Ragavan, Meera Vimala

Importance Patients with cancer have high utilization of health care services, and many have high financial burdens from care. High-deductible health plans (HDHPs), which offer lower premiums at the expense of higher deductibles and possibly higher out-of-pocket costs, are associated with decreased care utilization among survivors of cancer. However, it is unclear whether HDHPs are associated with cancer outcomes. Objective To determine whether HDHP status is associated with survival among cancer survivors and individuals without history of cancer and whether financial barriers to care mediate associations between HDHP status and survival. Design, Setting, and Participants This cross-sectional study included US adults ages 18 to 84 years who participated in the National Health Interview Survey from 2011 to 2018. Data were analyzed from December 14, 2023, to December 1, 2025. Exposure HDHP status. Main Outcomes and Measures Outcomes of interest were overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS). Analyses were adjusted for insurance status, marital status, sex, comorbidities, education, household income, geographic region, and cancer site and time since cancer diagnosis (if applicable). Results A total of 147 254 respondents (mean [SD] age, 45.7 [16.4] years; 79 261 [50.9%] female) were identified, including 9799 (5.9%) with history of cancer. A total of 2331 cancer survivors (25.6%) and 37 473 individuals without history of cancer (28.5%) reported an HDHP at the time of NHIS participation. HDHP status was associated with worse OS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.46; 95% CI, 1.19-1.79) and CSS (HR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.01-1.77) among cancer survivors. In contrast, among adults without history of cancer, HDHP status was not significantly associated with OS (HR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.96-1.21; P for interaction = .001). In mediation analyses, HDHP status among cancer survivors was associated with increased financial barriers to care, which mediated approximately 30% to 70% of the total association of HDHP with survival. Conclusions and Relevance In this cross-sectional study of nationwide population-based data, HDHPs were associated with worse OS and CSS among cancer survivors. However, HDHPs were not associated with mortality in adults without history of cancer. These data suggest that insurance coverage that financially discourages medical care may financially discourage necessary care and ultimately worsen cancer outcomes.

8567 Background: Adjuvant osimertinib (osi) improves disease-free survival (DFS) in patients (pts) with resected, early-stage, EGFR-mutant (EGFRmut) NSCLC, yet the benefit of osi after CRT in pts with unresectable locally advanced NSCLC is unknown. Post-hoc analysis of the PACIFIC trial showed a lack of survival benefit with consolidation durva versus placebo in pts with EGFRmut NSCLC. Comparisons between consolidation durva and EGFR TKIs in unresectable EGFRmut NSCLC following CRT are lacking. Methods: We conducted a multi-institutional retrospective analysis of pts with stage III unresectable EGFRmut NSCLC (exon19 deletion, exon21 L858R), who received EGFR TKI or durva after ≥ 2 cycles of platinum-based chemotherapy plus definitive radiation therapy between 2015-2022. Baseline characteristics including age, sex, smoking history, PD-L1 status, and outcomes on DFS, overall survival (OS), and safety were collected. Multivariable (MVA) cox regression analysis was used for statistical analysis. Treatment-related adverse events (trAE) were defined using CTCAE 5.0. Results: Seventeen pts from 12 institutions received an EGFR TKI (osi, n=15; erlotinib, n=2), and 13 pts received consolidation durva. Median follow-up was 23 months. Median age of all pts was 61 years (IQR:52-72) and 76.7% were female. Most pts in both groups had never-smoked and had adenocarcinoma. All pts received ≥ 60 Gy of radiation with concurrent chemotherapy. PD-L1 expression was ≥ 50% in 1/10 (10%) pts treated with durva vs 6/13 (46.2%) treated with TKI, p=0.09. Median duration on treatment for EGFR TKI and durva was 12.2 months and 4.8 months, respectively. Pts treated with EGFR TKI had significantly longer 24-month DFS versus pts treated with durva after adjusting for stage (3A vs 3B vs 3C) (Table). Any grade tRAE occurred in 58.8% (10/17) of pts treated with EGFR TKI vs 38.5% (5/13) with durva. Grade > 3 tRAE occurred in 15.4% (1 pneumonitis and 1 AST/ALT elevation) of pts treated with durva but in none of pts treated with EGFR TKI. Three pts within each arm came off treatment due to toxicity (EGFR TKI: 1 pneumonitis and 2 dermatitis; durva: 1 of each pneumonitis, Type 1 diabetes, AST/ALT elevation). Conclusions: EGFR TKI therapy after definitive CRT was associated with significantly longer DFS compared to durva in this retrospective study of pts with stage III unresectable EGFRmut NSCLC, without unanticipated safety signals. Follow-up is ongoing and OS outcomes will be evaluated subsequently. Further investigation is warranted to define the optimal therapy for locally advanced EGFRmut NSCLC. [Table: see text]