Age at lung cancer diagnosis in females versus males who never smoke by race and ethnicity.

BACKGROUND: We characterized age at diagnosis and estimated sex differences for lung cancer and its histological subtypes among individuals who never smoke. METHODS: We analyzed the distribution of age at lung cancer diagnosis in 33,793 individuals across 8 cohort studies and two national registries from East Asia, the United States (US) and the United Kingdom (UK). Student's t-tests were used to assess the study population differences (Δ years) in age at diagnosis comparing females and males who never smoke across subgroups defined by race/ethnicity, geographic location, and histological subtypes. RESULTS: We found that among Chinese individuals diagnosed with lung cancer who never smoke, females were diagnosed with lung cancer younger than males in the Taiwan Cancer Registry (n = 29,832) (Δ years = -2.2 (95% confidence interval (CI):-2.5, -1.9), in Shanghai (n = 1049) (Δ years = -1.6 (95% CI:-2.9, -0.3), and in Sutter Health and Kaiser Permanente Hawai'i in the US (n = 82) (Δ years = -11.3 (95% CI: -17.7, -4.9). While there was a suggestion of similar patterns in African American and non-Hispanic White individuals. the estimated differences were not consistent across studies and were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: We found evidence of sex differences for age at lung cancer diagnosis among individuals who never smoke.

Amblyopia Care Trends Following Widespread Photoscreener Adoption.

Importance: Amblyopia can result in permanent vision loss if not properly treated before age 7 years. In 2017, the US Preventive Services Task Force recommended that vision screening should occur at least once in all children aged 3 to 5 years to detect amblyopia. Objective: To understand trends and factors associated with screening, referral, or diagnosis of amblyopia before and after photoscreening expansion across a relatively large health care system in late 2017. Design, Setting, and Participants: This is a retrospective cohort study of electronic health record data from patients with a well child care visit at approximately age 3 years (ages 2.75-3.25 years) in a relatively large, multispecialty group practice in Northern California and linked census data between 2015 and 2022. Data were extracted and analyzed from October 2022 through August 2023. Exposures: Patient sex, race and ethnicity, immunization records, previous well child care visits, and census-level median household income. Main Outcomes and Measures: Vision screening, pediatric ophthalmology referral, or amblyopia diagnosis, compared using adjusted odds ratios (AORs). Results: The study included 2015-2017 data from 23 246 patients aged 3 years with at least 1 well child care visit (11 206 [48.2%] female) compared with 2018-2022 postexpansion data from 34 281 patients (16 517 [48.2%] female). The screening rate increased from 5.7% (424 of 7505) in 2015 to 72.1% (4578 of 6354) in 2022. The referral rate increased from 17.0% (1279 of 7505) in 2015 to 23.6% (1836 of 7792) in 2018. The diagnosis rate was 2.7% (200 of 7505) in 2015, peaked at 3.4% (263 of 7792) in 2018, and decreased to 1.4% (88 of 6354) in 2022. Compared with White patients, patients who were Asian, Black, or Hispanic were less likely to be screened (Asian: AOR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.72-0.88; Black: AOR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.53-0.96; Hispanic: AOR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.80-0.97). Compared with White patients, patients who were Asian or Hispanic were more likely to be referred (Asian: AOR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.36-1.62; Hispanic: AOR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.18-1.48) and were more likely to be diagnosed (Asian: AOR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.07-1.56; Hispanic: AOR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.33-2.11). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, increased availability of photoscreeners was associated with an increase in overall rates of vision screening for children aged 3 years in a relatively large health care system. Given that US rates of visual impairment are predicted to increase, additional targeted interventions would be needed to address remaining disparities in amblyopia care along patient- and clinician-level factors.

Risk of Gastric Adenocarcinoma in a Multiethnic Population Undergoing Routine Care: An Electronic Health Records Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Gastric adenocarcinoma (GAC) is often diagnosed at advanced stages and portends a poor prognosis. We hypothesized that electronic health records (EHR) could be leveraged to identify individuals at highest risk for GAC from the population seeking routine care. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study, with endpoint of GAC incidence as ascertained through linkage to an institutional tumor registry. We utilized 2010 to 2020 data from the Palo Alto Medical Foundation, a large multispecialty practice serving Northern California. The analytic cohort comprised individuals ages 40-75 receiving regular ambulatory care. Variables collected included demographic, medical, pharmaceutical, social, and familial data. Electronic phenotyping was based on rule-based methods. RESULTS: The cohort comprised 316,044 individuals and approximately 2 million person-years (p-y) of observation. 157 incident GACs occurred (incidence 7.9 per 100,000 p-y), of which 102 were non-cardia GACs (incidence 5.1 per 100,000 p-y). In multivariable analysis, male sex [HR: 2.2, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.6-3.1], older age, Asian race (HR: 2.5, 95% CI: 1.7-3.7), Hispanic ethnicity (HR: 1.9, 95% CI: 1.1-3.3), atrophic gastritis (HR: 4.6, 95% CI: 2.2-9.3), and anemia (HR: 1.9, 95% CI: 1.3-2.6) were associated with GAC risk; use of NSAID was inversely associated (HR: 0.3, 95% CI: 0.2-0.5). Older age, Asian race, Hispanic ethnicity, atrophic gastritis, and anemia were associated with non-cardia GAC. CONCLUSIONS: Routine EHR data can stratify the general population for GAC risk. IMPACT: Such methods may help triage populations for targeted screening efforts, such as upper endoscopy.

Trends in Detection of Adenoma and Sessile Serrated Lesions Over a Decade in a Community-Based Healthcare System.

INTRODUCTION: Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is an accepted benchmark for screening colonoscopy. Factors driving ADR and its relationship with sessile serrated lesions detection rate (SSLDR) over time remain unclear. We aim to explore patient, physician, and procedural influences on ADR and SSLDR trends. METHODS: Using a large healthcare system in northern California from January 2010 to December 2020, a total of 146,818 screening colonoscopies performed by 33 endoscopists were included. ADR and SSLDR were calculated over time using natural language processing. Logistic regression was used to calculate the odd ratios of patient demographics, physician attributes, and procedural details over time. RESULTS: Between 2010 and 2020, ADR rose from 19.4% to 44.4%, whereas SSLDR increased from 1.6% to 11.6%. ADR increased by 2.7% per year (95% confidence interval 1.9%-3.4%), and SSLDR increased by 1.0% per year (95% confidence interval 0.8%-1.2%). Higher ADR was associated with older age, male sex, higher body mass index, current smoker, higher comorbidities, and high-risk colonoscopy. By contrast, SSLDR was associated with younger age, female sex, white race, and fewer comorbidities. Patient and procedure characteristics did not significantly change over time ( P -interaction >0.05). Longer years in practice and male physician were associated with lower ADR and SSLDR in 2010, but significantly attenuated over time ( P -interaction <0.05). DISCUSSION: Both ADR and SSLDR have increased over time. Patient and procedure factors did not significantly change over time. Male endoscopist and longer years in practice had lower initial ADR and SSLDR, but significantly lessened over time.

Second Primary Lung Cancer Among Lung Cancer Survivors Who Never Smoked.

Importance: Lung cancer among never-smokers accounts for 25% of all lung cancers in the US; recent therapeutic advances have improved survival among patients with initial primary lung cancer (IPLC), who are now at high risk of developing second primary lung cancer (SPLC). As smoking rates continue to decline in the US, it is critical to examine more closely the epidemiology of lung cancer among patients who never smoked, including their risk for SPLC. Objective: To estimate and compare the cumulative SPLC incidence among lung cancer survivors who have never smoked vs those who have ever smoked. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based prospective cohort study used data from the Multiethnic Cohort Study (MEC), which enrolled participants between April 18, 1993, and December 31, 1996, with follow-up through July 1, 2017. Eligible individuals for this study were aged 45 to 75 years and had complete smoking data at baseline. These participants were followed up for IPLC and further SPLC development through the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry. The data were analyzed from July 1, 2022, to January 31, 2023. Exposures: Never-smoking vs ever-smoking exposure at MEC enrollment. Main Outcomes and Measures: The study had 2 primary outcomes: (1) 10-year cumulative incidence of IPLC in the entire study cohort and 10-year cumulative incidence of SPLC among patients with IPLC and (2) standardized incidence ratio (SIR) (calculated as the SPLC incidence divided by the IPLC incidence) by smoking history. Results: Among 211 414 MEC participants, 7161 (3.96%) developed IPLC over 4 038 007 person-years, and 163 (2.28%) developed SPLC over 16 470 person-years. Of the participants with IPLC, the mean (SD) age at cohort enrollment was 63.6 (7.7) years, 4031 (56.3%) were male, and 3131 (43.7%) were female. The 10-year cumulative IPLC incidence was 2.40% (95% CI, 2.31%-2.49%) among ever-smokers, which was 7 times higher than never-smokers (0.34%; 95% CI, 0.30%-0.37%). However, the 10-year cumulative SPLC incidence following IPLC was as high among never-smokers (2.84%; 95% CI, 1.50%-4.18%) as ever-smokers (2.72%; 95% CI, 2.24%-3.20%), which led to a substantially higher SIR for never-smokers (14.50; 95% CI, 8.73-22.65) vs ever-smokers (3.50; 95% CI, 2.95-4.12). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings indicate that SPLC risk among lung cancer survivors who never smoked is as high as among those with IPLC who ever-smoked, highlighting the need to identify risk factors for SPLC among patients who never smoked and to develop a targeted surveillance strategy.

"Go ahead and screen" - advice to healthcare systems for routine lynch syndrome screening from interviews with newly diagnosed colorectal cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Lynch syndrome (LS) is the most common cause of inherited colorectal cancer (CRC). Universal tumor screening (UTS) of newly diagnosed CRC cases is recommended to aid in diagnosis of LS and reduce cancer-related morbidity and mortality. However, not all health systems have adopted UTS processes and implementation may be inconsistent due to system and patient-level complexities. METHODS: To identify barriers, facilitators, and suggestions for improvements of the UTS process from the patient perspective, we conducted in-depth, semi-structured interviews with patients recently diagnosed with CRC, but not screened for or aware of LS. Patients were recruited from eight regionally diverse US health systems. Interviews were conducted by telephone, 60-minutes, audio-recorded, and transcribed. An inductive, constant comparative analysis approach was employed.  RESULTS: We completed 75 interviews across the eight systems. Most participants were white (79%), about half (52%) were men, and the mean age was 60 years. Most self-reported either no (60%) or minimal (40%) prior awareness of LS. Overall, 96% of patients stated UTS should be a routine standard of care for CRC tumors, consistently citing four primary motivations for wanting to know their LS status and engage in the process for LS identification: "knowledge is power"; "family knowledge"; "prevention and detection"; and "treatment and surveillance." Common concerns pertaining to the process of screening for and identifying LS included: creating anticipatory worry for patients, the potential cost and the accuracy of the genetic test, and possibly having one's health insurance coverage impacted by the LS diagnosis. Patients suggested health systems communicate LS results in-person or by phone from a trained expert in LS; offer proactive verbal and written education about LS, the screening steps, and any follow-up surveillance recommendations; and support patients in communicating their LS screening to any of their blood relatives. CONCLUSION: Our qualitative findings demonstrate patients with CRC have a strong desire for healthcare systems to regularly implement and offer UTS. Patients offer key insights for health systems to guide future implementation and optimization of UTS and other LS screening programs and maximize diagnosis of individuals with LS and improve cancer-related surveillance and outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not available: not a clinical trial.

Software Application Profile: dynamicLM-a tool for performing dynamic risk prediction using a landmark supermodel for survival data under competing risks.

MOTIVATION: Providing a dynamic assessment of prognosis is essential for improved personalized medicine. The landmark model for survival data provides a potentially powerful solution to the dynamic prediction of disease progression. However, a general framework and a flexible implementation of the model that incorporates various outcomes, such as competing events, have been lacking. We present an R package, dynamicLM, a user-friendly tool for the landmark model for the dynamic prediction of survival data under competing risks, which includes various functions for data preparation, model development, prediction and evaluation of predictive performance. IMPLEMENTATION: dynamicLM as an R package. GENERAL FEATURES: The package includes options for incorporating time-varying covariates, capturing time-dependent effects of predictors and fitting a cause-specific landmark model for time-to-event data with or without competing risks. Tools for evaluating the prediction performance include time-dependent area under the ROC curve, Brier Score and calibration. AVAILABILITY: Available on GitHub [https://github.com/thehanlab/dynamicLM].

Factors associated with adherence to provider referrals for lung cancer screening with low dose computed tomography before and during COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer has been the leading cause of American deaths from cancer. Although Medicare started covering lung cancer screening (LCS) with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) in 2015, the uptake of LDCT-LCS remains low. This study examines the changes in adherence to provider referrals for LDCT-LCS and the factors at patient, provider, and health system levels that influence the completion rate of LDCT-LCS orders before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Our study examined electronic health record data (December 2013 - December 2020) from a large, community-based clinical healthcare delivery system in California. We plotted monthly trends in the frequency of LDCT-LCS orders and completion rate and compared the annual LDCT-LCS completion rate between LCS-eligible, LCS-ineligible, and unknown eligibility groups. We then explored multilevel factors associated with the completion of LDCT-LCS orders using hierarchical generalized linear models. RESULTS: There was an increase in LDCT-LCS orders (N = 12,469) from 2013 to 2019, followed by a sharp decline in March 2020 due to the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Thereafter, LDCT-LCS orders slowly increased again in June 2020. The completion rate of LDCT-LCS increased from 0% in December 2013 to approximately 70% in 2018-2019 but declined to 50-60% in 2020 during the pandemic. Ineligible patients had lower completion rates of LDCT-LCS. Patients who were new to the healthcare system, Black, received the LDCT-LCS order in the first few years after Medicare coverage (2016 or 2017), during the pandemic, had major comorbidities, and smoked less than 30 pack-years were less likely to complete an order. Patients were more likely to complete LDCT-LCS orders if they were younger, received the LDCT-LCS order from a physician (vs. nonphysician provider), from family medicine or other specialties (vs. internal medicine), or saw a provider with more experience in LDCT-LCS. CONCLUSIONS: The beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic largely decreased the volume of LDCT-LCS orders, but rates have since been slowing recovering. Future interventions to improve lung cancer screening should consider doing more targeted outreach to new patients and Black patients as well as providing additional education to nonphysician practitioners and those providers with lower rates of LDCT-LCS referral orders.

Sequential Targeted Therapy for Advanced, Metastatic, and Recurrent Cervical Cancer: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of the Patient Journey.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate outcomes and cost-effectiveness of targeted therapy sequencing for metastatic and recurrent cervical cancer. METHOD: Models were simulated based on phase II and III trials on bevacizumab (bev) from GOG-240, cemiplimab (cemi) from GOG 3016, pembrolizumab (pembro) from KEYNOTE-826, and tisotumab vedotin (tiso) from GOG 3023. Costs were based on IBM Micromedex RED BOOK™ and company listed costs. RESULTS: For [chemo + bev → chemo], total cost was $125,918.04, with median overall survival (mOS) of 21.8 months, and cost-effectiveness ratio (CER) of $119,835.79. For [chemo + bev → cemi], total cost was $187,562.99 with mOS of 28.5 months and CER of $162,039.16. For [chemo + bev + pembro → chemo], total cost was $319,963.78 with mOS 32.9 months and CER of $249,930.10. For [chemo + bev + pembro → tiso], total cost was $455,204.45, with mOS 36.5 months and CER of $320,072.99. CONCLUSION: The combination of immunotherapies and biologics have significantly increased overall survival, but with associated higher costs, primarily related to drug costs.

Antimicrobial exposure is associated with decreased survival in triple-negative breast cancer.

Antimicrobial exposure during curative-intent treatment of triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) may lead to gut microbiome dysbiosis, decreased circulating and tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes, and inferior outcomes. Here, we investigate the association of antimicrobial exposure and peripheral lymphocyte count during TNBC treatment with survival, using integrated electronic medical record and California Cancer Registry data in the Oncoshare database. Of 772 women with stage I-III TNBC treated with and without standard cytotoxic chemotherapy - prior to the immune checkpoint inhibitor era - most (654, 85%) used antimicrobials. Applying multivariate analyses, we show that each additional total or unique monthly antimicrobial prescription is associated with inferior overall and breast cancer-specific survival. This antimicrobial-mortality association is independent of changes in neutrophil count, is unrelated to disease severity, and is sustained through year three following diagnosis, suggesting antimicrobial exposure negatively impacts TNBC survival. These results may inform mechanistic studies and antimicrobial prescribing decisions in TNBC and other hormone receptor-independent cancers.

A picture is worth a thousand words: advancing the use of visualization tools in implementation science through process mapping and matrix heat mapping.

BACKGROUND: Identifying key determinants is crucial for improving program implementation and achieving long-term sustainment within healthcare organizations. Organizational-level complexity and heterogeneity across multiple stakeholders can complicate our understanding of program implementation. We describe two data visualization methods used to operationalize implementation success and to consolidate and select implementation factors for further analysis. METHODS: We used a combination of process mapping and matrix heat mapping to systematically synthesize and visualize qualitative data from 66 stakeholder interviews across nine healthcare organizations, to characterize universal tumor screening programs of all newly diagnosed colorectal and endometrial cancers and understand the influence of contextual factors on implementation. We constructed visual representations of protocols to compare processes and score process optimization components. We also used color-coded matrices to systematically code, summarize, and consolidate contextual data using factors from the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Combined scores were visualized in a final data matrix heat map. RESULTS: Nineteen process maps were created to visually represent each protocol. Process maps identified the following gaps and inefficiencies: inconsistent execution of the protocol, no routine reflex testing, inconsistent referrals after a positive screen, no evidence of data tracking, and a lack of quality assurance measures. These barriers in patient care helped us define five process optimization components and used these to quantify program optimization on a scale from 0 (no program) to 5 (optimized), representing the degree to which a program is implemented and optimally maintained. Combined scores within the final data matrix heat map revealed patterns of contextual factors across optimized programs, non-optimized programs, and organizations with no program. CONCLUSIONS: Process mapping provided an efficient method to visually compare processes including patient flow, provider interactions, and process gaps and inefficiencies across sites, thereby measuring implementation success via optimization scores. Matrix heat mapping proved useful for data visualization and consolidation, resulting in a summary matrix for cross-site comparisons and selection of relevant CFIR factors. Combining these tools enabled a systematic and transparent approach to understanding complex organizational heterogeneity prior to formal coincidence analysis, introducing a stepwise approach to data consolidation and factor selection.

Mammographic Screening in Routine Practice: Multisite Study of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis and Digital Mammography Screenings.

Background The use of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) is increasing over digital mammography (DM) following studies demonstrating lower recall rates (RRs) and higher cancer detection rates (CDRs). However, inconsistent interpretation of evidence on the risks and benefits of mammography has resulted in varying screening mammography recommendations. Purpose To evaluate screening outcomes among women in the United States who underwent routine DM or DBT mammographic screening. Materials and Methods This retrospective cohort study included women aged 40-79 years who underwent DM or DBT screening mammograms between January 2014 and December 2020. Outcomes of RR, CDR, positive predictive value of recall (PPV1), biopsy rate, and positive predictive value of biopsy (PPV3) were compared between DM and DBT with use of adjusted multivariable logistic regression models. Results A total of 2 528 063 screening mammograms from 1 100 447 women (mean age, 57 years ± 10 [SD]) were included. In crude analyses, DBT (1 693 727 screening mammograms vs 834 336 DM screening mammograms) demonstrated lower RR (10.3% [95% CI: 10.3, 10.4] for DM vs 8.9% [95% CI: 8.9, 9.0] for DBT; P < .001) and higher CDR (4.5 of 1000 screening mammograms [95% CI: 4.3, 4.6] vs 5.3 of 1000 [95% CI: 5.2, 5.5]; P < .001), PPV1 (4.3% [95% CI: 4.2, 4.5] vs 5.9% [95% CI: 5.7, 6.0]; P < .001), and biopsy rates (14.5 of 1000 screening mammograms [95% CI: 14.2, 14.7] vs 17.6 of 1000 [95% CI: 17.4, 17.8]; P < .001). PPV3 was similar between cohorts (30.0% [95% CI: 29.2, 30.9] for DM vs 29.3% [95% CI: 28.7, 29.9] for DBT; P = .16). After adjustment for age, breast density, site, and index year, associations remained stable with respect to statistical significance. Conclusion Women undergoing digital breast tomosynthesis had improved screening mammography outcomes compared with women who underwent digital mammography. © RSNA, 2023 Supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Bae and Seo in this issue.

Should Health Systems Share Genetic Findings With At-Risk Relatives When the Proband Is Deceased? Interviews With Individuals Diagnosed With Lynch Syndrome.

Purpose: Genetic information has health implications for patients and their biological relatives. Death of a patient before sharing a genetic diagnosis with at-risk relatives is a missed opportunity to provide important information that could guide interventions to minimize cancer-related morbidity and mortality in relatives. Methods: We performed semi-structured interviews with individuals diagnosed with Lynch syndrome at 1 of 4 health systems to explore their perspectives on whether health systems should share genetic risk information with relatives following a patient's death. An inductive, open-coding approach was used to analyze audio-recorded content, with software-generated code reports undergoing iterative comparative analysis by a qualitative research team to identify broad themes and representative participant quotes. Results: Among 23 participating interviewees, 19 supported health systems informing relatives about their Lynch syndrome risk while the remaining 4 were conflicted about patient privacy. Most (n=22) wanted their Lynch syndrome diagnosis shared with relatives if they were unable to share and to be informed of their own risk if a diagnosed relative was unable to share. The most common issues noted regarding information-sharing with relatives included patient privacy and privacy laws (n=8), potential anxiety (n=5), and lack of contact information for relatives (n=3). Interviewee perspectives on how health systems could communicate genetic findings generated a consensus: When - a few months after but within a year of the patient's death; How - explanatory letter and follow-up phone call; and Who - a knowledgeable professional. Conclusions: Interviews demonstrated strong and consistent perspectives from individuals diagnosed with Lynch syndrome that health systems have a role and responsibility to inform relatives of genetic findings following a patient's death.

Patient Preferences for Preventive Healthcare During the COVID-19 Pandemic in a Large Integrated Health System.

The COVID-19 pandemic caused healthcare systems and patients to cancel or postpone healthcare services, particularly preventive care. Many patients still have not received these services raising concerns about the potential for preventable morbidity and mortality. At Sutter Health, a large integrated healthcare system in Northern California, we conducted a population-based email survey in August 2020 to evaluate perceptions and preferences about where, when, and how healthcare is delivered during the COVID-19 pandemic. In total, 3351 patients completed surveys, and 42.6% reported that they would "wait until they felt safe" before receiving a colonoscopy as compared to 22.4% for a mammogram. The doctor's office was the most common preferred location for receiving vaccines/shots (79.9%), though many also reported preferring an outdoor setting or in a car (63.7%). With over 40% of patients reporting that they would "wait until they feel safe" for a colonoscopy, healthcare systems could focus on promoting other evidence-based options such a fecal-occult blood test to ensure timely colon cancer screening.

Genetic counselors' experience with reimbursement and patient out-of-pocket cost for multi-cancer gene panel testing for hereditary cancer syndromes.

Multi-cancer gene panels for hereditary cancer syndromes (hereditary cancer panels, HCPs) are widely available, and some laboratories have programs that limit patients' out-of-pocket (OOP) cost share. However, little is known about practices by cancer genetic counselors for discussing and ordering an HCP and how insurance reimbursement and patient out-of-pocket share impact these practices. We conducted a survey of cancer genetic counselors based in the United States through the National Society of Genetic Counselors to assess the impact of reimbursement and patient OOP share on ordering of an HCP and hereditary cancer genetic counseling. Data analyses were conducted using chi-square and t tests. We received 135 responses (16% response rate). We found that the vast majority of respondents (94%, 127/135) ordered an HCP for patients rather than single-gene tests to assess hereditary cancer predisposition. Two-thirds of respondents reported that their institution had no protocol related to discussing HCPs with patients. Most respondents (84%, 114/135) indicated clinical indications and patients' requests as important in selecting and ordering HCPs, while 42%, 57/135, considered reimbursement and patient OOP share factors important. We found statistically significant differences in reporting of insurance as a frequently used payment method for HCPs and in-person genetic counseling (84% versus 59%, respectively, p < 0.0001). Perceived patient willingness to pay more than $100 was significantly higher for HCPs than for genetic counseling(41% versus 22%, respectively, p < 0.01). In sum, genetic counselors' widespread selection and ordering of HCPs is driven more by clinical indications and patient preferences than payment considerations. Respondents perceived that testing is more often reimbursed by insurance than genetic counseling, and patients are more willing to pay for an HCP than for genetic counseling. Policy efforts should address this incongruence in reimbursement and patient OOP share. Patient-centered communication should educate patients on the benefit of genetic counseling.

Effects of Behavioral Economics-Based Messaging on Appointment Scheduling Through Patient Portals and Appointment Completion: Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Behavioral economics-based techniques have been an increasingly utilized method in health care to influence behavior change by modifying language in patient communication (through choice architecture and the framing of words). Patient portals are a key tool for facilitating patient engagement in their health, and interventions deployed via patient portals have been effective in improving utilization of preventive health services. OBJECTIVE: We examined the impacts of behavioral economics-based nudge health maintenance reminders on appointment scheduling through a patient portal and appointment completion for 2 preventive services: Medicare wellness visits and Pap smear. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective observational study using electronic health record data from an integrated health care system in Northern California. Nudge health maintenance reminders with behavioral economics-based language were implemented for all sites in November 2017 for Medicare wellness visits and for selected sites in February 2018 for Pap smears. We analyzed 125,369 health maintenance reminders for Medicare wellness visits, and 585,358 health maintenance reminders for Pap smear sent between January 2017 and February 2020. The primary outcomes were rate of appointments scheduled through the patient portal and appointment completion rate. We compared the outcomes between those who received the new, behavioral economics-based health maintenance reminders (the nudge group) and those who received the original, standard health maintenance reminders (the control group). We used segmented regression with interrupted time series to assess the immediate and gradual effect of the nudge for Medicare wellness visits, and we used logistic regression to assess the association of nudge health maintenance reminders, adjusting for the propensity to receive a nudge health maintenance reminder, for Pap smear. RESULTS: The rates of appointments scheduled through the patient portal were higher for nudge health maintenance reminder recipients than those for control health maintenance reminder recipients (Medicare wellness visits-nudge: 12,537/96,839, 13.0%; control: 2,769/28,530, 9.7%, P<.001; Pap smear-nudge: 8,239/287,149, 2.9%; control: 1,868/120,047, 1.6%; P<.001). Rates of appointment completion were higher for nudge health maintenance reminders for Pap smear (nudge: 67,399/287,149, 23.5% control: 20,393/120,047, 17.0%; P<.001) but were comparable for Medicare wellness visits (nudge: 49,835/96,839, 51.5% control: 14,781/28,530, 51.8%; P=.30). There was a marginally gradual effect of nudge on number of appointments scheduled through the patient portal for the overall Medicare wellness visits sample (at a monthly rate of 0.26%, P=.09), and a significant gradual effect among scheduled appointments (at a monthly rate of 0.46%, P=.04). For Pap smear, nudge health maintenance reminders were positively associated with number of appointments scheduled through the patient portal (overall sample: propensity adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.62; 95% CI 1.50-1.74; among scheduled appointments: propensity adjusted OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.47-1.76) and with appointment completion (propensity adjusted OR 1.07; 1.04-1.10). CONCLUSIONS: Nudges, a behavioral economics-based approach to providing health maintenance reminders, increased the number of appointments scheduled through the patient portal for Medicare wellness visits and Pap smear. Our study demonstrates that a simple approach-framing and modifying language in an electronic message-can have a significant and long-term impact on patient engagement and access to care.

Do Patients Continue to Use Video Visits? Factors Related to Continued Video Visit Use.

Many studies have assessed the factors associated with overall video visit use during the COVID-19 pandemic, but little is known about who is most likely to continue to use video visits and why. The authors combined a survey with electronic health record data to identify factors affecting the continued use of video visit. In August 2020, a stratified random sample of 20,000 active patients from a large health care system were invited to complete an email survey on health care seeking preferences during the COVID. Weighted logistic regression models were applied, adjusting for sampling frame and response bias, to identify factors associated with video visit experience, and separately for preference of continued use of video visits. Actual video visit utilization was also estimated within 12 months after the survey. Three thousand three hundred fifty-one (17.2%) patients completed the survey. Of these, 1208 (36%) reported having at least 1 video visit in the past, lowest for African American (33%) and highest for Hispanic (41%). Of these, 38% would prefer a video visit in the future. The strongest predictors of future video visit use were comfort using video interactions (odds ratio [OR] = 5.30, 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 3.57-7.85) and satisfaction with the overall quality (OR = 3.94, 95% CI: 2.66-5.86). Interestingly, despite a significantly higher satisfaction for Hispanic (40%-55%) and African American (40%-50%) compared with Asian (29%-39%), Hispanic (OR = 0.46, 95% CI: 0.12-0.88) and African American (OR = 0.54, 95% CI: 0.16-0.90) were less likely to prefer a future video visit. Disparity exists in the use of video visit. The association between patient satisfaction and continued video visit varies by race/ethnicity, which may change the future long-term video visit use among race/ethnicity groups.

Incidence of Lung Cancer Among Never-Smoking Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander Females.

BACKGROUND: Although lung cancer incidence rates according to smoking status, sex, and detailed race/ethnicity have not been available, it is estimated that more than half of Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander (AANHPI) females with lung cancer have never smoked. METHODS: We calculated age-adjusted incidence rates for lung cancer according to smoking status and detailed race/ethnicity among females, focusing on AANHPI ethnic groups, and assessed relative incidence across racial/ethnic groups. We used a large-scale dataset that integrates data from electronic health records from 2 large health-care systems-Sutter Health in Northern California and Kaiser Permanente Hawai'i-linked to state cancer registries for incident lung cancer diagnoses between 2000 and 2013. The study population included 1 222 694 females (n = 244 147 AANHPI), 3297 of which were diagnosed with lung cancer (n = 535 AANHPI). RESULTS: Incidence of lung cancer among never-smoking AANHPI as an aggregate group was 17.1 per 100 000 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 14.9 to 19.4) but varied widely across ethnic groups. Never-smoking Chinese American females had the highest rate (22.8 per 100 000, 95% CI = 17.3 to 29.1). Except for Japanese American females, incidence among every never-smoking AANHPI female ethnic group was higher than that of never-smoking non-Hispanic White females, from 66% greater among Native Hawaiian females (incidence rate ratio = 1.66, 95% CI = 1.03 to 2.56) to more than 100% greater among Chinese American females (incidence rate ratio = 2.26, 95% CI = 1.67 to 3.02). CONCLUSIONS: Our study revealed high rates of lung cancer among most never-smoking AANHPI female ethnic groups. Our approach illustrates the use of innovative data integration to dispel the myth that AANHPI females are at overall reduced risk of lung cancer and demonstrates the need to disaggregate this highly diverse population.

Road to Better Work-Life Balance? Lean Redesigns and Daily Work Time among Primary Care Physicians.

PURPOSE: To assess the impact of Lean primary care redesigns on the amount of time that physicians spent working each day. METHODS: This observational study was based on 92 million time-stamped Epic® EHR access logs captured among 317 primary care physicians in a large ambulatory care delivery system. Seventeen clinic facilities housing 46 primary care departments were included for study. We conducted interrupted time series analysis to monitor changes in physician work patterns over 6 years. Key measures included total daily work time; time spent on "desktop medicine" outside the exam room; time spent with patients during office visits; time still working after clinic, i.e., after seeing the last patient each day; and remote work time. RESULTS: The amount of time that physicians spent on desktop EHR activities throughout the day, including after clinic hours, decreased by 10.9% (95% CI: -22.2, -2.03) and 8.3% (95% CI: -13.8, -2.12), respectively, during the first year of Lean implementation. Total daily work hours among physicians, which included both desktop activity and time in office visits, decreased by 20% (95% CI: -29.2, -9.60) by the third year of Lean implementation. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that Lean redesign may be associated with time savings for primary care physicians. However, since this was an observational analysis, further study is warranted (e.g., randomized trial) -to determine the impact of Lean interventions on physician work experiences.