Survey on Value Elements Provided by Artificial Intelligence and Their Eligibility for Insurance Coverage With an Emphasis on Patient-Centered Outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to explore the opinions on the insurance coverage of artificial intelligence (AI), as categorized based on the distinct value elements offered by AI, with a specific focus on patient-centered outcomes (PCOs). PCOs are distinguished from traditional clinical outcomes and focus on patient-reported experiences and values such as quality of life, functionality, well-being, physical or emotional status, and convenience. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We classified the value elements provided by AI into four dimensions: clinical outcomes, economic aspects, organizational aspects, and non-clinical PCOs. The survey comprised three sections: 1) experiences with PCOs in evaluating AI, 2) opinions on the coverage of AI by the National Health Insurance of the Republic of Korea when AI demonstrated benefits across the four value elements, and 3) respondent characteristics. The opinions regarding AI insurance coverage were assessed dichotomously and semi-quantitatively: non-approval (0) vs. approval (on a 1-10 weight scale, with 10 indicating the strongest approval). The survey was conducted from July 4 to 26, 2023, using a web-based method. Responses to PCOs and other value elements were compared. RESULTS: Among 200 respondents, 44 (22%) were patients/patient representatives, 64 (32%) were industry/developers, 60 (30%) were medical practitioners/doctors, and 32 (16%) were government health personnel. The level of experience with PCOs regarding AI was low, with only 7% (14/200) having direct experience and 10% (20/200) having any experience (either direct or indirect). The approval rate for insurance coverage for PCOs was 74% (148/200), significantly lower than the corresponding rates for other value elements (82.5%-93.5%; P ≤ 0.034). The approval strength was significantly lower for PCOs, with a mean weight ± standard deviation of 5.1 ± 3.5, compared to other value elements (P ≤ 0.036). CONCLUSION: There is currently limited demand for insurance coverage for AI that demonstrates benefits in terms of non-clinical PCOs.

The effects of hospice care on healthcare expenditure among cancer patients.

PURPOSE: It is necessary to estimate the hospice usage and hospice-related cost for entire cancer patients using nationwide cohort data to establish a suitable ethical and cultural infrastructure. This study aims to show the effects of hospital hospice care on healthcare expenditure among South Korean cancer patients. METHODS: This study is a retrospective cohort study using customized health information data provided by the National Health Insurance Service. Individuals who were diagnosed with stomach, colorectal, or lung cancer between 2003 and 2012 were defined as new cancer patients, which included 7,176 subjects. Patients who died under hospital-based hospice care during the follow-up period from January 2016 to December 2018 comprised the treatment group. Healthcare expenditure was the dependent variable. Generalized estimating equations was used. RESULTS: Among the subjects, 2,219 (30.9%) had used hospice care at an average total cost of 948,771 (± 3,417,384) won. Individuals who had used hospice care had a lower odds ratio (EXP(ß)) of healthcare expenditure than those who did not (Total cost: EXP(ß) = 0.27, 95% confidence intervals (CI) = 0.25-0.30; Hospitalization cost: EXP(ß) = 0.32, 95% CI = 0.29-0.35; Outpatient cost: EXP(ß) = 0.02, 95% CI = 0.02-0.02). CONCLUSION: Healthcare expenditure was reduced among those cancer patients in South Korea who used hospice care compared with among those who did not. This emphasizes the importance of using hospice care and encourages those hesitant to use hospice care. The results provide useful insights into both official policy and the existing practices of healthcare systems.

Association of polypharmacy with all-cause mortality and adverse events among elderly colorectal cancer survivors.

BACKGROUND: The risk of inappropriate drug exposure in elderly colorectal cancer (CRC) survivors after the initial cancer treatment has not been well studied. This study investigated the association of polypharmacy (PP) with overall survival, hospitalization, and emergency room (ER) visits among older CRC survivors. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using the Korean National Health Insurance claims data follow-up from 2002 to 2017. Participants comprised those aged ≥65 years who were hospitalized with a diagnosis of CRC received cancer treatment and survived at least 2 years from the initial CRC diagnosis between 2003 and 2012. PP was defined based on the number of individual drugs during the third year, after 2 years of survival since the initial cancer treatment. PP was categorized as follows: non-PP (zero to four prescribed drugs); PP (five to nine drugs), and excessive PP (≥10 drugs). Main outcomes are all-cause mortality, hospitalization, and ER visits. RESULTS: Of the 55,228 participants, 44.5% died, 83.1% were hospitalized, and 46.1% visited the ER. The PP and excess PP groups showed increased risk of all-cause mortality, hospitalization, and ER visit compared with the low PP group, and was highly associated among groups including patients aged 65 to 74 years and those in low-level frailty groups. CONCLUSIONS: These risks can be minimized by increasing awareness and enhancing behaviors among health care professionals, especially clinician and pharmacists, to be aware of potential drug interactions, review, and ongoing monitoring. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: The risk of inappropriate drug exposure in older colorectal cancer (CRC) survivors after the initial cancer treatment has not been well studied. Polypharmacy was associated with adverse outcomes, including all-cause mortality, hospitalization, and emergency room visits among older CRC survivors and it was particularly associated with those who were 65 to 75 years and those with low risk of frailty. When prescribing drugs, physicians should be mindful of finding a balance between adequate treatment of diseases and avoiding adverse drug effects in survivors of CRC.

Increasing disparities in the proportions of active treatment and 5-year overall survival over time by age groups among older patients with gastric cancer in Korea.

Purpose: As older patients with gastric cancer increase in Korea, no consensus indicative of anti-cancer treatment exists for the oldest old (age 85+). We investigated potential disparities in the proportion of surgery-including active treatment and the degree of survival improvement over time by age groups, and whether heterogeneity exists in the protective effect of time period on overall survival (OS) by age at diagnosis clusters. Materials and methods: A nationwide cohort (N = 63,975) of older patients with gastric cancer (age at diagnosis 70+) in 2005-2012 were followed until the end of 2018. Patients were categorized into four time period groups by their year of diagnosis. Cancer treatment patterns and 5-year OS were analyzed accordingly, and a random coefficients Cox model with random intercepts and random slopes of time period by age at diagnosis clusters was employed. Results: The mean age of patients was 76.4, and 60.4% were males. Most patients had 0-1 comorbidities (73.3%) and low-risk frailty scores (74.2%). Roughly two-thirds of patients received some form of anti-cancer treatment (62.4%), and while the number of comorbidities and the proportion of high-risk frailty scores trended toward an increase, the proportion of patients receiving anti-cancer treatment increased from 58% in 2005-2006 to 69.6% in 2011-2012. The proportion of surgery-including active treatment increased to over 70% in the 70-74 years old group, while stagnating at 10% in the 90+ years old group. Differences in the slope of 5-year OS improvement resulted in a widening survival gap between the old (age 70-84) and the oldest old. The protective effect of time period on OS hazard in the oldest old was not monotonically reduced with increasing "chronological" age but varied quite randomly, especially among female patients. Conclusion: Our study showed no upper age limit in terms of benefiting from the advances in the detection and treatment of gastric cancer over time. Thus, "functional" age rather than "chronological" age should be the criterion for anti-cancer screening and treatment, and actual implementation of proven treatments in the oldest old patients to reduce their non-compliance with treatment in clinical practice is needed to improve gastric cancer survival for all.