Changes in Facility Share of Medicaid-insured Patients With Urologic Cancers Following Implementation of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

OBJECTIVE: To examine Medicaid-insurance acceptance at facilities treating urologic cancers following implementation of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, longitudinal study with a pre-post design. We accessed 2010-2017 data from the National Cancer Database, calculating the facility-level change in proportion of urologic cancer patients with Medicaid following implementation of the ACA. We used multivariable logistic regression to assess baseline clinical and demographic factors associated with changes in the proportion of patients at a facility insured through Medicaid. RESULTS: We identified 630 facilities, including 287 in Medicaid expansion states and 343 in non-expansion states associated with 436,082 urologic cancer patients. The mean facility-level change in proportion of patients with Medicaid was + 5.8% (95% CI 5.0%-6.5%) in expansion states versus + 0.6% (95% CI 0.2%-0.9%) in non-expansion states. There were 179 facilities that experienced a decrease in the post-ACA period, representing 13.6% of facilities in expansion states and 40.8% in non-expansion states (P <.001). Factors associated with a decrease in proportion of urologic cancer patients insured by Medicaid included non-expansion state status (OR 8.9, 95% CI 5.3-15.6, P <.001), higher baseline proportion of patients with Medicaid (highest quartile vs lowest: OR 4.6, 95% CI 2.3-9.4, P <.001) and high-income zip code (highest vs lowest quartile: OR 3.1, 95% CI 1.5-6.6, P <.001). CONCLUSION: Urologic cancer care for Medicaid-insured Americans remains unevenly distributed across cancer care centers, even in states that expanded coverage. Our findings suggest that this variation may reflect the effort of some facilities to reduce their financial exposure to increased numbers of Medicaid patients in the wake of ACA-supported state expansions.

TikTok misinformation and user engagement in female pelvic floor conditions.

IMPORTANCE: Social media platforms are increasingly utilized to distribute medical information. Our study emphasizes the need for accuracy in pelvic health education on social media and the involvement of female pelvic floor (FPF) specialists in content creation. AIMS: In this cross-sectional study, we assessed the FPF TikTok videos with the highest engagement for quality of information and misinformation and investigated the relationship between misinformation and user engagement. METHODS: We collected all TikTok videos on the US app with hashtags related to FPF conditions, including 76 on pelvic organ prolapse, 323 on urinary tract infection, 84 on overactive bladder, and 972 on incontinence. The top 20 videos for each FPF condition were selected based on highest engagement, and 74 videos total met inclusion criteria. TikTok videos were scored with the validated DISCERN instrument for quality of consumer health information and a 5-point Likert scale for misinformation. The correlation between misinformation and user engagement was assessed. RESULTS: Our analysis revealed positive correlations among higher average misinformation scores and shares (r = 0.37, p < 0.001), likes (r = 0.23, p = 0.004), and overall engagement (r = 0.25, p = 0.002) in FPF TikTok videos as a group, likely driven by the #UTI category. Most TikTok videos (96%) had poor quality of information (DISCERN score < 3), and 18% of TikTok videos contained misinformation. CONCLUSION: The poor quality and prevalence of misinformation in FPF-related TikTok videos with the highest engagement raise concerns about the propagation of nonevidence-based health information.

Telehealth Availability for Cancer Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Cross-Sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: Telehealth was an important strategy for maintaining continuity of cancer care during the coronavirus pandemic and has continued to play a role in outpatient care; however, it is unknown whether services are equally available across cancer hospitals. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess telehealth availability at cancer hospitals for new and established patients with common cancers to contextualize the impact of access barriers to technology on overall access to health care. METHODS: We conducted a national cross-sectional secret shopper study from June to November 2020 to assess telehealth availability at cancer hospitals for new and established patients with colorectal, breast, and skin (melanoma) cancer. We examined facility-level factors to determine predictors of telehealth availability. RESULTS: Of the 312 investigated facilities, 97.1% (n=303) provided telehealth services for at least 1 cancer site. Telehealth was less available to new compared to established patients (n=226, 72% vs n=301, 97.1%). The surveyed cancer hospitals more commonly offered telehealth visits for breast cancer care (n=266, 85%) and provided lower access to telehealth for skin (melanoma) cancer care (n=231, 74%). Most hospitals (n=163, 52%) offered telehealth for all 3 cancer types. Telehealth availability was weakly correlated across cancer types within a given facility for new (r=0.16, 95% CI 0.09-0.23) and established (r=0.14, 95% CI 0.08-0.21) patients. Telehealth was more commonly available for new patients at National Cancer Institute-designated facilities, medical school-affiliated facilities, and major teaching sites, with high total admissions and below-average timeliness of care. Telehealth availability for established patients was highest at Academic Comprehensive Cancer Programs, nongovernment and nonprofit facilities, medical school-affiliated facilities, Accountable Care Organizations, and facilities with a high number of total admissions. CONCLUSIONS: Despite an increase in telehealth services for patients with cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic, we identified differences in access across cancer hospitals, which may relate to measures of clinical volume, affiliation, and infrastructure.

Role of colectomy in the management of appendiceal tumors: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Appendiceal tumors represent a range of histologies that vary in behavior. Recommendations for treatment with appendectomy versus right hemicolectomy (RHC) for different tumor types are evolving and sometimes conflicting. This study sought to characterize variation in the United States around surgical treatment of major appendiceal tumor types over time and describe differences in outcomes based on procedure. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with appendiceal goblet cell adenocarcinoma (GCA), mucinous adenocarcinoma, neuroendocrine neoplasm (NEN), or non-mucinous adenocarcinoma from 2004-2017 were identified in the National Cancer Database. Trends in RHC over time and predictors of RHC were identified. Surgical outcomes for each histologic type and stage were compared. RESULTS: Of 18,216 patients, 11% had GCAs, 34% mucinous adenocarcinoma, 31% NENs, and 24% non-mucinous adenocarcinoma. Rate of RHC for NEN decreased from 68% in 2004 to 40% in 2017 (p = 0.008) but remained constant around 60-75% for other tumor types. Higher stage was associated with increased odds of RHC for all tumor types. RHC was associated with higher rate of unplanned readmission (5% vs. 3%, p < 0.001) and longer postoperative hospital stay (median 5 days vs. 3 days, p < 0.001). On risk-adjusted analysis, RHC was significantly associated with increased survival versus appendectomy for stage 2 disease of all tumor types (HRs 0.43 to 0.63) and for stage 1 non-mucinous adenocarcinoma (HR = 0.56). CONCLUSIONS: Most patients with appendiceal tumors undergo RHC, which is associated with increased readmission, longer length of stay, and improved survival for stage 2 disease of all types. RHC should be offered selectively for appendiceal tumors.

Uveal Exposure Following Globe Rupture Simulating Conjunctival Melanoma.

This case report describes a diagnosis of uveal prolapse masquerading as a conjunctival melanoma after globe rupture in a woman aged 89 years.

Impact of COVID-19 on the gastrointestinal surgical oncology patient population.

Background: The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic led to substantial alterations in healthcare delivery and access. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 on the presentation and surgical care of patients with gastrointestinal (GI) cancers. Methods: All patients who underwent GI cancer surgery at a large, tertiary referral center between March 15, 2019 and March 15, 2021 were included. March 15, 2020 was considered the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. Changes in patient, tumor, and treatment characteristics before the pandemic compared to during the pandemic were evaluated. Results: Of 522 patients that met study criteria, 252 (48.3%) were treated before the COVID-19 pandemic. During the first COVID-19 wave, weekly volume of GI cancer cases was one-third lower than baseline (p = 0.041); during the second wave, case volume remained at baseline levels (p = 0.519). There were no demographic or tumor characteristic differences between patients receiving GI cancer surgery before versus during COVID-19 (p > 0.05 for all), and no difference in rate of emergency surgery (p > 0.9). Patients were more likely to receive preoperative chemotherapy during the first six months of the pandemic compared to the subsequent six months (35.6% vs. 15.5%, p < 0.001). Telemedicine was rapidly adopted at the start of the pandemic, rising from 0% to 47% of GI surgical oncology visits within two months. Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic caused an initial disruption to the surgical care of GI cancers, but did not compromise stage at presentation. Preoperative chemotherapy and telemedicine were utilized to mitigate the impact of a high COVID-19 burden on cancer care.

Local Therapeutics for the Treatment of Oligo Metastatic Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Metastatic prostate cancer remains universally lethal. Although de-novo metastatic prostate cancer was historically managed with systemic therapy alone, local therapies are increasingly utilized in the early treatment of the disease, particularly in patients with oligometastatic prostate cancer (OMPC). OMPC represents an intermediate stage between clinically localized and widespread metastatic disease. Diseases classified within this stage present an opportunity for localized targeting of the disease prior to progression to widespread metastases. The purpose of this review is to discuss the contemporary and emerging local therapies for the treatment of OMPC. RECENT FINDINGS: To date, there are three utilized forms of local therapy for OMPC: cryoablation, radiation therapy, and cytoreductive prostatectomy. Cryoablation can be utilized for the total ablation of the prostate and has shown promising results in patients with OMPC either in combination with ADT or with ADT and systemic chemotherapy. Radiation therapy along with ADT has demonstrated improvement in progression-free survival. The STAMPEDE Arm G, PEACE-1, and the HORRAD clinical trials have investigated radiation therapy for mPCa compared to standard of care versus systemic therapy with varying results. Cytoreductive radical prostatectomy (CRP) in conjunction with ADT has also been proposed in the management of OPMC with promising results from case-control and retrospective studies. Currently there are larger controlled trials investigating CRP for OPMC including the SIMCAP, LoMP, TRoMbone, SWOG 1802, IP2-ATLANTA, g-RAMPP, and FUSCC-OMPCa trials. Given the novel nature of local treatments for OPMC, treatment selection is still controversial and requires long-term follow-up and randomized clinical trials to aid patient and clinician decision making.

Acceptance of Simulated Adult Patients With Medicaid Insurance Seeking Care in a Cancer Hospital for a New Cancer Diagnosis.

Importance: Although there have been significant increases in the number of US residents insured through Medicaid, the ability of patients with Medicaid to access cancer care services is less well known. Objective: To assess facility-level acceptance of Medicaid insurance among patients diagnosed with common cancers. Design, Setting, and Participants: This national cross-sectional secret shopper study was conducted in 2020 in a random sample of Commission on Cancer-accredited facilities in the United States using a simulated cohort of Medicaid-insured adult patients with colorectal, breast, kidney, and melanoma skin cancer. Exposures: Telephone call requesting an appointment for a patient with Medicaid with a new cancer diagnosis. Main Outcomes and Measures: Acceptance of Medicaid insurance for cancer care. Descriptive statistics, χ2 tests, and multivariable logistic regression models were used to examine factors associated with Medicaid acceptance for colorectal, breast, kidney, and skin cancer. High access hospitals were defined as those offering care across all 4 cancer types surveyed. Explanatory measures included facility-level factors from the 2016 American Hospital Association Annual Survey and Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services General Information database. Results: A nationally representative sample of 334 facilities was created, of which 226 (67.7%) provided high access to patients with Medicaid seeking cancer care. Medicaid acceptance differed by cancer site, with 319 facilities (95.5%) accepting Medicaid insurance for breast cancer care; 302 (90.4%), colorectal; 290 (86.8%), kidney; and 266 (79.6%), skin. Comprehensive community cancer programs (OR, 0.4; 95% CI, 0.2-0.7; P = .007) were significantly less likely to provide high access to care for patients with Medicaid. Facilities with nongovernment, nonprofit (vs for-profit: OR, 3.5; 95% CI, 1.1-10.8; P = .03) and government (vs for-profit: OR, 6.6; 95% CI, 1.6-27.2; P = .01) ownership, integrated salary models (OR, 2.6; 95% CI, 1.5-4.5; P = .001), and average (vs above-average: OR, 6.4; 95% CI, 1.4-29.6; P = .02) or below-average (vs above-average: OR, 8.4; 95% CI, 1.5-47.5; P = .02) effectiveness of care were associated with high access to Medicaid. State Medicaid expansion status was not significantly associated with high access. Conclusions and Relevance: This study identified access disparities for patients with Medicaid insurance at centers designated for high-quality care. These findings highlight gaps in cancer care for the expanding population of patients receiving Medicaid.

Access to telehealth services for colorectal cancer patients in the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic yielded rapid telehealth deployment to improve healthcare access, including for surgical patients. METHODS: We conducted a secret shopper study to assess telehealth availability for new patient and follow-up colorectal cancer care visits in a random national sample of Commission on Cancer accredited hospitals and investigated predictive facility-level factors. RESULTS: Of 397 hospitals, 302 (76%) offered telehealth for colorectal cancer patients (75% for follow-up, 42% for new patients). For new patients, NCI-designated Cancer Programs offered telehealth more frequently than Integrated Network (OR: 0.20, p = 0.01), Academic Comprehensive (OR: 0.18, p = 0.001), Comprehensive Community (OR: 0.10, p < 0.001), and Community (OR: 0.11, p < 0.001) Cancer Programs. For follow-up, above average timeliness of care hospitals offered telehealth more frequently than average hospitals (OR: 2.87, p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: We identified access disparities and predictive factors for telehealth availability for colorectal cancer care during the COVID-19 pandemic. These factors should be considered when constructing telehealth policies.

Development of a Convergent Enantioselective Synthetic Route to (-)-Myrocin G.

Myrocins are a family of antiproliferative antibiotic fungal metabolites possessing a masked electrophilic cyclopropane. Preliminary chemical reactivity studies imputed the bioactivity of these natural products to a DNA cross-linking mechanism, but this hypothesis was not confirmed by studies with native DNA. We recently reported a total synthesis of (-)-myrocin G (4), the putative active form of the metabolite myrocin C (1), that featured a carefully orchestrated tandem fragment coupling-annulation cascade. Herein, we describe the evolution of our synthetic strategy toward 4 and report the series of discoveries that prompted the design of this cascade coupling. Efforts to convert the diosphenol (-)-myrocin G (4) to the corresponding 5-hydroxy-γ-lactone isomer myrocin C (1) are also detailed. We present a preliminary evaluation of the antiproliferative activities of (-)-myrocin G (4) and related structures, as well as DNA cross-linking studies. These studies indicate that myrocins do not cross-link DNA, suggesting an alternative mode of action potentially involving a protein target.

On Essentiality and the World Health Organization's Model List of Essential Medicines.

BACKGROUND: In 1977 the World Health Organization created its first Model List of Essential Medicines-a list designed to aid countries in determining which medicines to prioritize on their National Essential Medicines Lists. In classifying drugs as "essential," the World Health Organization has historically stressed drugs' ability to meet priority health needs of populations and cost. OBJECTIVES: In this paper we trace the fluctuations in the application of cost and priority status of disease as criteria for essential medicines throughout the reports published by the WHO Expert Committee on Selection and Use of Essential Medicines since 1977. METHODS: We analyzed essential medicines lists published on the World Health Organization website since 1977 for trends in criteria concerning cost and priority status of disease. Where, available, analyzed the World Health Organization Expert Committee analysis rationalizing why certain medicines were or were not added and were or were not removed. RESULTS: The application of the criteria of cost and priority status of essential medicines has fluctuated dramatically over the years. CONCLUSIONS: The definition of essential medicines has shifted and now necessitates a new consensus on normative definitions and criteria. A more standardized and transparent set of procedures for choosing essential medicines is required.