65 Background: We need better methods to understand the social determinants of health and integrate psychosocial and economic sequelae of cancer and its treatment into healthcare delivery for ethnoculturally diverse population. A Patient-Reported Outcomes Quality of Life (PROQOL) instrument has been developed to capture less commonly discussed patient concerns (Personal Relationships, Emotional health, Physical health, Cancer diagnosis and treatment, Money and Care planning) and improve patient-provider communication. We sought to adapt this instrument and pilot it in underserved, ethnically diverse solid tumor and hematological malignancies patients at Maricopa Integrated Health System (MIHS) in Phoenix, AZ. Methods: Two focus groups (FG) were conducted to understand patient perspectives of an adapted Spanish version of PROQOL. This version was then piloted among patients on active cancer treatment. Patients also completed a Linear Analog Scale Assessment (from 1-10) for quality of life (QOL) and its domains (higher scores indicate better QOL). Results: All participants in both FG (11/12 female) were Hispanics, with a median age of 53 years. Participants agreed that the domains covered in the PROQOL represented the most important psychosocial needs in their cancer continuum. No difficulty in understanding the individual domains or questions for delving deeper into each domain was noted. Median age of 34 pilot study participants (74% female) was 48 years, 79% were Hispanic, 10% were African Americans and median household income was $ 43,924 (range 23,002-98,382). 28/34 completed the Spanish version. Most common concerns were ‘Money’ (32%): difficulty paying medical bills and non-medical expenses and ‘Cancer Diagnosis, Treatment and Survivorship’ (32%): type of cancer and treatment concerns. Median overall QOL was 8 (range 3-10). Conclusions: PROQOL is feasible for systematic capture of patient concerns in underserved, ethnic minority cancer patients. A better understanding of these challenges can help design interventions to improve psychosocial and financial outcomes for the vulnerable groups and decrease disparities in care delivery.
Amphiregulin modifies the Minnesota Acute Graft-versus-Host Disease Risk Score: results from BMT CTN 0302/0802
Key PointsHigh-circulating AREG (≥33 pg/mL) reclassifies additional patients into HR categories and further refines the Minnesota aGVHD risk score. Patients with aGVHD and AREG ≥33 pg/mL have lower rates of steroid response, higher NRM, and poorer OS.
Single dose versus multiple doses of rituximab for preemptive therapy of Epstein–Barr virus reactivation after hematopoietic cell transplantation
AbstractOutcomes have improved considerably in multiple myeloma (MM), but disparities among racial‐ethnic groups exist. Differences in utilization of novel therapeutics are likely contributing factors. We explored such differences from the SEER‐Medicare database. A utilization analysis of lenalidomide, thalidomide, bortezomib, and stem cell transplant (SCT) was performed for patients diagnosed with MM between 2007 and 2009, including use over time, use by race, time‐dependent trends for each racial subgroup, and survival analysis. A total of 5338 MM patients were included with median 2.4‐year follow‐up. Within the first year of MM diagnosis, utilization of lenalidomide, bortezomib, SCT, and more than one novel agent increased over time while utilization of thalidomide decreased. There was significantly lower utilization of lenalidomide among African‐Americans (P < 0.01), higher thalidomide use among Hispanics and Asians (P < 0.01), and lower bortezomib use among Asians (P < 0.01). Hispanics had the highest median number of days to first dose of bortezomib (P = 0.02) and the lowest utilization of SCT (P < 0.01). Hispanics and Asians were the only groups without notable increases in lenalidomide and bortezomib use, respectively. SCT utilization increased over time for all except African‐Americans. SCT use within the first year after diagnosis was associated with better overall survival (HR 0.52; 95% CI: 0.4–0.68), while bortezomib use was associated with inferior survival (HR 1.14; 95% CI 1.02–1.28). We noted considerable variability in MM therapeutics utilization with seeming inequity for racial‐ethnic minorities. These trends should be considered to eliminate drug access and utilization disparities and achieve equitable benefit of therapeutic advances across all races.
Patient-centered care coordination in hematopoietic cell transplantation
Abstract Hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) is an expensive, resource-intensive, and medically complicated modality for treatment of many hematologic disorders. A well-defined care coordination model through the continuum can help improve health care delivery for this high-cost, high-risk medical technology. In addition to the patients and their families, key stakeholders include not only the transplantation physicians and care teams (including subspecialists), but also hematologists/oncologists in private and academic-affiliated practices. Initial diagnosis and care, education regarding treatment options including HCT, timely referral to the transplantation center, and management of relapse and late medical or psychosocial complications after HCT are areas where the referring hematologists/oncologists play a significant role. Payers and advocacy and community organizations are additional stakeholders in this complex care continuum. In this article, we describe a care coordination framework for patients treated with HCT within the context of coordination issues in care delivery and stakeholders involved. We outline the challenges in implementing such a model and describe a simplified approach at the level of the individual practice or center. This article also highlights ongoing efforts from physicians, medical directors, payer representatives, and patient advocates to help raise awareness of and develop access to adequate tools and resources for the oncology community to deliver well-coordinated care to patients treated with HCT. Lastly, we set the stage for policy changes around appropriate reimbursement to cover all aspects of care coordination and generate successful buy-in from all stakeholders.