Leapman, Michael

PURPOSE Despite evidence of diagnostic accuracy but unclear long-term clinical benefit, national utilization patterns of prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography (PSMA-PET) are undefined. METHODS We conducted a serial cross-sectional study to evaluate the use of PET imaging among commercial insurance beneficiaries with prostate cancer using administrative claims from deidentified Blue Cross Blue Shield Axis database. Eligible patients included prevalent and incident prostate cancer cases. We calculated the proportions undergoing PET imaging in semiannual periods from January 1, 2016, through December 31, 2024. We examined the association between regional-level contextual sociodemographic and health care characteristics, and regional use of PSMA-PET imaging in 2024. RESULTS A total of 514,750 male beneficiaries age 40-89 years with prostate cancer were identified between 2016 and 2024. The proportion of individuals with prostate cancer undergoing PET imaging increased from 4.5 [95% CI, 4.1 to 4.9] per 1,000 in the first half of 2016 to 77.6 (95% CI, 76.2 to 79.1) per 1,000 in the second half of 2024, P < .001. Increases in PET were driven by uptake of PSMA-PET following approval in 2021, which increased from 0.8 (95% CI, 0.6 to 0.9) per 1,000 in the second half of 2021 to 77.0 (95% CI, 75.5 to 78.5) per 1,000 in the second half of 2024, P < .001. PSMA-PET use in 2024 was higher in regions with greater education (99.3 v 114.6 per 1,000 in lowest [Q1] v highest [Q4] educated) and income (95.4 v 112.3 per 1,000 in Q1 v Q4 income) measures, P < .001. CONCLUSION PSMA-PET was rapidly incorporated into clinical practice among commercial insurance beneficiaries with prostate cancer with higher adoption in geographic regions with higher income and education.

Abstract Background Opioid stewardship policies could adversely affect pain management for patients with cancer. Yet patients with cancer are also at risk for opioid‐related harms. This study sought to determine trends in opioid prescribing by clinical stratum and pain for patients with cancer from 2016 to 2020. Methods A retrospective study was conducted of opioid‐naive adults with newly diagnosed cancer from 2016 to 2020 ( N = 10,232) in a large Connecticut health system. Logistic regression was used to calculate changes in the predicted probability of opioid prescribing from 2016 to 2020. Two subpopulations were examined: patients treated surgically ( n = 4405) and patients with metastatic cancer ( n = 2158). Flowsheet pain scores for patients with metastatic cancer were used to stratify by no pain (all scores, 0) versus any pain. The main outcomes were new (≥1 prescription in the 0–6 months after diagnosis) and additional (0–6 and 7–9 months) opioid prescriptions. Results A decline was observed in the predicted probability of new (71.1% to 64.6%; p < .001) and additional prescribing (27.2% to 24.2%; p = .07 [not significant]) declined. Among surgical patients, the predicted probability of new opioid prescribing fell (96.0% to 88.6%; p < .001), whereas additional prescribing was stable (13%). For patients with metastatic cancer with pain, new opioid prescribing was stable (56%). For those reporting no pain, the predicted probability of new opioid prescribing declined from 61.6% to 36.1% ( p < .001). Conclusions In the context of widespread policy changes, this study showed a modest decline in new and additional opioid prescribing for patients with cancer. In metastatic cancer, prescribing remained stable for patients reporting pain and declined steeply for those reporting no pain.

Purpose: Prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography (PSMA-PET) improves prostate cancer (PCa) localization, particularly in biochemical recurrence (BCR). The primary objective was to assess management patterns after PSMA-PET for BCR at 2 academic centers. Methods: This study evaluated clinical management within 6 months after first PSMA-PET for patients with BCR after local therapy. Management categories included no treatment, local therapy, systemic therapy, and metastasis-directed therapy (MDT). We also evaluated clinical management decision variation across strata of PSMA-PET results PSA levels (<2.0, 2.0-4.99, and ≥5.0 ng/mL) at time of imaging. Results: We identified 581 patients who received PSMA-PET from February 2021 to June 2023. PSMA-PET findings were negative in 142 (24%) and demonstrated localized recurrence in 86 (15%), regional nodal disease in 60 (10%), and distant metastasis in 293 (50%). Distant metastasis was identified in 105 (35%) patients with PSA < 2.0, 67 (60%) with PSA 2.0 to 4.99, and 115 (71%) with PSA ≥ 5.0. In patients with negative PSMA-PET, 63 (44%) received treatment. Conversely, 92% with detected metastases were treated (systemic therapy in 189 [64%], MDT in 75 [26%], and local therapy in 7 [2%]). Treatments differed by the PSA level within strata of PSMA-PET findings. Among 293 patients with metastases, MDT was used more commonly in patients with PSA < 2.0 (37%) than PSA 2.0 to 4.99 (30%) or PSA ≥ 5.0 (13%). Conclusions: Most patients undergoing PSMA-PET for BCR had identifiable disease and initiated therapy within 6 months. Identification of distant metastases and treatment choices differed by the PSA level at imaging. Prospective research is needed to determine whether earlier detection and treatment initiation improve clinical outcomes.

ImportanceAlthough prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography (PSMA-PET) has shown improved sensitivity and specificity compared with conventional imaging for the detection of biochemical recurrent (BCR) prostate cancer, the long-term outcomes of a widespread shift in imaging are unknown.ObjectiveTo estimate long-term outcomes of integrating PSMA-PET into the staging pathway for recurrent prostate cancer.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis decision analytic modeling study simulated outcomes for patients with BCR following initial definitive local therapy. Inputs used were from the literature and a retrospective cohort study conducted at 2 institutions. The base case analysis assumed modest benefits of earlier detection and treatment, and scenario analyses considered prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level at imaging and different outcomes of earlier vs delayed treatment. The analysis was performed between April 1, 2023, and May 1, 2024.Exposures(1) Immediate PSMA-PET imaging, (2) conventional imaging (computed tomography and bone scan [CTBS]) followed by PSMA-PET if CTBS findings were negative or equivocal, and (3) CTBS alone.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe main outcomes were detection of metastases, deaths from prostate cancer, and life-years and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained.ResultsThe model estimated that per 1000 simulated patients with BCR (assumed median age, 66 years), PSMA-PET is expected to diagnose 611 (95% uncertainty interval [UI], 565-656) patients with metastasis compared with 630 (95% UI, 586-675) patients diagnosed using CTBS followed by PSMA-PET and 297 (95% UI, 202-410) patients diagnosed using CTBS alone. Moreover, the estimated number of prostate cancer deaths was 512 (95% UI, 472-552 deaths) with PSMA-PET, 520 (95% UI, 480-559 deaths) with CTBS followed by PSMA-PET, and 587 (95% UI, 538-632 deaths) with CTBS alone. Imaging with PSMA-PET yielded the highest number of QALYs, which were 824 (95% UI, 698-885) higher than CTBS. These results differed by PSA level at the time of testing, with the highest incremental life-years and QALYs and lowest number of deaths from prostate cancer among patients with PSA levels of at least 5.0 ng/mL. Finally, the estimates were sensitive to the expected benefit of initiating therapy for recurrent prostate cancer earlier in the disease course.Conclusions and RelevanceThe results of this decision-analytic model suggest that upfront PSMA-PET imaging for the evaluation of BCR is expected to be associated with reduced cancer mortality and gains in life-years and QALYs compared with the conventional imaging strategy, assuming modest benefits of earlier detection and treatment.

11059 Background: Some opioid stewardship policies could negatively affect patients with cancer pain. However, patients with cancer are also at risk for opioid related harms, especially with persistent use. We assessed opioid prescribing trends in the context of cancer treatment and patient reported pain in a large health system in Connecticut. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of opioid-naïve adult patients with solid tumor malignancies diagnosed from 2016 through 2020 within the Yale New Haven Health System. We identified new (≥1 opioid prescription in 0-6 months following diagnosis) and additional (0-6 and 6-9 months) opioid prescriptions. The analysis evaluated all eligible patients as well as two clinical cohorts: patients treated surgically and patients with metastatic cancer. For patients with metastatic cancer and a documented pain score in the electronic health record flowsheet data, we further stratified by any (any score≥1) or no (all scores=0) pain in the 6 months since diagnosis and prior to first opioid, if given. For these patients, we noted therapeutic class of the first opioid. We used a logistic model adjusted for patient demographics to calculate predicted probability of opioid prescription and change over time. Results: A total of 10,868 patients met study criteria. Overall, we observed a decline in new opioid prescribing from 69.0% to 62.7% (p<.001) (Table). Additional opioid use also declined from 23.4% to 20.2% (p=.02). In the surgery cohort, new opioid prescribing fell from 95.7% to 88.2% (p<.001), while additional opioid use was stable over time (approximately 12%). For patients with metastatic cancer with any documented pain, new opioid prescribing was stable over time (approximately 56%). For those with documented pain scores=0, new opioid prescribing declined from 59.7% to 34.2% (p<.001). In these patients, the class listed on the first opioid prescription was analgesia in 86.6% and cough in 13.4%. Conclusions: Overall, and in patients treated with oncological surgeries, our study in a single large US health system suggests a modest, gradual decline in opioid prescribing for patients with cancer over time. On the other hand, among patients with metastatic cancer, opioid prescribing remained stable for those with documented pain and declined steeply for those without documented pain. [Table: see text]

34 Background: Prostate specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography (PSMA-PET) imaging improves prostate cancer visualization and has been proposed as a tool to guide treatment decisions. As PSMA-PET imaging agents were not approved in the United States (US) until December 2020, little is known about national patterns of PET imaging utilization. Methods: We conducted a dynamic cohort study to evaluate use of PET imaging among insurance beneficiaries aged 40-89 years with a diagnosis of prostate cancer using deidentified administrative claims from Blue Cross Blue Shield Axis. We calculated the proportions of patients undergoing PET imaging in semiannual periods from January 1, 2016, through December 31, 2022, examining tracers specific to prostate cancer, including PSMA-targeted agents as well as fluciclovine, sodium fluoride, and choline tracers. Cochran-Armitage tests were used to evaluate trends in the proportion of individuals receiving PET imaging over time. We also assessed the association between regional [hospital referral region (HRR)] level contextual sociodemographic and healthcare characteristics and regional use of PSMA-PET imaging in 2022 using chi-square tests. Results: There were 410,505 beneficiaries with prostate cancer identified in the study period. The semiannual proportion of patients undergoing PET imaging increased from 4.5 [(95% confidence interval (CI) 4.1-5.0] per 1,000 in the first half of 2016 to 41.7 (95% CI 40.6-42.9) per 1,000 in the second half of 2022, p<0.001. Increases in PET imaging were driven by uptake of PSMA-PET imaging, which increased from 0.7 (95% CI 0.6-0.9) per 1000 in the second half of 2021 to 37.5 (95% CI 36.4-38.6) per 1,000 in the second half of 2022, p<0.001. Following approvals of PSMA-PET agents, other forms of PET imaging rapidly decreased – from 18.2 (95% CI 17.4-18.9) per 1000 in the second half of 2021 to 4.6 (95% CI 4.3-5.0) per 1,000 in the same period of 2022, p<0.001. Compared to HRRs in quartile 1 (Q1), HRRs in Q4 of PSMA-PET use in 2022 had higher levels of education (25.0% with college education or higher in Q1 versus 29.4% in Q4, p=0.005) and median household income ($50,200 in Q1 versus $60,900 in Q4, p<0.001). Conclusions: In this study from a large commercial US health insurer, PSMA-PET was rapidly incorporated into clinical practice and is now the dominant prostate cancer radiotracer. However, the initial uptake of PSMA-PET may be accompanied by disparity, as our data suggests less use in areas with lower income and education measures.

Abstract Background The impact of ongoing efforts to decrease opioid use on patients with cancer remains undefined. Our objective was to determine trends in new and additional opioid use in patients with and without cancer. Methods This retrospective cohort study used data from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program–Medicare for opioid-naive patients with solid tumor malignancies diagnosed from 2012 through 2017 and a random sample of patients without cancer. We identified 238 470 eligible patients with cancer and further focused on 4 clinical strata: patients without cancer, patients with metastatic cancer, patients with nonmetastatic cancer treated with surgery alone (“surgery alone”), and patients with nonmetastatic cancer treated with surgery plus chemotherapy or radiation therapy (“surgery+”). We identified new, early additional, and long-term additional opioid use and calculated the change in predicted probability of these outcomes from 2012 to 2017. Results New opioid use was higher in patients with cancer (46.4%) than in those without (6.9%) (P &lt; .001). From 2012 to 2017, the predicted probability of new opioid use was more stable in the cancer strata (relative declines: 0.1% surgery alone; 2.4% surgery+; 8.8% metastatic cancer), than in the noncancer stratum (20.0%) (P &lt; .001 for each cancer to noncancer comparison). Early additional use declined among surgery patients (‒14.9% and ‒17.5% for surgery alone and surgery+, respectively) but was stable among patients with metastatic disease (‒2.8%, P = .50). Conclusions Opioid prescribing declined over time at a slower rate in patients with cancer than in patients without cancer. Our study suggests important but tempered effects of the changing opioid climate on patients with cancer.

1592 Background: While ongoing efforts to decrease opioid use have dramatically altered the prescribing landscape, the impact on patients with cancer is not well understood. We examined trends in new and persistent opioid use in opioid-naïve older patients with and without cancer in the United States. Methods: This retrospective cohort study used SEER-Medicare linked data for patients with solid tumors malignancies diagnosed from 2012 through 2017, and a random sample of patients without cancer. We included patients who did not receive opioids for 3 months prior to the diagnosis or randomly assigned index date. We identified new opioid use (claim in 0-90 days after diagnosis/index date), early persistent opioid use (claims in days 0-90 and 91-180), and long-term persistent opioid use (claims in days 0-90 and 91-180 and months 13-15). Further analysis focused on 4 clinical strata: non-cancer, metastatic cancer, cancer treated with surgery alone, and cancer treated with surgery plus chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy ("surgery+"). We calculated relative changes in the predicted probability of opioid use from 2012 to 2017 based on a logit model adjusted for patient demographics. Results: We identified 238,470 eligible patients with cancer (mean age 76.3 years). Among patients with cancer, 46.4% had new opioid use; use was higher among those receiving surgery+ (70.6%), those treated with surgery alone (58.8%) and those with metastatic cancer (50.0%), compared to patients without cancer (6.9%). From 2012 to 2017, the predicted probability of new opioid use declined in all groups, with lower relative decline in the cancer subgroups (6.8% surgery+; 9.5% surgery alone; 10.2% metastatic cancer) compared to the non-cancer comparator (24.7%). For instance, in patients with metastatic cancer, predicted probability of new use decreased from 52.4 to 47.1% (10.2%) vs. 8.0 to 6.0% (24.7%) in patients without cancer. Relative decline in predicted probability of long-term persistent opioid use was lower in the surgical cancer strata (44.2% surgery+; 46.1% surgery alone) vs. the non-cancer comparator (54.0%). Conclusions: While opioid use remains common in patients with cancer, new and persistent opioid use declined over time in all patients, though with steeper relative declines in non-cancer compared to cancer populations. Our study suggests important but tempered effects of the changing opioid climate on patients with cancer.[Table: see text]