Citations

572 Background: The DEFeNDR (Decreasing the burden of Febrile Neutropenia through Dynamic RPM) program leverages in-home technology and centralized nurse monitoring to facilitate ambulatory management as an alternative to hospital-based care for cancer patients with neutropenic fever (NF). The objective of this study is to assess 30-day care utilization outcomes and patient satisfaction at 12 months after program implementation. Methods: Adult cancer patients hospitalized with NF were assessed daily for DEFeNDR program eligibility including MASCC score ≥21 (per ASCO guidelines) and no cellular therapy (CAR-T, BMT) in the prior 100 days. Patients agreeing to participate in the 30-day program received a cellular-enabled tablet with pre-connected devices for twice-daily vital signs and symptom assessments. Patient generated data were EHR-integrated in real-time. Embedded decision trees facilitated alerts for adverse trends. Virtual RPM nurses responded to alerts and utilized predefined care pathways. The primary endpoint was the mean proportion of evaluable days spent inpatient (mPEDI) within 30 days of eligibility comparing those who participated in the program (RPM) with those who declined (no RPM). Results: Of 85 eligible patients, 62 were offered DEFeNDR participation. Of those, 34 (54.8%) participated and 28 (45.2%) declined. Baseline characteristics and care utilization outcomes are summarized in Table 1. RPM patients experienced significantly lower mPEDI compared with unmonitored patients [5.1% (Standard Error [SE], 1.9%) vs 12.4% (SE, 2.1%); Wilcoxon Rank Sums p-value, 0.032]. RPM patients also experienced a trend toward fewer total hospital days and lower 30-day readmission rate, as well as shorter mean length of stay and lower rate of ICU utilization when readmitted. Non-visit care activities (EHR clinical communications, documentation, and patient messaging) were decreased from pre-hospital baseline for 58.8% of RPM patients versus 46.6% of those unmonitored. All RPM patients completing a patient satisfaction survey (n=9) indicated that they would recommend the program to patients with a similar condition. Conclusions: Cancer patients with NF participating in the DEFeNDR program experienced a significant reduction in mPEDI and care utilization compared with those who declined. Further studies are warranted to assess comparative effectiveness of this model vs usual care.[Table: see text]

AbstractObjectiveTo evaluate the impact of a virtual registered nurse (ViRN) model on safety and care outcomes. ViRN is a telemedicine intervention that enables an experienced virtual nurse to assist the in‐person care team in providing care to patients.Data Sources and Study SettingElectronic health records data were utilized from the Mayo Clinic during the intervention (December 2020–November 2021) and historical periods (December 2018–November 2019). ViRN was implemented on general medical units at the Mayo Clinic Rochester. We used general medical units at the Mayo Clinic Arizona as the comparison group.Study DesignThis study used a difference‐in‐differences design to evaluate the impact of ViRN compared to usual care on transfer to the intensive care unit (ICU), inpatient mortality, and length of stay (LOS). We used logistic regression for transfer to the ICU and inpatient mortality and negative binomial regression for LOS. We controlled for demographics, patient interaction with the health system, clinical characteristics, and admission characteristics. We clustered standard errors to account for patients who have multiple admissions during the study period.Principal FindingsThere were no significant differences for transfer to the ICU (average marginal effect (AME) −0.08 percentage point [95% confidence interval (CI): −1.34, 1.18]), inpatient mortality (AME 0.43 percentage point [95% CI: −0.33, 1.18]), or LOS (AME −0.20 days [95% CI: −0.57, 0.17]). The findings were mostly consistent across the sensitivity analyses.ConclusionsOur results suggest that ViRN led to similar outcomes as usual care in general medical units. These findings support the potential to develop more advanced models of ViRN at the Mayo Clinic and the dissemination of the ViRN model to other systems. In the context of staffing shortages and other disruptions to the delivery of nursing care, it is critical to understand whether new models like ViRN provide nurse staffing alternatives without negatively affecting outcomes.

ImportancePatterns of clinical utilization and comparative effectiveness of anticoagulants for cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) remain largely unexplored.ObjectivesTo assess patterns of and factors associated with anticoagulant use and to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of contemporary anticoagulants in patients with active cancer in a clinical setting.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis retrospective cohort study obtained deidentified OptumLabs electronic health record claims data from January 1, 2012, to September 30, 2019. Adult patients (≥18 years of age) with a primary cancer diagnosis (except skin cancer) during at least 1 inpatient or 2 outpatient visits within 6 months before the venous thromboembolism (VTE) date were included. Data were analyzed from April 2020 to September 2021.ExposuresThe patients were grouped according to the anticoagulant prescribed: (1) direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), (2) low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), and (3) warfarin.Main Outcomes and MeasuresOdds ratios (ORs) were used to present the association between factors of interest and utilization of anticoagulants. Main efficacy outcomes included risk of VTE recurrence and all-cause mortality. Main safety outcomes included the risk of hospitalization due to major bleeding. Relative treatment effect estimates were expressed as hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs.ResultsThis study included 5100 patients (mean [SD] age, 66.3 [12.3] years; 2670 [52.4%] women; 799 [15.7%] Black, 389 [7.6%] Hispanic, and 3559 [69.8%] White individuals). Overall, 2512 (49.3%), 1488 (29.2%), and 1460 (28.6%) filled prescriptions for DOACs, LMWH, and warfarin, respectively. The median (IQR) treatment duration was 3.2 (1.0-6.5) months for DOACs, 3.1 (1.0-6.8) months for warfarin, and 1.8 (0.9-3.8) months for LWMH. Patients with lung (OR, 2.07; 95% CI, 1.12-3.65), urological (OR, 1.94; 95% CI,1.08-3.49), gynecological (OR, 4.25; 95% CI, 2.31-7.82), and colorectal (OR, 2.26; 95% CI, 1.20-4.32) cancer were associated with increased prescriptions for LMWH compared with DOACs. LMWH (HR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.14-1.90) and warfarin (HR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.13-1.87) were associated with an increased risk of VTE recurrences compared with DOACs. LMWH was associated with an increased risk of major bleeding (HR, 2.27; 95% CI, 1.62-3.20) and higher all-cause mortality (HR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.15-2.25) compared with DOACs.Conclusions and RelevanceIn this comparative effectiveness study of claims-based data, patients with CAT received anticoagulation for a remarkably short duration in clinical settings. DOACs was associated with a lower risk of VTE recurrence, major bleeding, and mortality. Warfarin may still be considered for patients with contraindications to DOACs and those with poor persistence on LMWH.

1535 Background: Ambulatory management of select patients with febrile neutropenia (FN) may substantially decrease patients’ burden of illness and improve their quality of life, and is recommended by American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) guidelines. However, in the United States, inpatient management remains the universal standard. We hereby report the health care utilization associated with the DEFeNDR remote patient monitoring (RPM) program, which leverages technology and virtual centralized nurse monitoring to facilitate ambulatory management of FN as an alternative to hospital-based care. Methods: Adult patients with cancer hospitalized with FN were assessed daily for eligibility to participate in the DEFeNDR program. Eligibility criteria included MASCC score >21 (per ASCO guidelines), and clinical judgment of the attending provider. Patients receiving cellular therapy (CAR-T, BMT) in the prior 100 days were excluded. Eligible patients agreeing to participate in the 30-day program were provided a kit containing cellular-enabled, pre-connected devices to facilitate monitoring, including twice-daily vital signs and electronic symptom questionnaires. Data were EHR-integrated in real-time and embedded decision trees facilitated alerts for adverse trends. RPM nurses responded to alerts and escalated care as indicated by pre-specified care pathways. Program assessment was performed at 20 weeks after full implementation. The primary outcome was the mean proportion of evaluable days spent inpatient (mPEDI) within 30 days of eligibility compared between those who participated in the program vs. those who declined. Results: 35 patients were offered participation in the DEFeNDR program. Of these, 17 participated and 18 declined. Baseline characteristics are provided. Participating patients experienced mPEDI of 6.9% (Standard Error [SE], 3.7%), compared with 17.7% (SE, 3.6%) for patients who declined participation. Due to small sample size, this difference (10.8%) did not reach statistical significance (Wilcoxon Rank Sums p-value, 0.15). 30-day mortality did not differ between groups. Mean inpatient days were also lower for patients participating in the program. Additionally, when readmitted, patients participating in RPM experienced a trend toward shorter length of stay and lower rates of intensive care unit utilization. Conclusions: A trend towards decreased burden of inpatient care is evident among patients participating in the DEFeNDR program. Further studies are warranted to assess comparative effectiveness of this model vs usual care.[Table: see text]

PURPOSE: For the past 5 years, most major antiemesis guidelines have included olanzapine-containing regimens among the recommended options for prophylaxis with highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC). We analyzed the uptake of olanzapine in clinical practice and the changing composition of multidrug antiemetic regimens. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed using an OptumLabs deidentified database of medical and pharmacy claims, which was filtered for patients starting HEC in the interval of 2006 to Q2 of 2021. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze patient characteristics and year-by-year antiemetic prescribing patterns, coinciding with cycles 1 and 2 of chemotherapy. RESULTS: A total of 63,154 distinct patients were included. The median age was 58 years (range, 18-88). Breast (45.2%) and hematologic (20.8%) cancers were the most common diagnoses. In 2016, olanzapine was prescribed to 1.4% of patients with cycle 1 of HEC. Prescriptions increased modestly each year, and by 2021, 13.9% of patients received olanzapine with their first cycle of chemotherapy. An additional 5.7% of patients received olanzapine for breakthrough symptoms or enhanced prophylaxis during cycle 2. In 2021, more than three-quarters of patients were prescribed antiemetics in a guideline-concordant manner, with an olanzapine-containing quadruplet (12.2%), an NK1-receptor antagonist triplet (64.5%), or an olanzapine triplet (suppressed for small sample size). CONCLUSION: Despite inclusion in major antiemesis guidelines, there has been relatively slow uptake of olanzapine for prophylaxis with HEC. This finding highlights the challenges of disseminating information and keeping prescribing systems updated with the newest evidence in supportive oncology.

Abstract Background In this longitudinal cohort study, we examined the socio-demographic and psychological predictors of alcohol use initiation during the COVID-19 pandemic in a sample of never alcohol users aged ≥21 prior to COVID-19. Methods Our study population consisted of 56 930 patients aged ≥21, as of 30 March 2019 were collected from a pre-COVID period of 1 year before 31 March 2020, and during-COVID, a period between 1 April 2020 and 30 March 2021. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression models were utilized to examine the roles of socio-demographic variables (gender, age, education, Area Deprivation Index and rural residence) changes in anxiety and depression severity as predictors of alcohol use initiation. Results Age, gender, race, ethnicity, education and rural status were significant predictors in multivariable analysis. A subgroup analysis showed neither anxiety nor depression had a significant association with alcohol use initiation. Conclusion Women, younger individuals, those living in a rural area and people who smoke cigarettes were more likely to initiate alcohol use during the pandemic. Our study has public health and clinical implications such as the need for targeted alcohol use screening and intervention for vulnerable individuals.

232 Background: Olanzapine has an important role in preventing and treating nausea and vomiting from highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC). This drug, for the last 5 years, has been a component of most major antiemesis guidelines. The aim of the current study was to assess how often olanzapine has been prescribed for patients receiving HEC. Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed using an OptumLabs de-identified clinical database of medical and pharmacy claims. The database was filtered for patients starting HEC in the interval of 2006 to Q2 of 2021. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze patient characteristics and year-by-year antiemetic prescribing patterns, coinciding with cycles 1 and 2 of chemotherapy. Results: A total of 63,154 distinct patients were included. The median age was 58 years (range, 18-88). Over a quarter of the patients identified as Black, Hispanic, Asian, or other. Breast (45.2%) and hematologic (20.8%) cancers were the most common diagnoses. In 2016, olanzapine was prescribed to only 1.4% of patients with cycle 1 of HEC. Prescriptions increased modestly each year, and by 2021, 13.9% of patients received olanzapine with their first cycle of chemotherapy. An additional 5.7% of patients received olanzapine for breakthrough symptoms or enhanced prophylaxis during cycle 2. In 2021, over three-quarters of patients were prescribed antiemetics in a guideline concordant manner, with either an olanzapine-containing quadruplet (12.2%), an NK1 receptor antagonist triplet (64.5%), or an olanzapine triplet (exact number suppressed due to small sample size). Conclusions: The rate of olanzapine prescribing is less than might be expected following its inclusion in major antiemesis guidelines. This finding highlights the challenges of disseminating information and keeping prescribing systems updated with the newest evidence in supportive oncology.