Citations

PURPOSE Cancer survivors endure costly and time-intensive care throughout treatment and survivorship. Paid sick leave provides employment and financial stability while supporting time off for medical needs. We investigated whether paid sick leave is associated with financial hardship and overall and cancer-specific mortality risk in working adult cancer survivors. METHODS Working adults age 18-64 years with a cancer history were identified from the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) between 2011 and 2023. Associations of paid sick leave and financial hardship (medical care delays, problems paying medical bills, worry about paying medical bills, and cost-related medication underuse) were examined with 2011-2018 and 2019-2023 data using separate multivariable logistic regressions because of survey redesign in 2019. Linked mortality files from the National Death Index were available for 2011-2018 respondents. The association of paid sick leave and mortality risk was examined with multivariable Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS A total of 8,091 and 3,919 working cancer survivors were identified from the 2011-2018 and 2019-2023 NHIS, respectively. Paid sick leave was associated with decreased medical care delays because of cost (2011-2018 odds ratio [OR], 0.74 [95% CI, 0.60 to 0.93]; P = .008; 2019-2023 OR, 0.51 [95% CI, 0.35 to 0.74]; P < .001) but not consistently with other forms of financial hardship. In adjusted analyses, paid sick leave was associated with significant reductions in risk of overall mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 0.74 [95% CI, 0.61 to 0.9]; P = .003) and cancer mortality (HR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.61 to 0.91]; P = .003). CONCLUSION In working cancer survivors, paid sick leave is associated with decreased care delays and lower overall and cancer-specific mortality risk, which may be due to maintained employment, household income, and health insurance coverage leading to improvements in treatment access, affordability, and overall survivorship care.

PURPOSE Since 2012, several states have implemented mandatory paid sick leave (PSL) policies. PSL can provide patients time and income continuity to undergo screening and/or timely diagnostic workup for new cancer-related symptoms and complete lengthy and expensive cancer treatment courses. This study aimed to examine the association between mandatory PSL policies and cancer stage at diagnosis and overall survival (OS). METHODS Adults age 18-64 years diagnosed with cancer were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program registries between 2010 and 2019. Difference-in-differences (DID) analyses were used to compare absolute changes in stage I and stage IV diagnoses and 1-year OS before and after policy implementation in states that enacted mandatory PSL relative to states that did not enact such policies. RESULTS A total of 1,052,307 patients with cancer were included. In adjusted DID analyses, there were a 0.83 (95% CI = –1.49 to –0.16, P = .014) PP decrease in stage IV diagnoses and a 0.63 (95% CI = 0.10 to 1.17, P = .021) PP increase in 1-year OS associated with implementation of mandatory PSL policies. In exploratory analyses, males and individuals with lung cancer experienced the greatest shifts in policy-associated changes in stage at diagnosis and OS. CONCLUSION PSL policy implementation is associated with decreased late-stage diagnoses and improved OS in patients with cancer. Policies that improve opportunities to receive medical care may facilitate earlier cancer detection and ultimately contribute to better patient outcomes.

Hazardous alcohol use remains a major contributor to acute and chronic liver disease, while alcohol-associated liver disease (ALD) is a leading indication for liver transplantation. In recent years, embedded, interprofessional ALD clinics have improved access to alcohol use disorder care within hepatology and liver transplantation, but more work is needed to meet this challenge. The literature is lacking regarding scaling procedures to provide services for increasingly large ill patient populations. This article begins to fill this gap by describing “expanded ALD care”: broad, innovative, longitudinal, interprofessional care delivery strategies surpassing standalone clinics. Drawing from analogous patient populations served by collaborative models in primary care and comprehensive eating disorder treatment, the expanded ALD care framework proposes practical strategies toward specific innovations: equipoise between biomedical and psychosocial care elements, increased clinician number and reach, long-term patient relationships, harm reduction and palliative care, outreach to external agencies and clinicians, and enhanced support for patients and families. The article also defines attributes of innovative healthcare systems that support expanded ALD care.

Abstract There is ongoing recognition of the burden of non‐alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and non‐alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), with fibrosis being the most important histological feature that is associated with progression to cirrhosis and the occurrence of major adverse liver outcomes. Liver biopsy is the gold standard applied to detect NASH and determine the stage of fibrosis, but its use is limited. There is a need for non‐invasive testing (NIT) techniques to identify patients considered at‐risk NASH (NASH with NAFLD activity score > 4 and ≥ F2 fibrosis). For NAFLD‐associated fibrosis, several wet (serological) and dry (imaging) NITs are available and demonstrate a high negative predictive value (NPV) for excluding those with advanced hepatic fibrosis. However, identifying at‐risk NASH is more challenging; there is little guidance on how to use available NITs for these purposes, and these NITs are not specifically designed to identify at‐risk NASH patients. This review discusses the need for NITs in NAFLD and NASH and provides data to support the use of NITs, focusing on newer methods to non‐invasively identify at‐risk NASH patients. This review concludes with an algorithm that serves as an example of how NITs can be integrated into care pathways of patients with suspected NAFLD and potential NASH. This algorithm can be used for staging, risk stratification and the effective transition of patients who may benefit from specialty care.

Acute kidney injury (AKI) in the setting of cirrhosis (hepatorenal syndrome [HRS]–AKI) is a severe and often fatal complication of end‐stage liver disease. The goals of treatment are to reverse renal failure and prolong survival in patients who are critically ill. However, interventions have limited efficacy, and mortality rates remain high. In the United States, the mainstay of pharmacologic therapy consists of the off‐label use of vasoconstrictive agents in combination with plasma expanders, a strategy that produces modest effects. Liver transplantation is the ultimate solution but is only an option in a minority of patients because contraindications to transplantation are common and organ availability is limited. Renal replacement therapy is a temporary option but is known to confer an extremely poor short‐term prognosis in patients with HRS‐AKI and at best serves as a bridge to liver transplantation for the minority of patients who are transplantation candidates. The high mortality rate associated with HRS‐AKI in the United States is a reflection of the suboptimal standard of care. Improved therapeutic options to treat HRS‐AKI are sought. Terlipressin is a drug approved in Europe for treatment of HRS‐AKI and supported by recommendations for first‐line therapy by some liver societies and experts around the world. This review article will discuss the substantial unmet medical need associated with HRS‐AKI and the potential benefits if terlipressin was approved in the United States.

Abstract Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has emerged as a major cause of cancer deaths globally. The landscape of systemic therapy has recently changed, with six additional systemic agents either approved or awaiting approval for advanced stage HCC. While these agents have the potential to improve outcomes, a survival increase of 2–5 months remains poor and falls short of what has been achieved in many other solid tumor types. The roles of genomics, underlying cirrhosis, and optimal use of treatment strategies that include radiation, liver transplantation, and surgery remain unanswered. Here, we discuss new treatment opportunities, controversies, and future directions in managing HCC.

SummaryBackgroundInfection with the hepatitis C virus (HCV) has been considered a major cause of mortality, morbidity and resource utilisation in the US. In addition, HCV is the main cause of hepatocellular cancer (HCC) in the US. Recent developments in the diagnosis and treatment of HCV, including new recommendations pertaining to screening for HCV by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and newer treatment regimens with high efficacy, short duration and the potential for interferon‐free therapies, have energised the health care practitioners regarding HCV management.AimTo assess the full impact of HCV burden on clinical, economic and patient‐reported outcomes.MethodsAn expert panel was convened to assess the full impact of HCV burden on a number of important outcomes using an evidence‐based approach predicated on Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology. The literature was summarised, graded using an evidence‐based approach and presented during the workshop. Workshop presentations were intended to review recent, relevant evidence‐based literature and provide graded summary statements pertaining to HCV burden on topics including the relationships between HCV and the development of important outcomes.ResultsThe associations of HCV with cirrhosis, HCC, liver‐related mortality, type 2 diabetes mellitus, rheumatological diseases and quality of life impairments are supported by strong evidence. Also, there is strong evidence that sustained viral eradication of HCV can improve important outcomes such as mortality and quality of life.ConclusionsThe current evidence suggests that HCV has been associated with tremendous clinical, economic and quality of life burden.