Borah, Bijan J.

Background: Latinas with mammographic dense breasts are at increased risk of breast cancer. This randomized controlled trial tests the effectiveness of three breast density (BD) educational approaches on adherence to subsequent mammography screening among Latinas receiving care at a Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC). Measure(s): Adherence was ascertained using electronic health record and survey responses. Kaplan–Meier estimates of the time to subsequent mammogram were used to obtain adherence rates at 1- and 2-years post baseline mammogram. Cox modeling assessed whether adherence differed by patient characteristics or group assignment. Results: This analysis was limited to Latinas enrolled between October 27, 2016, and December 21, 2018 ( n = 946; 66.1% <50 years of age, 53.5% with dense breasts). Adherence rates at 1 year was 24.8% increasing to 51.7% by year 2. Latinas randomized to the Promotora + brochure + letter arm (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.09 [95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.87 to 1.36]) or brochure + letter (HR: 1.03 [95% CI 0.82 to 1.29]) arm were not more likely to be adherent to subsequent mammography compared to the letter only arm ( p = 0.76) . Adjusting for age and study group, having more prior mammograms, being “extremely likely” to get an annual mammogram, and having more confidence to get an annual mammogram at baseline were significant drivers of subsequent adherence. Conclusion: Informational interventions targeting BD education alone are unlikely to significantly improve adherence to subsequent mammography among Latinas receiving care in FQHCs.

ABSTRACTIntroduction/AimsHealthcare utilization and costs in myotonic dystrophy (DM) are not well understood. This study describes the burden of DM and its associated costs.MethodsWe performed a retrospective study using data from a large U.S. administrative claims database to identify commercially insured individuals with DM and compared healthcare utilization and cost with a matched cohort. Analyses were performed between the cohorts with ≥ 3 years of insured follow‐up.ResultsWe identified 1182 DM individuals with coverage at least 3 year prior and 3 years following an index DM diagnosis from January 1, 2009 to December 31, 2018. Compared to controls, DM individuals were 3.7 times more likely to be hospitalized (p < 0.0001), 2.4 times more likely to visit an emergency department (p < 0.0001), and had twice as many outpatient visits (p < 0.0001) in the first year post‐diagnosis, with similar utilization at 2‐ and 3‐years post‐diagnosis. Annual mean costs were 3.9 times higher for health plan paid costs (p < 0.0001) and 2.6 times higher for patient‐paid costs (p < 0.0001) for DM individuals than controls in the first year post‐diagnosis, with similar costs at 2‐ and 3‐years post‐diagnosis. Factors associated with higher costs included the need for durable medical equipment, including gait aids or respiratory support devices.DiscussionIndividuals with DM experience significantly higher healthcare utilization and associated healthcare costs than controls of similar age, sex, race, and census region. The findings show the high clinical and economic burden of DM, highlighting the importance of improving cost‐effective care delivery in this population.

Abstract Objectives In the general hospital wards, machine learning (ML)-based early warning systems (EWSs) can identify patients at risk of deterioration to facilitate rescue interventions. We assess subpopulation performance of a ML-based EWS on medical and surgical adult patients admitted to general hospital wards. Materials and Methods We assessed the scores of an EWS integrated into the electronic health record and calculated every 15 minutes to predict a composite adverse event (AE): all-cause mortality, transfer to intensive care, cardiac arrest, or rapid response team evaluation. The distributions of the First Score 3 hours after admission, the Highest Score at any time during the hospitalization, and the Last Score just before an AE or dismissal without an AE were calculated. The Last Score was used to calculate the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC-AUC) and the precision-recall curve (PRC-AUC). Results From August 23, 2021 to March 31, 2022, 35 937 medical admissions had 2173 (6.05%) AE compared to 25 214 surgical admissions with 4984 (19.77%) AE. Medical and surgical admissions had significant different (P &lt;.001) distributions of the First Score, Highest Score, and Last Score among those with an AE and without an AE. The model performed better in the medical group when compared to the surgical group, ROC-AUC 0.869 versus 0.677, and RPC-AUC 0.988 versus 0.878, respectively. Discussion Heterogeneity of medical and surgical patients can significantly impact the performance of a ML-based EWS, changing the model validity and clinical discernment. Conclusions Characterization of the target patient subpopulations has clinical implications and should be considered when developing models to be used in general hospital wards.

8051 Background: The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) currently recommends the use of Atezolizumab, Nivolumab, Osimertinib, and Pembrolizumab in the perioperative management of non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC) and esophageal cancers (EC). As the therapeutic landscape evolves, we aim to evaluate the cost implications of these guidelines for eligible patients in the United States. Methods: The Medicare Part B payment allowance limits of each medication were ascertained except Osimertinib for which an approximate wholesale acquisition cost (WAC) was reported due to privately administered Medicare Part D coverage. Using national data and published literature, we estimated the annual incidence of patients with newly diagnosed EC and NSCLC who would be eligible for surgery combined with neoadjuvant and/or adjuvant immune and targeted therapy. We applied the estimated cost of the medication based on dosing and duration of treatment, which spanned 1 year for all but adjuvant Osimertinib, which spanned 3 years. Using these data, the cost per patient and the total cost for an incident cohort were estimated. Results: We estimated that 8,602 patients with newly diagnosed EC would be eligible for adjuvant Nivolumab; the cost to treat one patient was $248,529, and the cost to treat one incident cohort was approximately $2 billion (Table). We estimated that 50,409 patients with NSCLC will meet the criteria for neoadjuvant Nivolumab with a total cost of three cycles of $32,894 per patient and $1.7 billion per cohort. Among NSCLC patients who may undergo resection and qualify for adjuvant therapy (Stage IB – IIA with high-risk features or IIB-IIIA), 85,063 patients are anticipated to be EGFR-negative and treated with adjuvant Atezolizumab or Pembrolizumab. Treatment costs range from $178,584 – $197,320 per patient with up to $16 billion cost per cohort. The cost to treat one patient with adjuvant Osimertinib was $556,720, and the cost to treat one incident cohort was close to $10 billion. In total, the cost to treat an incident cohort of eligible operable thoracic malignancies could exceed $30 billion. Conclusions: Neoadjuvant and adjuvant immune and targeted therapy in operable thoracic patients is associated with a significant cost burden. Prospective large-scale studies are needed to assess cost-effectiveness, particularly given the paucity of superior overall survival data with these agents. [Table: see text]

AbstractThe Adult Medical Care Coordination program (“the program”) was implemented at Mayo Clinic to promote patient self‐management and improve 30‐day unplanned readmission for patients with high risk for readmission after hospital discharge. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of the program compared to usual care using a pragmatic, stepped wedge cluster randomized trial (“stepped wedge trial”). However, several challenges arose including large differences between the study arms. Our goal is to describe the challenges and present lessons learned on how to overcome such challenges and generate evidence to support practice decisions. We describe the challenges encountered during the trial, the approach to addressing these challenges, and lessons learned for other learning health system researchers facing similar challenges. The trial experienced several challenges in implementation including several clinics dropping from the study and care disruptions due to COVID‐19. Additionally, there were large differences in the patient population between the program and usual care arms. For example, the mean age was 76.8 for the program and 68.1 for usual care. Due to these differences, we adapted the methods using the propensity score matching approach that is traditionally applied to observational designs and adjusted for differences in observable characteristics. When conducting pragmatic research, researchers will encounter factors beyond their control that may introduce bias. The lessons learned include the need to weigh the tradeoffs of pragmatic design elements and the potential value of adaptive designs for pragmatic trials. Applying these lessons would promote the successful generation of evidence that informs practice decisions.

Abstract Introduction Alaska Native and American Indian (ANAI) peoples in Alaska currently experience a disproportionate burden of morbidity and mortality from tobacco cigarette use. Financial incentives for smoking cessation are evidence-based, but a family-level incentive structure has not been evaluated. We used a community-based participatory research and qualitative approach to culturally adapt a smoking cessation intervention with ANAI families. Aims and Methods We conducted individual, semistructured telephone interviews with 12 ANAI adults who smoke, 12 adult family members, and 13 Alaska Tribal Health System stakeholders statewide between November 2022 and March 2023. Through content analysis, we explored intervention receptivity, incentive preferences, culturally aligned recruitment and intervention messaging, and future implementation needs. Results Participants were receptive to the intervention. Involving a family member was viewed as novel and aligned with ANAI cultural values of commitment to community and familial interdependence. Major themes included choosing a family member who is supportive and understanding, keeping materials positive and encouraging, and offering cash and noncash incentives for family members to choose (eg, fuel, groceries, activities). Participants indicated that messaging should emphasize family collaboration and that cessation resources and support tips should be provided. Stakeholders also reinforced that program materials should encourage the use of other existing evidence-based cessation therapies (eg, nicotine replacement, counseling). Conclusions Adaptations, grounded in ANAI cultural strengths, were made to the intervention and recruitment materials based on participant feedback. Next steps include a beta-test for feasibility and a randomized controlled trial for efficacy. Implications This is the first study to design and adapt a financial incentives intervention promoting smoking cessation among ANAI peoples and the first to involve the family system. Feedback from this formative work was used to develop a meaningful family-level incentive structure with ANAI people who smoke and family members and ensure intervention messaging is supportive and culturally aligned. The results provide qualitative knowledge that can inform future family-based interventions with ANAI communities, including our planned randomized controlled trial of the intervention.

Objective: This study aims to assess the costs of a same-day discharge (SDD) enhanced recovery pathway for diverting loop ileostomy (DLI) closure compared with a standard institutional enhanced recovery protocol. Background: Every year, 50,155 patients in the United States undergo temporary stoma reversal. While ambulatory stoma closure has shown promise, widespread adoption remains slow. This study builds on previous research, focusing on the costs of a novel SDD protocol introduced in 2020. Methods: A retrospective case-control study was conducted at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, and Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida, comparing patients undergoing SDD DLI closure from August 2020 to February 2023 to those in a matched cohort receiving standard inpatient enhanced recovery protocol. Patients were matched based on age, sex, american society of anesthesiologists score, surgery period, and hospital. Primary outcomes included direct hospitalization and additional costs in the 30 days postdischarge. Results: The SDD group (n = 118) demonstrated a significant reduction in median index episode hospitalization and 30-day postoperative costs compared with the inpatient group (n = 236), with savings of $4827 per patient. Complication rates were similar, and so were readmission and reoperation rates. Conclusions: Implementation of the SDD for DLI closure is associated with substantial cost savings without compromising patient outcomes. The study advocates for a shift towards SDD protocols, offering economic benefits and potential improvements in health care resource utilization.

93 Background: The treatment paradigm for mCSPC patients has rapidly evolved over the last few years with the emergence of triplet therapy and prognostication by volume of disease. However, the health economic implications of triplet therapy by disease volume remain unclear. Methods: A Markov model where patients transitioned between the progression-free, progression and death states was developed. State utilities were derived from the LATITUDE trial. Point probabilities for overall survival, progression-free survival, grade ≥ 3 and 5 toxicities were obtained from the eligible mCSPC phase III clinical trials. Medicare Advantage and commercial total paid amounts (2022 US$) of treatments were obtained from OptumLabs Data Warehouse. Costs and disutilities of adverse events were derived from published literature. Half-cycle corrected costs and utilities were accrued monthly over a 20-year lifetime horizon and were discounted at 3%. Monte Carlo simulation was used to calculate incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). A willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of US$100,000 was used. Results: In terms of Medicare Advantage payer’s perspective (Table), docetaxel (D)+ADT was observed to provide additional 0.068 QALYs compared to ADT at an ICER of US$16,544 per QALY in high volume disease. Compared to D+ADT, abiraterone (AAP) triplet provided additional 1.03 QALYs at US$56,641 per QALY. Compared to AAP triplet, apalutamide (APA)+ADT provided additional 0.048 QALYs at US$5,846,248 per QALY in high volume disease. In low volume disease, D+ADT provided 0.45 more QALYs at US$20,690 per QALY compared to ADT alone. Compared to D+ADT, AAP triplet provided an additional 1.51 QALYS at US$44,267 per QALY. In terms of total paid commercial costs, AAP triplet provided an additional 1.19 QALYs compared to ADT at US$91,952 per QALY in high volume disease. In low volume, D+ADT provided additional 0.38 QALYs at US$22,058 per QALY compared to ADT. Compared to D+ADT, AAP triplet provided a 0.97 QALY gain at US$105,958 per QALY. Compared to AAP triplet, darolutamide (DARO) triplet provided a 0.47 QALY at US$689,196 per QALY. Compared to DARO triplet, APA+ADT provided an additional 0.49 QALYs at an ICER of US$971,389 per QALY. All other treatments (not reported here) were dominated. Conclusions: At the selected WTP of US$100,000 per QALY, AAP triplet therapy was most likely the cost-effective strategy in overall mCSPC population particularly in patients with high volume disease. However, these results should be interpreted with careful accounting for timing of metastases. [Table: see text]

The Deterioration Index (DI) is an automatic early warning system that utilizes a machine learning algorithm integrated into the electronic health record and was implemented to improve risk stratification of inpatients. Our pilot implementation showed superior diagnostic accuracy than standard care. A score >60 had a specificity of 88.5% and a sensitivity of 59.8% (PPV 0.1758, NPP 0.9817). However, acceptance in the clinical workflow was divided; nurses preferred standard care, while providers found it helpful.