<h3>Importance</h3><p>Medicare Advantage (MA) plans receive capitated per enrollee payments that create financial incentives to provide care more efficiently than traditional Medicare (TM); however, incentives could be associated with MA plans reducing use of beneficial services. Postacute care can improve functional status, but it is costly, and thus may be provided differently to Medicare beneficiaries by MA plans compared with TM.</p><h3>Objective</h3><p>To estimate the association of MA compared with TM enrollment with postacute care use and postdischarge outcomes.</p><h3>Design, Setting, and Participants</h3><p>This was a cohort study using Medicare data on 4613 hospitalizations among retired Ohio state employees and 2 comparison groups in 2015 and 2016. The study investigated the association of a policy change with use of postacute care and outcomes. The policy changed state retiree health benefits in Ohio from a mandatory MA plan to subsidies for either supplemental TM coverage or an MA plan. After policy implementation, approximately 75% of retired Ohio state employees switched to TM. Hospitalizations for 3 high-volume conditions that usually require postacute rehabilitation were assessed. Data from the Medicare Provider Analysis and Review files were used to identify all hospitalizations in short-term acute care hospitals. Difference-in-difference regressions were used to estimate changes for retired Ohio state employees compared with other 2015 MA enrollees in Ohio and with Kentucky public retirees who were continuously offered a mandatory MA plan. Data analyses were performed from September 1, 2019, to November 30, 2023.</p><h3>Exposures</h3><p>Enrollment in Ohio state retiree health benefits in 2015, after which most members shifted to TM.</p><h3>Main Outcomes and Measures</h3><p>Received care in an inpatient rehabilitation facility, skilled nursing facility, or home health, or any postacute care; the occurrence of any hospital readmission; the number of days in the community during the 30 days after hospital discharge; and mortality.</p><h3>Results</h3><p>The study sample included 2373 hospitalizations for Ohio public retirees, 1651 hospitalizations for other Humana MA enrollees in Ohio, and 589 hospitalizations for public retirees in Kentucky. After the 2016 policy implementation, the percentage of hospitalizations covered by MA decreased by 70.1 (95% CI, −74.2 to −65.9) percentage points (pp), inpatient rehabilitation facility admissions increased by 9.7 (95% CI, 4.7 to 14.7) pp, use of only home health or skilled nursing facility care fell by 8.6 (95% CI, −14.6 to −2.6) pp, and days in the community fell by 1.6 (95% CI, −2.9 to −0.3) days for Ohio public retirees compared with other Humana MA enrollees in Ohio. There was no change in 30-day mortality or hospital readmissions; similar results were found by comparisons using Kentucky public retirees as a control group.</p><h3>Conclusions and Relevance</h3><p>The findings of this cohort study indicate that after a change in retiree health benefits, most Ohio public retirees shifted from MA to TM and received more intensive postacute care with no significant change in measured short-term postdischarge outcomes. Future work should consider additional measures of postacute functional status over a longer follow-up period.</p>

<p>Patients with stage IV GI cancer spent 1 in 4 days alive with health care contact!</p>

Background: Multimorbidity is associated with premature mortality and excess health care costs. The burden of multimorbidity is highest among patients with cancer, yet trends and determinants of multimorbidity over time are poorly understood. Methods: Via Medicare claims linked to Cancer Prevention Study II data, group-based trajectory modeling was used to compare National Cancer Institute comorbidity index score trends for cancer survivors and older adults without a cancer history. Among cancer survivors, multinomial logistic regression analyses evaluated associations between demographics, health behaviors, and comorbidity trajectories. Results: In 82,754 participants (mean age, 71.6 years [SD, 5.1 years]; 56.9% female), cancer survivors (n = 11,265) were more likely than older adults without a cancer history to experience the riskiest comorbidity trajectories: (1) steady, high comorbidity scores (remain high; odds ratio [OR], 1.36; 95% CI, 1.29–1.45), and (2) high scores that increased over time (start high and increase; OR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.38–1.65). Cancer survivors who were physically active postdiagnosis were less likely to fall into these two trajectories (OR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.64–0.84, remain high; OR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.33–0.53, start high and increase) compared to inactive survivors. Cancer survivors with obesity were more likely to have a trajectory that started high and increased (OR, 2.83; 95% CI, 2.32–3.45 vs. normal weight), although being physically active offset some obesity-related risk. Cancer survivors who smoked postdiagnosis were also six times more likely to have trajectories that started high and increased (OR, 6.86; 95% CI, 4.41–10.66 vs. never smokers). Conclusions: Older cancer survivors are more likely to have multiple comorbidities accumulated at a faster pace than older adults without a history of cancer. Weight management, physical activity, and smoking avoidance postdiagnosis may attenuate that trend.

Background: Multimorbidity is associated with premature mortality and excess health care costs. The burden of multimorbidity is highest among patients with cancer, yet trends and determinants of multimorbidity over time are poorly understood. Methods: Via Medicare claims linked to Cancer Prevention Study II data, group-based trajectory modeling was used to compare National Cancer Institute comorbidity index score trends for cancer survivors and older adults without a cancer history. Among cancer survivors, multinomial logistic regression analyses evaluated associations between demographics, health behaviors, and comorbidity trajectories. Results: In 82,754 participants (mean age, 71.6 years [SD, 5.1 years]; 56.9% female), cancer survivors (n = 11,265) were more likely than older adults without a cancer history to experience the riskiest comorbidity trajectories: (1) steady, high comorbidity scores (remain high; odds ratio [OR], 1.36; 95% CI, 1.29–1.45), and (2) high scores that increased over time (start high and increase; OR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.38–1.65). Cancer survivors who were physically active postdiagnosis were less likely to fall into these two trajectories (OR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.64–0.84, remain high; OR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.33–0.53, start high and increase) compared to inactive survivors. Cancer survivors with obesity were more likely to have a trajectory that started high and increased (OR, 2.83; 95% CI, 2.32–3.45 vs. normal weight), although being physically active offset some obesity-related risk. Cancer survivors who smoked postdiagnosis were also six times more likely to have trajectories that started high and increased (OR, 6.86; 95% CI, 4.41–10.66 vs. never smokers). Conclusions: Older cancer survivors are more likely to have multiple comorbidities accumulated at a faster pace than older adults without a history of cancer. Weight management, physical activity, and smoking avoidance postdiagnosis may attenuate that trend.

United States clinical practice guidelines for metastatic colorectal cancer recommend use of medications impacted by genetic variants but do not recommend testing. We analyzed real-world treatment using a cancer registry and claims dataset to explore pharmacogenomic (PGx) medication treatment patterns and characterize exposure. In a cohort of 6957 patients, most (86.9%) were exposed to at least one chemotherapy medication with PGx guidelines. In a cohort of 2223 patients with retail pharmacy claims available, most (79.2%) were treated with at least one non-chemotherapy (79.2%) medication with PGx guidelines. PGx-associated chemotherapy exposure was associated with age, race/ethnicity, educational attainment, and rurality. PGx-associated non-chemotherapy exposure was associated with medication use and comorbidities. The potential impact of PGx testing is large and policies aimed at increasing PGx testing at diagnosis may impact treatment decisions for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer as most patients are exposed to medications with pharmacogenomics implications during treatment.

Purpose: Telehealth may remain an integral part of cancer survivorship care after the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. While telehealth may reduce travel/waiting times and costs for many patients, it may also create new barriers that could exacerbate care disparities in historically underserved populations, manifesting as differences in overall care participation, and in differential video versus phone use for telehealth. Methods: We reviewed visits by cancer survivors between January and December 2020 at a designated cancer center in Minnesota. We used descriptive statistics, data visualization, and generalized estimating equation logistic regression models to compare visit modalities and trends over time by age, urban/rural status, and race/ethnicity. Results: Among 159,301 visits, including 33,242 telehealth visits, older and rural-dwelling individuals were underrepresented in telehealth compared with in-person care. Non-Hispanic White individuals, those aged 18–69 years, and urban residents used video for > 50% of their telehealth visits. In contrast, those aged ≥ 70 years, rural residents, and most patient groups of color used video for only 33–43% of their telehealth visits. Video use increased with time for everyone, but relative differences in telehealth modalities persisted. Visits of Black/African American patients temporarily fell in spring/summer 2020. Conclusions: Our findings underscore reduced uptake of telehealth, especially video, among potentially vulnerable patient populations. Future research should evaluate reasons for differential telehealth utilization and whether visit modality (in-person versus video versus phone) affects cancer outcomes. Implications for Cancer Survivors: A long-term cancer care model with integrated telehealth elements needs to account for specific barriers for vulnerable populations.

Pediatric, adolescent and young adult patients undergoing cancer treatment and/or hematopoietic stem cell transplant are at increased risk for developing a secondary human papillomavirus (HPV)-associated malignancy. The objective of this study was to determine HPV vaccination coverage among individuals participating in a childhood cancer survivor program (CCSP). A retrospective cohort study was conducted among CCSP patients age 11–26 years attending a CCSP visit between 2014 and 2019. Survivors were age-, sex-, and race-matched 1:2 with controls without cancer. Data were abstracted from the electronic health record and state-based vaccination registry. Analysis was limited to Minnesota residents to minimize missing vaccination data. Survivorship care plans (SCPs) were reviewed for vaccine recommendations. 592 patients were included in the analyses (200 CCSP patients; 392 controls). By study design, mean age (18.4 years), race (72 % white), and sex (49 % female) were similar in the two groups. Among CCSP patients 22 % resided in a rural area compared to 3.8 % of controls. Vaccination coverage among CCSP patients was not statistically significantly different from controls [60.0 % vs 66.3 %, OR = 0.82, 95 % CI: (0.55, 1.23), p = 0.35]. Completion of 3 doses was not different between groups even though 3 doses is recommended for all CCSP patients regardless of age at initiation (28.5 % vs 30.1 %, p = 0.09). Only 8.0 % of SCPs recommended HPV vaccination. Although patients participating in a CCSP did not have significantly different HPV vaccination coverage compared to controls, HPV vaccination initiation and 3-dose series completion are still suboptimal in a patient population at high-risk of a secondary HPV-associated cancer.

<h3>Importance</h3><p>The number of cancer survivors living in the US is projected to be 26.1 million by 2040. Cancer survivors may be at increased risk of bone fractures, but research is limited in several important ways.</p><h3>Objective</h3><p>To investigate the associations of cancer diagnoses, including time since diagnosis and stage at diagnosis, with risks of pelvic, radial, and vertebral fractures (separately and combined) among older cancer survivors and compared with fracture risk among older adults without a history of cancer. Secondarily, to examine differences in risk of fracture stratified by modifiable behaviors, treatment, and cancer type.</p><h3>Design, Setting, and Participants</h3><p>This longitudinal cohort study used data from 92 431 older adults in the US Cancer Prevention Study II Nutrition Cohort linked with 1999 to 2017 Medicare claims. Data were analyzed from July 15, 2021, to May 3, 2022.</p><h3>Exposures</h3><p>Cancer history, time since cancer diagnosis, and stage at cancer diagnosis.</p><h3>Main Outcomes and Measures</h3><p>Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs for the risk of pelvic, radial, vertebral, and total frailty-related fractures were estimated using multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression. Stratification was used for secondary aims.</p><h3>Results</h3><p>Among 92 431 participants (mean [SD] age, was 69.4 [6.0] years, 51 820 [56%] women, and 90 458 [97.9%] White], 12 943 participants experienced a frailty-related bone fracture. Compared with participants without a history of cancer, cancer survivors who were diagnosed 1 to less than 5 years earlier with advanced stage cancer had higher risk of fracture (HR, 2.12; 95% CI, 1.75-2.58). The higher fracture risk in cancer survivors with recent advanced stage diagnosis (vs no cancer) was driven largely by vertebral (HR, 2.46; 95% CI, 1.93-3.13) and pelvic (HR, 2.46; 95% CI, 1.84-3.29) fracture sites. Compared with cancer survivors who did not receive chemotherapy, survivors who received chemotherapy were more likely to have a fracture; this association was stronger within 5 years of diagnosis (HR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.09-1.57) than 5 or more years after diagnosis (HR, 1.22; 95% CI, 0.99-1.51). Although the HR for risk of fracture was lower among physically active cancer survivors 5 or more years after diagnosis (HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.54-1.07), this result was not statistically significant, whereas current smoking was significantly associated with higher risk of fracture (HR, 2.27; 95% CI, 1.55-3.33).</p><h3>Conclusions and Relevance</h3><p>Findings from this cohort study suggest that older adults with a history of cancer may benefit from clinical guidance on prevention of frailty-related fractures. If study findings are replicated, fracture prevention programs for survivors might include referrals for physical activity with cancer exercise professionals and smoking cessation programs.</p>

Having a mental illness increases risk of mortality for women with breast cancer, partly due to barriers to accessing recommended care (e.g., cancer screening). Early detection is one important factor in breast cancer survival. To further understand this disparity in survival, we examined whether older women with mental illness are more likely to be diagnosed with later-staged breast cancers compared to women without mental illnesses. We used 2005–2015 SEER-Medicare data to identify AJCC stage I–IV breast cancer patients with and without a history of mental illness prior to cancer diagnosis. We used generalized ordinal regression to examine associations between mental illness diagnoses and stage at diagnosis, controlling for age, race/ethnicity, income, comorbidities, primary care use, rurality, and marital status. Among 96,034 women with breast cancer, 1.7% have a serious mental illness (SMI), 19.9% depression or anxiety, and 7.0% other mental illness. Those with SMI have 40% higher odds of being diagnosed with AJCC Stages II, III than Stage I; women with depression/anxiety have 25% lower odds of being diagnosed with Stage IV cancer than Stage I; and women with other mental illnesses have similar odds of being diagnosed in later stages. Women with SMI have higher odds of being diagnosed at later stages, which likely contributes to higher mortality after breast cancer. Surprisingly, women with depression and anxiety have a lower risk of being diagnosed with Stage IV cancer. Earlier breast cancer diagnosis in women with SMI is an important goal for reducing disparities breast cancer survival.

Background: This study aims to quantify the extent and diversity of the cancer care workforce, beyond medical oncologists, to inform future demand because the number of cancer survivors is expected to grow in the United States. Methods: Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare data were used to evaluate health-care use of cancer survivors diagnosed between 2000 and 2014, enrolled in fee-for-service Medicare Parts A and B, and 65 years or older in 2008-2015. We calculated percentage of cancer survivors who saw each clinician specialty and their average annual number of visits in each phase of care. We projected the national number of individuals receiving care and number of annual visits by clinician specialty and phase of care through 2040. Results: Cancer survivors had higher care use in the first year after diagnosis and last year of life phases. During the initial year after cancer diagnosis, most survivors were seen for cancer-related care by a medical oncologist (59.1%), primary care provider (55.9%), and/or other cancer-treating physicians (42.2%). The percentage of survivors with cancer-related visits to each specialty declined after the first year after diagnosis, plateauing after year 6-7. However, at 10 or more years after diagnosis, approximately 20% of cancer survivors had visits to medical oncologists and an average of 4 visits a year. Conclusions: Cancer survivors had higher care use in the first year after diagnosis and last year of life. High levels of care use across specialties in all phases of care have important implications for models of survivorship care coordination and workforce planning.

Background: Innovative treatments have improved cancer survival but also increased financial hardship for patients. While demographic factors associated with financial hardship among cancer survivors are known in the USA, the role of geography is less clear. Methods: We evaluated prevalence of forgoing care due to cost within 12 months by US Census region (Northeast, North Central/Midwest [NCMW], South, West) by demographic factors (age, sex, race/ethnicity) among 217,981 cancer survivors aged 18 to 82 years from the 2015–2019 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System survey. We summarized region- and group-specific prevalence of forgoing physician visits due to cost and used multilevel logistic regression models to compare regions. Results: The prevalence of forgoing physician visits due to cost was highest in the South (aged < 65 years: 19–38%; aged ≥ 65: 4–21%; adjusted odds ratios [OR], NCMW versus South, OR: 0.63 [0.56–0.71]; Northeast versus South, OR: 0.63 [0.55–0.73]; West versus South, OR: 0.73 [0.64–0.84]). Across the USA, including regions with broad Medicaid expansion, younger, female, and persons of color most often reported cost-related forgoing physician visits. Conclusion: Forgoing physician visits due to cost among cancer survivors is regionally clustered, raising concerns for concentrated poor long-term cancer outcomes. Underlying factors likely include variation in regional population compositions and contextual factors, such as Medicaid expansion and social policies. Disproportionate cost burden among survivors of color in all regions highlight systemic barriers, underscoring the need to improve access to the entire spectrum of care for cancer survivors, and especially for those most vulnerable.

Our objective was to assess gynecologic cancer survivor preferences for telehealth cancer care. Gynecologic cancer survivors participating in a prospective cohort study were invited to complete a cross-sectional survey regarding their experience with and preferences for telehealth. Of 188 participants, 48.9% had undergone a telehealth visit since March 2020, and 53.7% reported a preference for exclusively in-person visits for their cancer care and surveillance. Furthermore, 80.5% of participants were satisfied with the telehealth care they received and 54.8% would recommend telehealth services to patients with similar conditions. Most participants thought a physical examination was critical to detecting recurrence, and concern that their provider may miss something during telehealth visits was greater among those who preferred in-person visits. With many gynecologic cancer survivors preferring in-person care, building a future care model that includes telehealth elements will require adaptations, careful evaluation of patient concerns, as well as patient education on telehealth.

1582Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, most cancer care in the United States transitioned to telehealth (phone or video visits) to reduce infection risks for patients and providers. Teleheal...

OBJECTIVES The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has significantly impacted health care delivery across the United States, including treatment of cancer. We aim to describe the determinants of treatment plan changes from the perspective of oncology physicians across the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS Participants were recruited to an anonymous cross-sectional online survey of oncology physicians (surgeons, medical oncologists, and radiation oncologists) using social media from March 27 to April 10, 2020. Physician demographics, practice characteristics, and cancer treatment decisions were collected. RESULTS The analytic cohort included 411 physicians: 241 (58.6%) surgeons, 106 (25.8%) medical oncologists, and 64 (15.6%) radiation oncologists. In all, 38.0% were practicing in states with 1001 to 5000 confirmed COVID-19 cases as of April 3, 2020, and 37.2% were in states with >5000 cases. Most physicians (N=285; 70.0% of surgeons, 64.4% of medical oncologists, and 73.4% of radiation oncologists) had altered cancer treatment plans. Most respondents were concerned about their patients' COVID-19 exposure risks, but this was the primary driver for treatment alterations only for medical oncologists. For surgeons, the primary driver for treatment alterations was conservation of personal protective equipment, institutional mandates, and external society recommendations. Radiation oncologists were primarily driven by operational changes such as visitor restrictions. CONCLUSIONS The COVID-19 pandemic has caused a majority of oncologists to alter their treatment plans, but the primary motivators for changes differed by oncologic specialty. This has implications for reinstitution of standard cancer treatment, which may occur at differing time points by treatment modality.