Preussler, Jaime M.

PURPOSE Public reporting of health care outcomes can have unintended effects such as inappropriate risk aversion in patient selection. METHODS The center-specific survival analysis annually assigns all hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) centers in the United States a +1, −1, or 0 score for observed outcomes that are above, below, or within a center-specific predicted range of outcome. For each index year (2012-2016), centers receiving a −1 score after 0 scores in the preceding 2 years were compared with contemporaneous centers with as-predicted outcomes (0 score). Changes in the patient population characteristics in the 3 years before versus the 3 years after the index years were compared between the newly below-expected centers (NBCs) and the controls. A multivariate model adjusted for baseline patient population characteristics and center volume. RESULTS No differences in patient selection behavior were identified when comparing the NBCs with the controls across eight key patient population characteristics. For the statistically modeled (predicted) 1-year overall survival (OS), reflecting a holistic measure of centers' patient population risk, we observed no statistically significant difference in change (−0.23% [95% CI, −1.4 to 0.9]; P = .70). The observed OS increased in both NBCs and controls by 0.9% and 4.5%, respectively, without statistically significant difference in change. CONCLUSION Centers receiving a −1 score were not observed to deviate significantly from patient selection trends in the HCT field. These findings suggest that public reporting of HCT outcomes in the United States does not result in unintended bias against HCT for high-risk patients.

Abstract There has been an increase in volume as well as an improvement in overall survival (OS) after hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) for hematologic disorders. It is unknown if these changes have affected racial/ethnic minorities equally. In this observational study from the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research of 79 904 autologous (auto) and 65 662 allogeneic (allo) HCTs, we examined the volume and rates of change of autoHCT and alloHCT over time and trends in OS in 4 racial/ethnic groups: non-Hispanic Whites (NHWs), non-Hispanic African Americans (NHAAs), and Hispanics across 5 2-year cohorts from 2009 to 2018. Rates of change were compared using Poisson model. Adjusted and unadjusted Cox proportional hazards models examined trends in mortality in the 4 racial/ethnic groups over 5 study time periods. The rates of increase in volume were significantly higher for Hispanics and NHAAs vs NHW for both autoHCT and alloHCT. Adjusted overall mortality after autoHCT was comparable across all racial/ethnic groups. NHAA adults (hazard ratio [HR] 1.13; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.04-1.22; P = .004) and pediatric patients (HR 1.62; 95% CI 1.3-2.03; P < .001) had a higher risk of mortality after alloHCT than NHWs. Improvement in OS over time was seen in all 4 groups after both autoHCT and alloHCT. Our study shows the rate of change for the use of autoHCT and alloHCT is higher in NHAAs and Hispanics than in NHWs. Survival after autoHCT and alloHCT improved over time; however, NHAAs have worse OS after alloHCT, which has persisted. Continued efforts are needed to mitigate disparities for patients requiring alloHCT.

Introduction Public reporting of outcomes drives healthcare improvement in many fields, including hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT), although with possible unintended consequences. The Center for International Blood & Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR) publishes an annual Center-Specific Survival Analysis (CSA), which compares HCT centers' observed 1-year overall survival (OS) with their statistically modeled expected 1-year OS, with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Centers with OS within their 95% CI receive a 0 score, indicating as expected outcomes. Those with OS below / above their 95% CI receive a -1 / +1 score, indicating below / above expected OS, respectively. After a -1 report, centers may change their patient selection criteria, causing unintentional systematic exclusion of patient populations who could benefit from HCT. We analyzed how the CSA report influences patient selection practices among centers receiving a -1 score. Methods Centers receiving a -1 report between 2012 and 2016 that had ‘as expected’ survival in the preceding 2 years were classified as newly below expected OS centers (NBCs). The year of their -1 report was used as the index year. Centers with ‘as expected’ OS in the 3 years before and after each index year were identified as control centers, reflecting expected evolution of patient selection in the HCT field. The patient population variables analyzed are shown in Table 1. The difference in patient population characteristics in the 3 years before vs the 3 years after the index years defined the change in patient selection behavior at the NBCs and the controls. A multivariate model adjusting for baseline patient population characteristics and center size was used to compare the change in patient population from before and after the index year in the NBCs and that of the controls. The difference in differences (ΔinΔ) were calculated as ΔNBC - ΔControl. A significance threshold of p<0.01 was used to account for multiple testing. Results After adjusting for overall trends, center size, and baseline patient population characteristics, no differences in patient selection behavior meeting the pre-specified threshold for statistical significance were identified when comparing the NBCs (n=24 centers) with the controls (n=195 centers). In the 3 years following the index years, 4,150 and 25,013 patients were transplanted at NBCs and controls, respectively. The proportion of patients receiving reduced intensity or non-myeloablative conditioning regimens decreased 4.1% in NBCs and increased 5.0% in controls, for a net difference of -9.1% (95% CI: -16.7% to -1.6%, p=0.02). All other patient characteristic proportions changed in the same direction at NBCs and controls, albeit to varying degrees (Table 1). In some high-risk characteristics, (e.g. HCT-CI > 3), a greater increase was seen at NBCs vs controls (ΔinΔ 2.1% 95% CI: -2.8% to 6.9%, p=0.40). In others, (e.g. age 60+ years), a greater increase was seen at controls vs NBCs (ΔinΔ -2.6% 95% CI: -5.9% to 0.7%, p=0.12). To capture a holistic measure of centers' patient population risk, the predicted 1-year survival was compared in the NBCs vs controls using the logistic regression model generated for each year's CSA. The predicted OS increased by 3.08% and 3.30% in the NBCs and controls respectively, with no statistically significant difference (-0.23%, 95% CI: -1.4% to 0.9%, p=0.70, Figure 1). The observed overall survival (adjusted for predicted 1 year OS) also increased in both BECs and controls by 0.9% and 4.5% respectively, without statistically significant difference (-3.6%, 95% CI: -6.7% to -0.7%, p=0.02). Discussion For centers receiving a -1 report, no statistically significant changes were seen in patient population characteristics in the following 3 years when compared to centers with OS was as expected. There was variability in the changes in high-risk patient characteristics at the NBCs relative to the controls, and in some cases more patients with high-risk characteristics were selected at these centers compared to those at controls. The change in predicted overall survival at 1 year, a summary indicator of survival risk, was similar between BECs and control centers. Although the number of patients in centers with below expected OS was small, these findings suggest the public reporting of outcomes in HCT in the US does not unintentionally affect access to HCT for high-risk patients at NBCs.

Abstract Introduction: Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (alloHCT) is the only potentially curative treatment available for acute myelogenous leukemia (AML). It is a medically complicated and resource intensive procedure for which there are patient-, provider- and system-related factors that may impact its utilization. While Medicare coverage for alloHCT may help address a major financial barrier to access, there is still an unmet need due to other factors. This study intended to examine trends and factors associated with utilization of alloHCT and to estimate unmet need for alloHCT among Medicare beneficiaries with AML. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included all patients with a diagnosis of AML identified in the Medicare claims data from 2010 through 2016. Primary patient selection criteria included: primary or secondary diagnosis of AML, age limit (65-74), and continuous enrollment (for at least 180 days after AML diagnosis in Part A and Part B fee-for-service programs). To study trends in utilization, the transplant rates were calculated as the number of patients who received an alloHCT within 180 days and one year of diagnosis (numerator) divided by the total number of patients diagnosed with AML within each diagnosis year (denominator). Transplant rates within one year of diagnosis were further adjusted by patient characteristics, including age group, sex, race, residential region, and Elixhauser Comorbidity Index (ECI). A multivariable logistic regression was utilized to identify factors associated with the likelihood of receiving alloHCT within one year of diagnosis. Two approaches were applied to estimate unmet need for alloHCT. The first approach (Approach 1) used claims data to identify the potential need for alloHCT among patients who achieved complete remission for at least 90 days; patients who achieved 90-day remission but did not receive alloHCT at any time point were considered to have unmet need. In the second approach (Approach 2), the total number of patients diagnosed with AML in the claims data was run through the National Marrow Donor Program (NMDP) methodology , which takes estimates of risk level, response to treatment, comorbidity, and early mortality into consideration. Overall estimated need and unmet need from 2010-2015 and over different time periods were evaluated for both approaches. Results: Among the 5,974 patients diagnosed with AML from March 1, 2010 through June 30 th, 2016, 1226 patients (21%) received an alloHCT by the end of 2016. Trend analysis results suggest that utilization of alloHCT increased from 2010 to 2016 (P < 0.0001) (Figure 1). The likelihood of receiving alloHCT within one year of diagnosis was found to be associated with diagnosis year, age, race, geographic region, ECI, and population-level median household income (Table 1). Both approaches estimated that approximately 36% of the diagnosed patients were in need of alloHCT between 2010 and 2015. The overall unmet need was estimated as 59% and 43% based on the claims data approach and the NMDP methodology, respectively. Despite the differences in estimated unmet need between the two approaches, the unmet need for alloHCT was found to trend down over time (Figures 2 & 3). Discussion and Conclusions: Medicare coverage facilitates access to the health care system and receipt of health services when a need for treatment or care is recognized. Utilization of alloHCT has increased over time among Medicare beneficiaries with AML. However, there are persistent differences in utilization of alloHCT by age, race, geographic region, comorbidity, and socioeconomic status, indicating disparities in access to alloHCT among this population. The results of estimated need and unmet need for alloHCT may be affected by the lack of cytogenetics and molecular information in administrative claims. To minimize this limitation, we used NMDP methodology for validation and found a similar estimation of potential need for alloHCT and downward trend in unmet need. Although the unmet need for alloHCT for AML has improved over time, policy efforts, research, and continued education are needed to close the gap between the actual utilization of alloHCT and unmet need for this potentially curative treatment. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Saber: Govt. COI: Other.

Abstract Social determinants of health, including poverty, contribute significantly to health outcomes in the United States; however, their impact on pediatric hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) outcomes is poorly understood. We aimed to identify the association between neighborhood poverty and HCT outcomes for pediatric allogeneic HCT recipients in the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research database. We assembled 2 pediatric cohorts undergoing first allogeneic HCT from 2006 to 2015 at age ≤18 years, including 2053 children with malignant disease and 1696 children with nonmalignant disease. Neighborhood poverty exposure was defined a priori per the US Census definition as living in a high-poverty ZIP code (≥20% of persons below 100% federal poverty level) and used as the primary predictor in all analyses. Our primary outcome was overall survival (OS), defined as the time from HCT until death resulting from any cause. Secondary outcomes included relapse and transplantation-related mortality (TRM) in malignant disease, acute and chronic graft-versus-host disease, and infection in the first 100 days post-HCT. Among children undergoing transplantation for nonmalignant disease, neighborhood poverty was not associated with any HCT outcome. Among children undergoing transplantation for malignant disease, neighborhood poverty conferred an increased risk of TRM but was not associated with inferior OS or any other transplantation outcome. Among children with malignant disease, a key secondary finding was that children with Medicaid insurance experienced inferior OS and increased TRM compared with those with private insurance. These data suggest opportunities for future investigation of the effects of household-level poverty exposure on HCT outcomes in pediatric malignant disease to inform care delivery interventions.