Search

Objectives: Cancer accounts for 22% of all mortality and is the leading cause of death among Hispanic and/or Latinx patients in the United States. The disparities in access to radiation therapy (RT), mortality rates, and treatment outcomes among Hispanic-American breast cancer patients compared with other populations highlight the urgent need for targeted interventions. The Navigator-Assisted Hypofractionation (NAVAH) program, with its innovative patient navigation approach and culturally sensitive survey, aims to better identify the specific barriers faced by this population. This study is a report of the NAVAH program experience piloting a Spanish-language culturally sensitive survey in Hispanic-American volunteers., Methods: Hispanic-American volunteers with fluency in Spanish were recruited to participate in survey conduction, identified from local networks. Survey information was assessed by topic category, and survey responses were amalgamated into a representative score for each category. Survey categories include acceptability (comfort and prejudice among interactions with the system), accessibility (transportation, distance to care, and health care literacy), accommodation (access to the internet, navigating transportation), affordability (financial considerations, employment, and level of education), and availability (access to a medical center, coordinating care, and overall quality of care)., Results: A total of 6 volunteers meeting inclusion criteria completed the survey; 4 in person and 2 by telephone. The median survey completion time was 12 minutes 38 seconds. Respondents noted satisfaction and trust in their interactions with medical providers; however, responses in the acceptability category highlighted a high perception of disparities in the medical system, including a high prevalence of racial and ethnic prejudice and a high prevalence of treatment differences between high-income and low-income patients in clinical settings., Conclusions: In the first Spanish-language survey of its kind, our findings indicate that this survey design is feasible in the Hispanic-American population. Implementation of this survey in breast cancer patients will provide more definitive and comprehensive answers regarding other categories in the survey, including financial challenges during treatment, access to accommodations, and perception of treatment during cancer care. The investigation involving patients actively receiving breast cancer RT is currently underway., Competing Interests: A.S.-F. was supported by the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) Medical Student Fellowship Award. Dr S.M. receives research funding from the National Institutes of Health (National Cancer for Advancing Translational Sciences), University Hospitals Minority Faculty Career Development Award, the Robert Winn Diversity in Clinical Trials Career Development Award (sponsored by the Bristol Myers Squibb Foundation), the Case Comprehensive Cancer Center Accelerator Pilot Project Award, the Gilead Sciences Research Scholars Program in Solid Tumors Award, the Radiation Oncology Institute, and the Susan G Komen Career Catalyst Research Grant. The other authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The optimal adjuvant therapy (antiestrogen therapy [ET] + radiation therapy or ET alone, or in some reports radiation therapy alone) in older women with early-stage breast cancer has been highly debated. However, granular details on the role of insurance in the out-of-pocket cost for patients receiving ET with or without radiation therapy are lacking. This project disaggregates out-of-pocket costs by insurance plans to increase treatment cost transparency., Methods and Materials: Several radiation therapy schedules are accepted standards as per the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. For our financial estimate model, we used the 5-fraction and 15-fraction radiation therapy and ET prescribed over a 5-year duration. The total aggregate out-of-pocket costs were determined from the sum of treatment costs, deductibles, and copays/coinsurance based on Medicaid, Original Medicare, Medigap Plan G, and Medicare Part D Rx plans. The model assumes a Medicare- and/or Medicaid-eligible patient ≥70 years of age with node-negative, early-stage estrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer. Patient out-of-pocket costs were estimated from publicly available insurance data from plan-specific benefit coverage materials using a 5-year time horizon., Results: Original Medicare beneficiaries face a total out-of-pocket treatment charge of $2738.52 for ET alone, $2221.26 for 5-fraction radiation therapy alone, $2573.92 for 15-fraction radiation therapy alone, $3361.26 for combined ET+ 5-fraction radiation therapy, and $3713.92 for combined ET + 15-fraction radiation therapy. Medigap Plan G beneficiaries have an out-of-pocket charge of $1130.00 with radiation therapy alone and face an out-of-pocket of $2270.00 for ET alone and combined ET+ radiation therapy. For Medicaid beneficiaries, all treatments approved by Medicaid are covered without limit, resulting in no out-of-pocket expense for either adjuvant treatment option., Conclusions: This model (based on actual cost estimates per insurance plan rather than claims data), by estimating expenses within Medicare and Medicaid plans, provides a level of transparency to patient cost. With knowledge of the costs borne by patients themselves, treatment decisions informed by patients' individual priorities and preferences may be further enhanced., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: For early stage breast cancer (BC), the choice of radiation therapy duration (1 vs 3 weeks) is highly debated. Cost and financial toxicity are major concerns that patients with BC face. Nonetheless, there remain limited discussions providing granular details of the role of insurance in the aggregate cost of 1 week versus 3 weeks of radiation therapy for patients. This project aims to disaggregate costs by plan to increase transparency of out-of-pocket (OOP) cost estimates in radiation therapy., Methods and Materials: Treatment procedures were determined through the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. OOP treatment costs, deductibles, and copays/coinsurance were calculated by using Medicaid, Original Medicare, Medigap Plan G, and Medicare Part D prescription plans. The medicare.gov, medicaid.oh.gov, aarpmedicareplans.com, and the physician fee schedule from cms.gov were used to determine costs by treatment. Price estimates reflect actual costs per insurance plan rather than costs estimated from claims data. All procedures were considered to be performed in an Ohio hospital setting. One-week radiation therapy was defined as 5 fractions without boost, and 3-week radiation therapy was defined as 15 fractions without boost., Results: Medicare beneficiaries with Original Medicare coverage face an OOP treatment charge of $649.24 for 1 week of radiation therapy and $1006.20 for 3 weeks of radiation therapy. Assuming the deductible is met postlumpectomy, Medigap Plan G beneficiaries are faced with no additional charges for both lengths of radiation therapy. Similarly for Medicaid beneficiaries (assuming treatment is approved by Medicaid), all expenses are covered without limit, resulting in no OOP expense., Conclusions: Considerations of 1 and 3 weeks of radiation therapy for postlumpectomy early-stage BC are often dependent on cancer characteristics and patient preferences. This model (based on actual cost estimates per insurance plan rather than claims data) compares OOP costs across Medicaid and Medicare plans, which more holistically informs providers and patients in radiation therapy duration decision making., Competing Interests: Disclosures Reshma Jagsi has stock options as compensation for her advisory board role in Equity Quotient, a company that evaluates culture in health care companies; she has received personal fees from the National Institutes of Health as a special government employee (in her role as a member of the Advisory Committee for Research on Women's Health), the Greenwall Foundation, and the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation. She has received grants for unrelated work from the National Institutes of Health, the Doris Duke Foundation, the Greenwall Foundation, the American Cancer Society, the Komen Foundation, and Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan for the Michigan Radiation Oncology Quality Consortium. She had a contract to conduct an investigator-initiated study with Genentech. She has served as an expert witness for Sherinian and Hasso, Dressman Benzinger LaVelle, and Kleinbard LLC. Shearwood McClelland III serves as a consultant for Gilmartin Capital (a company that evaluates surgically targeted radiation therapies), receives travel funding from GT Medical Technologies Inc, and research funding from the University Hospitals Minority Faculty Career Development Award, the American Society of Radiation Oncology Emerging Investigator Award, the Robert Winn Diversity in Clinical Trials Career Development Award, and the National Cancer Institute Paul Calabresi K12 Clinical Oncology Research Career Development Program., (Copyright © 2023 American Society for Radiation Oncology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Compared with conventional external-beam radiation therapy (cEBRT) for patients with breast cancer (BC) and prostate cancer (PC), shorter radiation regimens may be associated with lower treatment noncompletion rates. We assess disparities in receipt of shorter radiation regimens and treatment noncompletion for BC and PC., Patients and Methods: The 2004-2017 National Cancer Database was queried for adjuvant cEBRT or hypofractionated EBRT (hEBRT) for nonmetastatic BC; and definitive cEBRT, moderate hypofractionation (mEBRT), or stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for localized PC. Multivariable logistic regression identified factors associated with treatment noncompletion and receipt of shorter regimens., Findings: We identified 170,386 men with PC (median age [interquartile range], 70 [64-75] years; Black, 17.5%; White, 82.5%) and 306,846 women with BC (61 [52-69] years; Black, 12.3%; White, 87.7%). Among patients who received cEBRT for PC, Black men had higher treatment noncompletion rates compared with White (14.1% v 13.0%; odds ratio [95% CI] 1.07 [1.03 to 1.12]; P < .001). In contrast, treatment noncompletion was not disparate with SBRT (Black 1.6% v White 1.3%; 1.20 [0.72 to 2.00], P = .49) or mEBRT (Black 9.0% v White 7.1%; 1.05 [0.72 to 1.54], P = .79). From 2004 to 2017, SBRT (0.07% to 11.8%; 1.32 [1.31 to 1.33]) and mEBRT (0.35% to 9.1%; 1.27 [1.25 to 1.28]) increased (both P < .001); however, Black men were consistently less likely to receive SBRT (7.4% v White, 8.3%; 0.84 [0.79 to 0.89], P < .001). Among women with BC, there were no racial differences in treatment noncompletion; however, hEBRT was associated with lower treatment noncompletion rates (1.0% v cEBRT 2.3%; 0.39 [0.35 to 0.44], P < .001). Although hEBRT for BC increased (0.8% to 35.6%) between 2004 and 2017, Black women were less likely to receive hEBRT (10.4% v 15.3%; 0.78 [0.75 to 0.81], P < .001)., Interpretation: Black patients were consistently less likely to receive hypofractionated radiation for PC or BC, despite evidence suggesting that shorter regimens may lower rates of treatment noncompletion with similar oncologic outcomes.

Background: Whole breast radiation therapy (RT) has become standard of care in early stage breast cancer treatment following lumpectomy. Predictors of RT completion have been sparsely studied, with no previous nationwide examination of the impact of fractionation regimen on completion rate., Patients and Methods: The National Cancer Database identified patients with early stage breast cancer having undergone lumpectomy and RT from 2004 through 2015. Fraction size of 1.8-2.0 Gray (Gy) was defined as standard fractionation (SFRT); 2.66-2.70 Gy/fraction as hypofractionation (HFRT). RT completion was defined as receipt of at least 46 Gy for SFRT and 40 Gy for HFRT. A multivariable logistic regression model characterized RT completion predictors., Results: A total of 100,734 patients were identified where fraction size could be reliably characterized as above; more than 87% completed RT. Of these, 66.8% received SFRT, yet HFRT use significantly increased over time (5.2% increase/year; P < .0001). RT completion rates were significantly greater following HFRT (99.3%) versus SFRT (79.7%); patients receiving SFRT had higher odds of not completing RT (odds ratio, 41.5; 95% confidence interval, 36.6-47.1; P < .0001). Multivariable analysis revealed that African-American and Caucasian patients treated with SFRT versus HFRT had 22 and 43 times the odds of not completing RT, respectively (P < .0001)., Conclusions: SFRT remained the majority of RT fractionation in the studied time period, although HFRT use has increased over time. Patients residing > 10 miles from a treatment facility or of African-American race had lower odds of completing RT, as were patients treated with SFRT versus HFRT. These findings suggest compliance advantages of HFRT for patients with early stage breast cancer having undergone lumpectomy., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Localized breast angiosarcoma (LBA) is a rare condition with no prospective clinical trials guiding the management of afflicted patients. Management of LBA and the resulting outcomes on a nationwide scale has not been previously examined., Methods: The National Cancer Data Base (NCDB) from 2004 to 2014 identified resected LBA patients. Treatment patterns were compared between three time periods (2004-2007, 2008-2011, and 2012-2014). Demographic and tumor characteristics, as well as treatments received-extent of surgery and adjuvant therapies-were analyzed for association with overall survival after adjustment for covariates., Results: 826 resected localized breast angiosarcoma patients were identified. Mastectomy was the most common surgical approach (86%); over 60% of patients did not receive adjuvant therapies after surgery. On multivariate analysis, tumor grade, tumor size, and surgical margins were associated with worse survival. Extent of surgery (mastectomy versus lumpectomy) and radiation therapy use were not associated with improved survival. Adjuvant chemotherapy was associated with improved survival in patients with primary tumors 5 cm and greater., Conclusions: The extent of surgery is not associated with improved survival in women with LBA, and patients may consider breast-conservation surgery. Adjuvant therapies are not associated with improved survival, with the exception of possible role of adjuvant chemotherapy in large primary tumors (5 cm or greater). Further clinical studies are needed to determine the impact of these treatments on local control, progression-free survival, and patients' quality of life. Until then, the findings of our analysis will form basis for the multi-disciplinary discussion of management of women with LBA.

Introduction: Primary breast angiosarcoma is a rare malignancy with no clinical trials to guide management. The current use of surgery, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy among North American oncologists is unknown., Patients and Methods: An institutional review board-approved anonymous electronic survey was distributed to 9660 practicing North American radiation and medical oncologists. Questions pertained to treatment recommendations for localized nonmetastatic primary breast angiosarcoma, as well as knowledge/use of β-blockers in angiosarcoma. The Fisher exact test was used to compare responses of medical and radiation oncologists., Results: Surgery was recommended by 95% of all respondents. Chemotherapy was recommended by over half of medical and radiation oncologists. Radiotherapy was recommended by 92% of radiation and 56% of medical oncologists. The most common treatment recommendation was a trimodal treatment, with up-front surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy, then by adjuvant radiotherapy. Twenty-two percent of respondents were aware of clinical data pertaining to the use of β-blockers in management of angiosarcoma, and among these respondents 69% were comfortable incorporating this treatment into standard practice., Conclusion: Trimodal management of primary localized breast angiosarcoma is supported by North American radiation and medical oncologists, with the majority recommending up-front surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy and radiation. The recently published reports of successful use of β-blockers are not yet known among North American clinicians, but there is a great enthusiasm to incorporate these commonly prescribed medications into standard practice. These findings may greatly influence the standard of care for breast angiosarcoma treatment, particularly given the absence of Level I-supported evidence., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)