 articles, of which 5 were systematized reviews and 6 concerned the development, validation, or operationalization of quality indicators. Thirty-five distinct quality indicators for metastatic CRC were extracted across 6 domains of care: 1) diagnosis, staging, and treatment planning; 2) systemic anticancer treatment; 3) radiation oncology; 4) surgical approaches; 5) supportive care; and 6) palliative and end-of-life care, with a general quality indicator of overall survival. Of the 35 quality indicators extracted, 8 (23%) were unique to metastatic CRC and 27 (77%) were generic quality indicators across different tumor types but applicable to metastatic CRC.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There are few quality indicators specifically relevant to metastatic CRC. Those that do exist are generally generic process measures used across tumor types and do not measure the nuance or complexity of current multidisciplinary treatment of patients with metastatic CRC.</p>","PeriodicalId":14681,"journal":{"name":"JNCI Cancer Spectrum","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2024-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11487155/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142072767","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Jacob Stein, Alexis Wardell, Dawn M Ritzwoller, Catherine Swift, Melissa Matson, Hannah C Winslow, Hrishika Muthukrishnan, Austin R Waters, Emily R Haines, Lauren Lux, Andrew B Smitherman
Cancer care organizations often struggle to adequately address the unique needs of adolescent and young adult cancer patients, resulting in poorer outcomes compared with other age groups. Creation of adolescent and young adult cancer programs serves to bridge this gap and improve quality of care for this population. We aimed to describe the evolution and impact of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill's Adolescent and Young Adult Cancer Program. To do so, we conducted a retrospective cohort study utilizing electronic health record data matched with North Carolina Cancer Registry data from 2014 to 2022. Between 2014 and 2022, a total of 4016 adolescents and young adults (aged 13-39 years) received cancer care at the University of North Carolina Medical Center, with 670 having contact with the Adolescent and Young Adult Cancer Program. Program-contacted patients were younger, more likely to be non-Hispanic Black race, and more likely to have metastatic disease or hematologic malignancies. We saw a steady increase in patient volume over the study period, corresponding with program growth.
{"title":"University of North Carolina adolescent and young adult cancer program: reach and characteristics of care.","authors":"Jacob Stein, Alexis Wardell, Dawn M Ritzwoller, Catherine Swift, Melissa Matson, Hannah C Winslow, Hrishika Muthukrishnan, Austin R Waters, Emily R Haines, Lauren Lux, Andrew B Smitherman","doi":"10.1093/jncics/pkae092","DOIUrl":"10.1093/jncics/pkae092","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Cancer care organizations often struggle to adequately address the unique needs of adolescent and young adult cancer patients, resulting in poorer outcomes compared with other age groups. Creation of adolescent and young adult cancer programs serves to bridge this gap and improve quality of care for this population. We aimed to describe the evolution and impact of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill's Adolescent and Young Adult Cancer Program. To do so, we conducted a retrospective cohort study utilizing electronic health record data matched with North Carolina Cancer Registry data from 2014 to 2022. Between 2014 and 2022, a total of 4016 adolescents and young adults (aged 13-39 years) received cancer care at the University of North Carolina Medical Center, with 670 having contact with the Adolescent and Young Adult Cancer Program. Program-contacted patients were younger, more likely to be non-Hispanic Black race, and more likely to have metastatic disease or hematologic malignancies. We saw a steady increase in patient volume over the study period, corresponding with program growth.</p>","PeriodicalId":14681,"journal":{"name":"JNCI Cancer Spectrum","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2024-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11524889/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142465723","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Reviewers.","authors":"","doi":"10.1093/jncics/pkae055","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jncics/pkae055","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":14681,"journal":{"name":"JNCI Cancer Spectrum","volume":"8 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2024-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11416867/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142465725","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Rebecca Forman, Jessica B Long, Sarah J Westvold, Khushi Agnish, Hannah D Mcmanus, Michael S Leapman, Michael E Hurwitz, Lisa P Spees, Stephanie B Wheeler, Cary P Gross, Michaela A Dinan
Background: Immunotherapy (IO) and oral anticancer agents (OAA) have improved outcomes for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), but there is a need to understand real-world costs from the perspective of payers and patients.
Methods: We used retrospective fee-for-service Medicare 100% claims data to study patients diagnosed with mRCC in 2015-2019. We identified initial treatment type and costs (the year after diagnosis) and analyzed differences in monthly and 12-month costs over time and between OAA, IO, and combination groups and the association between Out-Of-Pocket (OOP) costs and adherence.
Results: We identified 15 407 patients with mRCC (61% male; 85% non-Hispanic White). A total of 6196 received OAA, IO, or combination OAA/IO as initial treatment. OAA use decreased (from 31% to 11%) with a simultaneous rise in patients receiving IO (3% to 26%) or combination IO/OAA therapy (1% to 11%). Medicare payments for all patients with mRCC increased by 41%, from $60 320 (95% confidence interval = 58 260 to 62 380) in 2015 to $85 130 (95% confidence interval = 82 630 to 87 630) in 2019. Payments increased in patients who received OAA, IO, or combination OAA/IO but were stable in those with other/no treatment. Initial higher OOP responsibility ($200-$1000) was associated with 13% decrease in percent days covered in patients receiving OAA in the first 90 days of treatment, compared with those whose OOP responsibility was less than $200.
Conclusion: From 2015 to 2019, costs for Medicare patients with mRCC rose substantially due to more patients receiving IO or IO/OAA combined therapy and increases in costs among those receiving those therapies. Increased OOP costs was associated with decreased adherence.
{"title":"Cost trends of metastatic renal cell carcinoma therapy: the impact of oral anticancer agents and immunotherapy.","authors":"Rebecca Forman, Jessica B Long, Sarah J Westvold, Khushi Agnish, Hannah D Mcmanus, Michael S Leapman, Michael E Hurwitz, Lisa P Spees, Stephanie B Wheeler, Cary P Gross, Michaela A Dinan","doi":"10.1093/jncics/pkae067","DOIUrl":"10.1093/jncics/pkae067","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Immunotherapy (IO) and oral anticancer agents (OAA) have improved outcomes for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), but there is a need to understand real-world costs from the perspective of payers and patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We used retrospective fee-for-service Medicare 100% claims data to study patients diagnosed with mRCC in 2015-2019. We identified initial treatment type and costs (the year after diagnosis) and analyzed differences in monthly and 12-month costs over time and between OAA, IO, and combination groups and the association between Out-Of-Pocket (OOP) costs and adherence.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified 15 407 patients with mRCC (61% male; 85% non-Hispanic White). A total of 6196 received OAA, IO, or combination OAA/IO as initial treatment. OAA use decreased (from 31% to 11%) with a simultaneous rise in patients receiving IO (3% to 26%) or combination IO/OAA therapy (1% to 11%). Medicare payments for all patients with mRCC increased by 41%, from $60 320 (95% confidence interval = 58 260 to 62 380) in 2015 to $85 130 (95% confidence interval = 82 630 to 87 630) in 2019. Payments increased in patients who received OAA, IO, or combination OAA/IO but were stable in those with other/no treatment. Initial higher OOP responsibility ($200-$1000) was associated with 13% decrease in percent days covered in patients receiving OAA in the first 90 days of treatment, compared with those whose OOP responsibility was less than $200.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>From 2015 to 2019, costs for Medicare patients with mRCC rose substantially due to more patients receiving IO or IO/OAA combined therapy and increases in costs among those receiving those therapies. Increased OOP costs was associated with decreased adherence.</p>","PeriodicalId":14681,"journal":{"name":"JNCI Cancer Spectrum","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2024-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11376369/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141916695","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Margarita Cariolou, Sofia Christakoudi, Marc J Gunter, Tim Key, Aurora Pérez-Cornago, Ruth Travis, Raul Zamora-Ros, Kristina Elin T Petersen, Anne Tjønneland, Elisabete Weiderpass, Rudolf Kaaks, Petra Seibold, Elif Inan-Eroglu, Matthias B Schulze, Giovanna Masala, Claudia Agnoli, Rosario Tumino, Chiara Di Girolamo, Amaia Aizpurua, Miguel Rodriguez-Barranco, Carmen Santiuste, Marcela Guevara, Dagfinn Aune, Doris S M Chan, David C Muller, Konstantinos K Tsilidis
Background: Adiposity has been characterized as a modifiable risk factor for prostate cancer. Its association with outcomes after prostate cancer diagnosis, however, must be better understood, and more evidence is needed to facilitate the development of lifestyle guidance for patients with prostate cancer.
Methods: We investigated the associations between adiposity indices close to prostate cancer diagnosis (up to 2 years before or up to 5 years after diagnosis) and mortality in 1968 men of the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition cohort. Men were followed up for a median of 9.5 years. Cox proportional hazards models were adjusted for age and year of diagnosis, disease stage and grade, and smoking history and stratified by country.
Results: Each 5-unit increment in prediagnosis or postdiagnosis body mass index combined was associated with a 30% higher rate of all-cause mortality and a 49% higher rate of prostate cancer-specific mortality. Similarly, each 5-unit increment in prediagnosis body mass index was associated with a 35% higher rate of all-cause mortality and a 51% higher rate of prostate cancer-specific mortality. The associations were less strong for postdiagnosis body mass index, with a lower number of men in analyses. Less clear positive associations were shown for waist circumference, hip circumference, and waist to hip ratio, but data were limited.
Conclusions: Elevated levels of adiposity close to prostate cancer diagnosis could lead to higher risk of mortality; therefore, men are encouraged to maintain a healthy weight. Additional research is needed to confirm whether excessive adiposity after prostate cancer diagnosis could worsen prognosis.
{"title":"Adiposity assessed close to diagnosis and prostate cancer prognosis in the EPIC study.","authors":"Margarita Cariolou, Sofia Christakoudi, Marc J Gunter, Tim Key, Aurora Pérez-Cornago, Ruth Travis, Raul Zamora-Ros, Kristina Elin T Petersen, Anne Tjønneland, Elisabete Weiderpass, Rudolf Kaaks, Petra Seibold, Elif Inan-Eroglu, Matthias B Schulze, Giovanna Masala, Claudia Agnoli, Rosario Tumino, Chiara Di Girolamo, Amaia Aizpurua, Miguel Rodriguez-Barranco, Carmen Santiuste, Marcela Guevara, Dagfinn Aune, Doris S M Chan, David C Muller, Konstantinos K Tsilidis","doi":"10.1093/jncics/pkae070","DOIUrl":"10.1093/jncics/pkae070","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Adiposity has been characterized as a modifiable risk factor for prostate cancer. Its association with outcomes after prostate cancer diagnosis, however, must be better understood, and more evidence is needed to facilitate the development of lifestyle guidance for patients with prostate cancer.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We investigated the associations between adiposity indices close to prostate cancer diagnosis (up to 2 years before or up to 5 years after diagnosis) and mortality in 1968 men of the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition cohort. Men were followed up for a median of 9.5 years. Cox proportional hazards models were adjusted for age and year of diagnosis, disease stage and grade, and smoking history and stratified by country.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Each 5-unit increment in prediagnosis or postdiagnosis body mass index combined was associated with a 30% higher rate of all-cause mortality and a 49% higher rate of prostate cancer-specific mortality. Similarly, each 5-unit increment in prediagnosis body mass index was associated with a 35% higher rate of all-cause mortality and a 51% higher rate of prostate cancer-specific mortality. The associations were less strong for postdiagnosis body mass index, with a lower number of men in analyses. Less clear positive associations were shown for waist circumference, hip circumference, and waist to hip ratio, but data were limited.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Elevated levels of adiposity close to prostate cancer diagnosis could lead to higher risk of mortality; therefore, men are encouraged to maintain a healthy weight. Additional research is needed to confirm whether excessive adiposity after prostate cancer diagnosis could worsen prognosis.</p>","PeriodicalId":14681,"journal":{"name":"JNCI Cancer Spectrum","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2024-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11410200/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142046694","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}