Jemal, Ahmedin

BackgroundThis study was aimed at examining the risks of subsequent primary cancers (SPCs) among breast cancer survivors by hormone receptor (HR) status and age at diagnosis.MethodsData from 12 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries were used to identify 431,222 breast cancer survivors (at least 1 year) diagnosed between the ages of 20 and 84 years from 1992 to 2015. Risks of SPCs were measured as the standardized incidence ratio (SIR) and the excess absolute risk (EAR) per 10,000 person‐years. Poisson regression was used to test the difference in SIRs by HR status.ResultsIn comparison with the general population, the risk of new cancer diagnoses among survivors was 20% higher for those with HR‐positive cancers (SIR, 1.20; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.19‐1.21; EAR, 23.3/10,000 person‐years) and 44% higher for those with HR‐negative cancers (SIR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.41‐1.47; EAR, 45.2/10,000 person‐years), with the risk difference between HR statuses statistically significant. The higher risk after HR‐negative cancer was driven by acute nonlymphocytic leukemia and breast, ovarian, peritoneal, and lung cancers. By age at diagnosis, the total EAR per 10,000 person‐years ranged from 15.8 (95% CI, 14.1‐17.5; SIR, 1.11) among late‐onset (age, 50‐84 years) HR‐positive survivors to 69.4 (95% CI, 65.1‐73.7; SIR, 2.24) among early‐onset (age, 20‐49 years) HR‐negative survivors, with subsequent breast cancer representing 73% to 80% of the total EAR. After breast cancer, the greatest EARs were for ovarian cancer among early‐onset HR‐negative survivors, lung cancer among early‐ and late‐onset HR‐negative survivors, and uterine corpus cancer among late‐onset HR‐positive survivors.ConclusionsRisks of SPCs after breast cancer differ substantially by subtype and age. This suggests that more targeted approaches for cancer prevention and early‐detection strategies are needed in survivorship care planning.

Background: The National Comprehensive Cancer Network and American Society of Clinical Oncology recommend consideration of the use of echocardiography 6 to 12 months after completion of anthracycline-based chemotherapy in at-risk populations. Assessment of BNP (B-type natriuretic peptide) has also been suggested by the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association/Heart Failure Society of America for the identification of Stage A (at risk) heart failure patients. The real-world frequency of the use of these tests in patients after receipt of anthracycline therapy, however, has not been studied previously. Methods and Results: In this retrospective study, using administrative claims data from the OptumLabs Data Warehouse, we identified 31 447 breast cancer and lymphoma patients (age ≥18 years) who were treated with an anthracycline in the United States between January 1, 2008 and January 31, 2018. Continuous medical and pharmacy coverage was required for at least 6 months before the initial anthracycline dose and 12 months after the final dose. Only 36.1% of patients had any type of cardiac surveillance (echocardiography, BNP, or cardiac imaging) in the year following completion of anthracycline therapy (29.7% echocardiography). Surveillance rate increased from 37.5% in 2008 to 42.7% in 2018 (25.6% in 2008 to 40.5% echocardiography in 2018). Lymphoma patients had a lower likelihood of any surveillance compared with patients with breast cancer (odds ratio, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.74–0.85]; P <0.001). Patients with preexisting diagnoses of coronary artery disease and arrhythmia had the highest likelihood of cardiac surveillance (odds ratio, 1.54 [95% CI, 1.39–1.69] and odds ratio, 1.42 [95% CI, 1.3–1.53]; P <0.001 for both), although no single comorbidity was associated with a >50% rate of surveillance. Conclusions: The majority of survivors of breast cancer and lymphoma who have received anthracycline-based chemotherapy do not undergo cardiac surveillance after treatment, including those with a history of cardiovascular comorbidities, such as heart failure.

Abstract Breast cancer survivorship guidelines recommend at least annual follow-up visits, yet the degree to which this occurs in clinical practice is uncertain. Claims data from a US commercial insurance database (OptumLabs) were used to identify women treated with curative intent surgery for newly diagnosed breast cancer between 2006 and 2014. In 25 035 women, median follow-up was 3 years. In the second year after surgery, 9.6% of the patients did not visit a primary care provider, an oncologist, or a surgeon (guideline-nonadherent). The guideline-nonadherent proportion increased from 7.8% in women diagnosed in 2006 to 12.2% in those diagnosed in 2014 (two-sided Wald P &lt; .001). During years 2–6, guideline-nonadherence was also associated with older age, nonwhite race, no radiation, no chemotherapy, no endocrine therapy, and increasing time after surgery. There is a substantial and increasing rate of inadequate follow-up among breast cancer survivors. This has the potential to impair outcomes.

Abstract Background: Breast cancer care imposes a significant financial burden to U.S. healthcare systems and has become a key focus in the health care debate. Therapies for breast cancer are expensive, and the economic burden of these therapies may be rising due to the rapid introduction of pricey new drugs and techniques. There are limited data on the health care costs of individuals with breast cancer after initial diagnosis and how these costs have changed over time. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of commercially insured adult women with newly diagnosed non-metastatic breast cancer (identified via previously published claims-based algorithms) using 2007-2016 data from a large US health plan available in OptumLabs® Data Warehouse. We included patients with continuous health plan coverage for at least 2 years after initial diagnosis 2007-2014 and assessed how total health care spending and out-of-pocket costs (paid amounts) changed over this time. Costs were adjusted to 2016 US dollars using the general Consumer Price Index. Inpatient, outpatient, and outpatient pharmacy costs were evaluated. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to examine predictors of above average cost (cost &gt; mean for that year of diagnosis). Results: A total of 12,446 newly diagnosed breast cancer patients were identified (mean age, 51.6 years). Forty percent had undergone mastectomy, 38% chemotherapy, and 63% radiation. After adjustment for inflation, total healthcare costs increased 29.7% from 2007 to 2014 (Table 1), with increases primarily observed during the first year after diagnosis. Out-of-pocket costs remained relatively stable, and accounted for 5.3% of the total spending. Approximately 80% of the total costs were related to care received in the outpatient setting. Factors independently associated with above average spending included treatment with mastectomy [OR 1.78 (95% CI 1.5-2.1)], reconstruction [OR 3.0 (95% CI 2.6-3.5)], radiation [OR 4.0 (95% CI 3.4-4.7)] and chemotherapy [OR 18.4 (95% CI 16.6-20.3]. Table 1.Average healthcare spending over time Mean cost during first year after diagnosisMean cost during second year after diagnosisYear of diagnosistotalout-of-pockettotalout-of-pocket2007$80,296.17$4,271.25$16,559.21$1,907.012008$84,126.70$4,445.78$16,785.43$2,205.982009$88,331.45$4,728.42$17,005.68$2,214.932010$91,502.58$5,067.78$17,243.91$2,126.192011$93,826.40$5,089.45$16,862.45$2,027.962012$96,690.06$5,449.91$17,814.09$2,179.262013$104,064.93$5,678.19$17,087.47$2,115.972014$104,169.74$5,620.51$16,714.12$1,590.67 Conclusions: Breast cancer care is increasingly expensive during the first year after diagnosis, and costs are greatest for the recipients of more aggressive treatments. Costs during the second year after diagnosis have remained relatively stable. Citation Format: Ruddy KJ, Sangaralingham LR, Freedman RA, Jemal A, Mougalian SS, Keegan T, Loprinzi CL, Gross CP, Henk HJ, Shah N. Trends in the cost of care for breast cancer among women with commercial insurance [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2018 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2018 Dec 4-8; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PD6-07.

Abstract Background Little is known about patterns of and factors associated with treatment for de novo metastatic cancer patients who die soon after diagnosis. In this study, we examine treatment patterns for patients newly diagnosed with metastatic lung, colorectal, breast, or pancreatic cancer who died within 1 month of diagnosis. Methods We identified 100 848 adult patients in the National Cancer Database with de novo metastatic lung, colorectal, breast, and pancreatic cancer, diagnosed between 2004 and 2014 and who died within 1 month. We performed descriptive and multivariable logistic regression analyses to examine receipt of surgery, chemotherapy, radiation, and hormonal therapy by cancer type, adjusting for sociodemographic and clinical variables. Results Treatment substantially varied by cancer type, over time, age, insurance, and facility type. Surgery ranged from 0.4% in pancreatic to 28.3% in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients, chemotherapy from 5.8% among CRC to 11% in lung and breast cancer patients, and radiotherapy from 1.3% in pancreatic to 18.7% in lung cancer patients. Use of some treatments (eg, surgery for CRC and breast cancer) progressively declined between 2004 and 2014. Compared with lung cancer patients treated at National Cancer Institute-designated cancer centers, those treated at community cancer centers had 48% lower odds of radiation. Conclusions Treatment of patients diagnosed with imminently fatal de novo metastatic cancer varied markedly by cancer type and patient/facility characteristics. These variations warrant more research to better identify patients with imminently fatal de novo metastatic cancer who may not benefit from aggressive and expensive therapies.

6531 Background: Annual mammography is recommended to screen residual breast tissue for new cancers and recurrent disease after treatment for early stage breast cancer. This study aimed to assess mammography rates over time in breast cancer survivors. Methods: We used administrative claims data from a large U.S. commercial insurance database, OptumLabs, to retrospectively identify privately- and Medicare Advantage-insured women with operable breast cancer who had residual breast tissue after definitive breast surgery between 2006 and 2015. We required coverage for at least 13 months following surgery. For each subsequent 13-month time period, we only included women without a loss of coverage, bilateral mastectomy, metastatic breast cancer diagnosis, or non-breast cancer diagnosis. We calculated the proportion of patients who had a mammogram during each 13-month period following breast surgery. We used multivariable logistic regression to test for factors associated with mammography in the first 13 months. Results: The cohort included 26,011 women followed for a median of 2.9 years (IQR 1.9-4.6) after surgery; 63.1% were less than 65 years of age, and 74.4% were white. In their first year of follow-up, 86% underwent mammography, but by year 7, this decreased to 73%. Fewer than 1% underwent MRI instead of mammography. In multivariable analysis, mammograms were less likely during the first year after surgery among women aged < 50 years (odds ratio [OR], 0.7; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.6 to 0.8), African Americans (OR, 0.7; 95% CI, 0.7 to 0.8), patients who underwent mastectomy (OR, 0.7; 95% CI, 0.6 to 0.7), and patients residing in the Western part of the country (OR, 0.9; 95% CI, 0.7 to 0.9). Those with 1-2 comorbidities were more likely (OR, 1.1; 95% CI 1.1-1.2) than those with none to have a mammogram during that period. Mammography use did not differ significantly by year of diagnosis (2006-2015). Conclusions: Even in an insured cohort, a substantial proportion of breast cancer survivors do not undergo annual surveillance mammography. Mammography use falls as the time from the early stage breast cancer diagnosis increases. Understanding factors associated with lack of mammographic screening may help improve survivorship care.

ABSTRACT Collectively, lymphoid neoplasms are the fourth most common cancer and the sixth leading cause of cancer death in the United States. The authors provide contemporary lymphoid neoplasm statistics by subtype based on the 2008 World Health Organization classifications, including the most current US incidence and survival data. Presented for the first time are estimates of the total numbers of US lymphoid neoplasm cases by subtype as well as a detailed evaluation of incidence and survival statistics. In 2016, 136,960 new lymphoid neoplasms are expected. Overall lymphoma incidence rates have declined in recent years, but trends vary by subtype. Precursor lymphoid neoplasm incidence rates increased from 2001 to 2012, particularly for B‐cell neoplasms. Among the mature lymphoid neoplasms, the fastest increase was for plasma cell neoplasms. Rates also increased for mantle cell lymphoma (males), marginal zone lymphoma, hairy cell leukemia, and mycosis fungoides. Like incidence, survival for both mature T‐cell lymphomas and mature B‐cell lymphomas varied by subtype and by race. Patients with peripheral T‐cell lymphomas had among the worst 5‐year relative survival (36%‐56%, depending on race/sex), while those with mycosis fungoides had among the best survival (79%‐92%). For B‐cell lymphomas, 5‐year survival ranged from 83% to 91% for patients with marginal zone lymphoma and from 78% to 92% for those with hairy cell leukemia; but the rates were as low as 47% to 63% for patients with Burkitt lymphoma and 44% to 48% for those with plasma cell neoplasms. In general, black men had the lowest survival across lymphoid malignancy subtypes. These contemporary incidence and survival statistics are useful for developing management strategies for these cancers and can offer clues regarding their etiology. CA Cancer J Clin 2016;66:443–459. © 2016 American Cancer Society .