Citations

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.

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.

Abstract Background: Financial hardship is a growing challenge for patients with blood cancer who undergo hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT), and it is associated with poor patient-reported outcomes. In contrast, little is known about the potential impact of patient-reported financial hardship on post-HCT survival. Methods: We sought to describe the association of financial hardship with survival after HCT in a prospectively assembled cohort of patients from three large transplant centers (n = 325). Results: There was no association between financial hardship measures assessed at 6 months post-HCT and 1- or 2-year survival after HCT. Conclusions: Patient-reported financial distress after HCT does not seem to adversely affect post-HCT survival. Impact: When assessing the effectiveness of interventions to ameliorate familial financial burden among HCT, the focus should be on patient-reported outcomes rather than survival. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 27(3); 345–7. ©2018 AACR.

BACKGROUNDOutcomes have improved significantly in multiple myeloma (MM), but racial disparities in health care access and survival exist. A comprehensive analysis exploring MM care and racial disparities is warranted.METHODSPatients with MM from 1991 to 2010 in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results‐Medicare database were evaluated for racial trends in clinical myeloma‐defining events (MDEs), the receipt of treatment (drugs and stem cell transplantation; [SCT]), the cost of care, and overall survival (OS).RESULTSAmong 35,842 patients, the frequency of all MDEs at diagnosis increased over time; whereas, in recent years (2006‐2010), all MDEs with the exception of renal dialysis decreased. Blacks had highest rates for all MDEs except bone fractures, which were highest in whites. Over time, the proportion of patients who received any treatment, multiple agents, and SCT increased significantly, and the largest increase was observed in the receipt of immunomodulatory drugs and steroids. There was greater receipt of bortezomib and SCT among whites and blacks and higher receipt of immunomodulatory drugs among Hispanics and Asians (P < .001). Medicare claims were highest during first 6 months after MM diagnosis for blacks and at any time after MM diagnosis for Hispanics. Over time, Medicare claims increased most steadily for Hispanics (P < .001). Hypercalcemia, renal dysfunction, and bone fractures were associated with inferior OS. Blacks and Asians had superior OS compared with whites, but racial differences in OS became less pronounced during 2006 through 2010 (P = .182) compared with prior years (P < .01). Better OS was noted among patients who had higher median incomes.CONCLUSIONSThe current results indicate that there have been significant changes in the management of patients with MM over time and provide an in‐depth understanding of the factors that may help explain racial disparities. Cancer 2018;124:1710‐21. © 2018 American Cancer Society

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.

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.