scholarly journals Telehealth in cancer care during COVID-19: disparities by age, race/ethnicity, and residential status

Author(s):  
Patricia I. Jewett ◽  
Rachel I. Vogel ◽  
Rahel Ghebre ◽  
Jane Y. C. Hui ◽  
Helen M. Parsons ◽  
...  
2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 6594-6594
Author(s):  
Sandeep Sai Voleti ◽  
Sikander Ailawadhi ◽  
Carolyn Mead-Harvey ◽  
Rahma M. Warsame ◽  
Rafael Fonseca ◽  
...  

6594 Background: Patient reported financial hardship (FH) in cancer care is a growing challenge for patients, their caregivers and healthcare providers. As treatment costs escalate, it is imperative to develop effective strategies to proactively recognize and mitigate FH within oncology practice. Using automated processes to screen and refer patients to appropriate resources is a potential option. At Mayo Clinic, screening for FH involves using a single financial strain question ‘ How hard is it for you to pay for the very basics like food, housing, medical care, and heating?’ completed by all cancer patients annually as part of the Social Determinants of Health (SDOH) assessment. In this study, we describe the prevalence and predictors for FH (denoted by the answer ‘hard and very hard’) in our patient population. Methods: Patients receiving cancer care at the three Mayo Clinic sites (Minnesota, Arizona, and Florida) who completed the FH screen at least once were included in this study. Demographics (age, gender, race/ ethnicity, insurance, employment status, marital status, and zip code) and disease state data for included patients was extracted from the EMR and Mayo Clinic Cancer Registry. Disease state was categorized by type of cancer (hematological or solid malignancy) and cancer stage. Zip code was used to derive median income, rural/urban residence and distance from the cancer center. Multivariable logistic regression models were utilized to examine factors associated with FH. Results: The final study cohort included 31,969 patients with median age 66 years (IQR 57,73), 51% females, and 76% married. Race/ethnicity composition was 93% White, 3% Black, and 4% Hispanic. 52% of patients had Medicare and 43% had commercial insurance. Other notable factors included 48% retired, 41% working/ students, 76% married, and 72% urban residents. Median time from cancer diagnosis was 1.1 year (IQR 0.1, 3.8) and median income was $64,406 (IQR 53,067, 82,038). 31% of patients had hematological malignancies, 20% of the cancers for which staging information was available were metastatic. FH was reported by 4% (n = 1194) of the patients. A significantly higher likelihood of endorsing FH (p < 0.001 for all) was noted in Hispanic (OR 1.64), Black (OR 1.84), American Indian/Alaskan native (OR 2.02), below median income (OR 1.48), rural (OR 1.17), self-pay (OR 2.77), Medicaid (OR 2.29), Medicare (OR 1.43), unemployed/disabled (OR 2.39), single (OR 2.07), or divorced (OR 2.43) patients. Older age, being retired, and living farther from the cancer center were associated with significantly less likelihood of endorsing FH. Conclusions: Our study successfully leveraged the EMR to identify key sociodemographic groups more likely to report FH. An electronic trigger to flag such patients at high-risk of FH and proactively address FH is currently being developed.


2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (28_suppl) ◽  
pp. 127-127
Author(s):  
Teresa Maria Zyczynski ◽  
Cardinale B. Smith ◽  
Ying Zhang ◽  
Yi Hao

127 Background: Racial disparities in cancer care have received increased attention in recent years. One previously identified disparity is in the time to treatment initiation (TTI) – a factor closely associated with outcomes. While most research in the US to date has focused on the Medicaid and Medicare populations, this study examined disparities between different racial/ethnic groups in TTI and overall survival (OS) among patients with cancer managed in the community setting. Methods: Using the Flatiron Health electronic health record database, patients diagnosed with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC), metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), metastatic breast cancer (mBC), multiple myeloma (MM), advanced gastroesophageal cancer (aGastric), advanced urothelial cancer (aUL), metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) or advanced melanoma (aMel) and treated with first-line (1L) therapy, with ≥1 month of follow-up during 2014-2019, were included. Patient characteristics, TTI and outcomes were compared across race/ethnicity groups classified as White, Black, Asian and Hispanic/Latino/Other (Other). Results: A total of 81,543 patients were evaluated (37% aNSCLC, 19% mCRC, 15% mBC, 8% MM, 6% aGastric, 5.2% aUL, 5.0% mRCC and 4.1% aMel); 67% were White, 9% Black, 3% Asian and 11% Other. Overall, TTI was similar across race/ethnicity groups (median range 1.1–1.2 months), and 44% of all patients received treatment ≤30 days post-diagnosis. Overall Survival (months). Median OS varied by tumor and race/ethnicity groups (Table). However, multivariate Cox proportional hazards analysis showed that Asian patients had better OS than Black patients in many cancers (hazard ratio [HR] 0.8 aNSCLC, 0.75 mBC, 0.63 aGastric, 0.59 aUL, 0.81 mCRC, 0.68 mRCC), while White patients had better survival than Black patients in mBC (HR 0.8) and aGastric (HR 0.87). Conclusions: In this real-word analysis, TTI did not differ by race/ethnicity group for any of the cancers examined. However, some differences in OS emerged on multivariate analysis – this was longer in Asian than Black patients in aNSCLC, mBC, mCRC, aGastric, aUL and mRCC, and longer in White than Black patients in mBC and aGastric. Given the small sample size in some groups, further analyses are needed to determine the influence of race/ethnicity on cancer care and outcomes.[Table: see text]


2021 ◽  
pp. 627-634
Author(s):  
Charles Kamen ◽  
Jennifer M. Jabson Tree

Undergoing cancer treatment and transitioning to survivorship presents challenges for all individuals, and sexual and gender minority (SGM) individuals may face additional challenges based on the multiple identities they bring into cancer care (sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression, as well as race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and other identities). Psychosocial oncology providers are in a unique position to address these challenges and improve the experience of cancer care for SGM patients. This chapter discusses psycho-oncology care issues specific to SGM cancer patients, including general health disparities affecting SGM communities; specific disparities in cancer risk factors, incidence, and outcomes; psychosocial needs among SGM cancer patients; and recommendations for developing psycho-oncology services to address the needs of SGM patients.


Cancer ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 122 (3) ◽  
pp. 420-431 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael J. Hassett ◽  
Maria J. Schymura ◽  
Kun Chen ◽  
Francis P. Boscoe ◽  
Foster C. Gesten ◽  
...  

2005 ◽  
Vol 23 (27) ◽  
pp. 6576-6586 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Z. Ayanian ◽  
Alan M. Zaslavsky ◽  
Edward Guadagnoli ◽  
Charles S. Fuchs ◽  
Kathleen J. Yost ◽  
...  

Purpose To identify opportunities for improving care, we evaluated patients' perceptions of the quality of their cancer care by race, ethnicity, and language. Patients and Methods We surveyed a population-based cohort of 1,067 patients with colorectal cancer in northern California approximately 9 months after diagnosis. Adjusting for clinical and demographic factors, mean problem scores were analyzed on a 100-point scale for six domains of care. Results Mean problem scores were highest for health information (47.8), followed by treatment information (32.3), psychosocial care (31.7), coordination of care (21.3), confidence in providers (13.1), and access to cancer care (12.7). In adjusted comparisons with white patients, African American patients reported more problems with coordination of care (difference, 9.8; P < .001), psychosocial care (difference, 7.2; P = .03), access to care (difference, 6.6; P = .03), and health information (difference, 12.5; P < .001). Asian/Pacific Islander patients reported more problems than did white patients with coordination of care (difference, 13.2; P < .001), access to care (difference, 15.5; P < .001), and health information (difference, 12.6; P = .004). Hispanic patients tended to report more problems with coordination of care (difference, 4.4; P = .06), access to care (difference, 5.8; P = .08), and treatment information (difference, 7.0; P = .06). Non–English-speaking white patients reported more problems than other white patients with coordination of care (difference, 21.9; P < .001), psychosocial care (difference, 16.1; P = .009), access to care (difference, 19.8; P = .003), and treatment information (difference, 17.8; P = .002). Non–English-speaking Hispanic patients reported more problems than other Hispanic patients with confidence in providers (difference, 16.9; P = .01). Conclusion Efforts to improve patients' experiences with cancer care should address disparities by race, ethnicity, and language, particularly in coordination of care, access to care, and the provision of relevant information.


2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 2039-2039
Author(s):  
Michelle Ju ◽  
James-Michael Blackwell ◽  
Patricio Polanco ◽  
John C. Mansour ◽  
Sam C. Wang ◽  
...  

2039 Background: The receipt of timely, guideline concordant cancer amongst racial/ethnic and socioeconomic vulnerable populations remains a significant health policy issue. The Affordable Care Act (ACA) with implementation of Medicaid Expansion sought to reduce cancer disparities by reducing uninsured rates, theoretically improving healthcare access and delivery. We assessed the impact of Medicaid expansion on racial/ethnic disparities in the receipt of timely guideline concordant cancer care. Methods: We identified patients between 40-64 years of age with all stages of cancer (lung, colorectal, breast, uterine, and cervical) in the National Cancer Database, 2012-2015. Patients were assigned to Medicaid expansion cohort based on state of residence and whether Medicaid expansion was enacted at date of diagnosis in that state. Guideline concordant care was defined based on NCCN guidelines. We constructed an ecological model with multivariate regression analysis on rate of guideline concordant care receipt with covariates including race/ethnicity, Medicaid expansion, SES, gender, Charlson-Deyo score, and treatment facility type. Results: We identified 445,952 patients, 12% Black, 6% Hispanic white, median age 55 years. Patients in the lowest SES quartile following Medicaid expansion had the greatest increase in rates of insured status, although all SES quartiles had increased insured rates compared to non-Medicaid expansion regardless of race/ethnicity. In our ecological model, the rate of receipt of guideline concordant care declined by 0.5% per year between 2012-2015. After adjusting for covariates, Asians were 2.8% less likely to receive guideline concordant care than non-Hispanic whites, Blacks 3.8% less likely, and Hispanics 6.3% less likely (p < 0.0001). Racial/ethnic disparities in receipt of guideline concordant cancer care remained after Medicaid expansion with no differential benefit. Conclusions: Insurance gains under the ACA Medicaid expansion did not affect the rate of guideline concordant care receipt. Significant racial disparities persist in the likelihood of receiving guideline concordant care, particularly among Hispanics. Further studies are needed to determine additional barriers to cancer care access/delivery and identify key targets aimed at improving equity.


Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 3531-3531
Author(s):  
Julie A. Wolfson ◽  
Smita Bhatia ◽  
Jill Ginsberg ◽  
Laura Becker ◽  
David Bernstein ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Young adults (22-39y) with ALL treated at an NCI-designated Comprehensive Cancer Center (CCC) have a superior survival when compared with those treated at a non-CCC site. (Wolfson et al, CEBP, 2017) Despite superior outcomes, specialized cancer centers (such as CCC) have been generally criticized for a higher cost of cancer care (Nardi et al, JNCCN, 2016). However, the magnitude of difference in cost of care for ALL patients by treatment site has not been explored. Here we examine cost of cancer care at CCC and non-CCC sites in YA with ALL. Methods: Using commercial insurance data (OptumLabs® Data Warehouse), we established a cohort of 309 patients with ALL diagnosed between 2001 and 2014, at age 22y to 39y. Patients were included if they had ≥30 days of continuous insurance enrollment after ALL diagnosis, were treated with chemotherapy, and were followed from diagnosis until 3y, disenrollment, or 3/31/2017, whichever came first. Patients undergoing hematopoietic cell transplant were not included in the current analyses. Primary outcomes included total monthly medical costs paid by: (1) health plan; (2) patient (out-of-pocket [OOP] costs). The primary predictor of interest was the classification of the facility where the patient received cancer-related treatment, as NCI-designated CCC vs. non-CCC. Multivariable models were adjusted for age, sex, race/ethnicity, income, education, comorbidity, year of diagnosis and radiation therapy. Monthly costs were modeled using generalized linear models with log link (gamma distribution); bootstrapping obtained 95% confidence intervals (CI). To accommodate censoring, each one-month cost was weighted by the inverse probability of not being censored. Adjusting for covariates, average costs were estimated by CCC status at each monthly interval. Monthly costs were summed over the 36-month study period, and adjusted at the claim-line level to reflect 2016 pricing. Results: Patients were diagnosed at a median age of 32y (range 22-39); 53% of the cohort was male, 46% non-Hispanic white, 42% had some college education or higher, and 70% had an annual household income of ≥$50,000. Following diagnosis, patients were enrolled in the insurance plan for a median 753 days after ALL diagnosis (34 to 4,899 days). Half of the cohort (n=153, 49.5%) was not treated at a CCC. There was no difference between CCC and non-CCC patients with respect to age, gender, race/ethnicity, education, income, comorbidities, year of diagnosis, or length of follow-up. A greater proportion of patients received radiation at CCC vs. non-CCC (23% vs 13% p=0.02). Costs Paid byHealth Plan: The average unadjusted mean 3y costs paid by the health plan per person (HPP) were $540,822/patient for CCC patients vs. $210,075/patient for non-CCC patients (p<0.001). The average adjusted mean 3y HPP costs were almost 3 times higher for patients treated in CCC vs. non-CCC patients ($782,438/patient vs. $288,359/patient; p<0.001). HPP costs were highest for all patients within the first 12 months (CCC: $469,190/patient; non-CCC: $200,049/patient; p<0.001 [Fig 1]), consistent with the fact that ALL treatment regimens include a more intense first 12 months followed by a longer maintenance phase that relies mostly on oral chemotherapy. OOP CostsPaid by Patient: Unadjusted average 3y mean OOP costs per patient were $9,869 in CCC patients and $5,976 in non-CCC patients (p<0.001). The average adjusted mean OOP costs per patient were 1.7 times higher in CCC as compared to non-CCC patients ($14,190 vs. $8,457; p<0.001). OOP costs were also highest in the first 12 months (CCC: $5,483/patient; non-CCC: $3,575/patient [Fig 2]). Conclusions: Using a commercial insurance database, we find that for patients diagnosed with ALL between the ages of 22y and 39y, the costs paid by the health plan are 3 times higher for those receiving care at an NCI-designated CCC as compared to a non-CCC site. Along the same lines, out of pocket costs are 1.7 times higher for those receiving care at an NCI-designated CCC as compared to a non-CCC site. The difference in cost is highest during the first year of therapy. We are currently examining the details of what drives the higher cost of care at CCC. Figure 1. Figure 1. Disclosures Lyman: Generex Biotechnology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Other: Research support; Halozyme; G1 Therapeutics; Coherus Biosciences: Consultancy.


Cancer ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 117 (1) ◽  
pp. 180-189 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachel A. Freedman ◽  
Katherine S. Virgo ◽  
Yulei He ◽  
Alexandre L. Pavluck ◽  
Eric P. Winer ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Katy E. Balazy ◽  
Cecil M. Benitez ◽  
Paulina M. Gutkin ◽  
Clare E. Jacobson ◽  
Rie von Eyben ◽  
...  

Background: Breast cancer care requires coordination between multiple diagnostic and treatment modalities. Disparities such as age, race/ethnicity, and socioeconomic status are associated with delays in care. This study investigates whether primary language is associated with delays in breast cancer diagnosis and treatment before and through radiotherapy (RT). Patients and Methods: This study was an institutional retrospective matched-cohort analysis of women treated with breast RT over 2 years. A total of 65 non–English-speaking (NES) patients were matched with 195 English-speaking (ES) patients according to stage, age, and chemotherapy delivery. Key time intervals along the breast cancer care path from initial findings through RT were recorded. Data were analyzed in a mixed model with matching as the random effect. The impact of race and insurance status was analyzed in addition to language. Results: Significant delays were found for NES patients, which varied by race. NES Latina patients experienced the longest delay, with a mean total care-path time of 13.53 months (from initial findings to end of RT) versus 8.18 months for all ES patients (P<.0001). Specifically, their mean total care-path time was 5.97 months longer than that of ES Latina patients (P=.001) and 5.80 months longer than that of ES White patients (P<.0001). In addition, NES Latina patients had a significantly longer total care-path time than NES patients of other races/ethnicities (P=.001). Delays were specifically seen between initial clinical or radiographic findings and diagnostic mammogram (P=.001) and between biopsy and resection (P=.044). Beyond language, race/ethnicity was itself associated with delays between resection and start of RT (P=.032) and between start and end of RT (P=.022). Conclusions: Language is associated with pre-RT delays in breast cancer care, especially for NES Latina patients. Delays are most pronounced before diagnostic mammograms, but they also exist before resection and RT. Future work should target NES patients to assist their progress along the care path.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document