ABSTRACT
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.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To assess pain severity and interference with life in women after different types of breast cancer surgery and the demographic, treatment-related, and psychosocial variables associated with these pain outcomes. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Data are conflicting regarding pain outcomes and quality of life (QOL) among women who undergo different types of breast surgery. METHODS: Women with nonhereditary breast cancer completed the brief pain inventory before surgery and at 1, 6, 12, and 18 months postsurgery. We assessed associations between pain outcomes and CPM status and mastectomy status using multivariable repeated measures models. We assessed associations between pain outcome and QOL and decision satisfaction. RESULTS: Of 288 women (mean age 56 years, 58% non-Hispanic White), 50 had CPM, 75 had unilateral mastectomy, and 163 had BCS. Mean pain severity scores were higher at one (2.78 vs 1.9, P = 0.016) and 6 months (2.79 vs 1.96, P = 0.031) postsurgery in women who had CPM versus those who did not, but there was no difference at 12 and 18 months. Comparing mastectomy versus BCS, pain severity was higher at 1 and 12 months. There was a significant interaction between pain severity and time point for CPM ( P = 0.006), but not mastectomy status ( P = 0.069). Regardless of surgery type, Black women had higher pain severity ( P = 0.004) than White women. Higher pain interference was associated with lower QOL ( P < 0.001) and lower decision satisfaction ( P = 0.034). CONCLUSIONS: Providers should counsel women considering mastectomy about the potential for greater acute pain and its impact on overall well-being. Racial/ethnic disparities in pain exist and influence pain management in breast surgical patients.
