Is the QCI framework suited for monitoring outcomes and costs in a teaching hospital using value-based healthcare principles? A retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: The objective is to develop a pragmatic framework, based on value-based healthcare principles, to monitor health outcomes per unit costs on an institutional level. Subsequently, we investigated the association between health outcomes and healthcare utilisation costs. DESIGN: This is a retrospective cohort study. SETTING: A teaching hospital in Rotterdam, The Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: The study was performed in two use cases. The bariatric population contained 856 patients of which 639 were diagnosed with morbid obesity body mass index (BMI) <45 and 217 were diagnosed with morbid obesity BMI ≥45. The breast cancer population contained 663 patients of which 455 received a lumpectomy and 208 a mastectomy. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The quality cost indicator (QCI) was the primary measures and was defined asQCI = (resulting outcome * 100)/average total costs (per thousand Euros)where average total costs entail all healthcare utilisation costs with regard to the treatment of the primary diagnosis and follow-up care. Resulting outcome is the number of patients achieving textbook outcome (passing all health outcome indicators) divided by the total number of patients included in the care path. RESULTS: The breast cancer and bariatric population had the highest resulting outcome values in 2020 Q4, 0.93 and 0.73, respectively. The average total costs of the bariatric population remained stable (avg, €8833.55, min €8494.32, max €9164.26). The breast cancer population showed higher variance in costs (avg, €12 735.31 min €12 188.83, max €13 695.58). QCI values of both populations showed similar variance (0.3 and 0.8). Failing health outcome indicators was significantly related to higher hospital-based costs of care in both populations (p <0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The QCI framework is effective for monitoring changes in average total costs and relevant health outcomes on an institutional level. Health outcomes are associated with hospital-based costs of care.

One-stop autologous breast reconstruction: A safe and effective cost-saving pathway.

INTRODUCTION: Patients undergoing autologous breast reconstruction usually require further operations as part of their reconstructive journey. This involves contralateral breast symmetrization and nipple-areola complex (NAC) reconstruction. Restrained access to elective operating space led us to implement a one-stop breast reconstruction pathway. METHODS: Patients undergoing contemporaneous contralateral breast symmetrization and immediate NAC reconstruction with free nipple grafts between July 2020 and June 2021 were identified. A retrospective review of our prospectively maintained database was conducted, to retrieve surgical notes, postoperative complications, and length of inpatient stay. A cost analysis was performed considering savings from contralateral symmetrization. RESULTS: A total of 50 eligible cases were identified, which had unilateral one-stop breast reconstructions. Complication rates and length of stay were not affected by this approach, with only one free flap being lost for this cohort. This approach resulted in £181,000 being saved for our service over a calendar year. DISCUSSION: A one-stop breast reconstruction pathway has proven to be safe and effective in our unit. During these uncertain times, it has streamlined the management of eligible patients, while releasing capacity for other elective operations. Patients avoid having to wait for secondary procedures, finishing their reconstructive pathway earlier. We plan to continue providing this service which has shown to be beneficial clinically and financially.

Contemporary Analysis of Reexcision and Conversion to Mastectomy Rates and Associated Healthcare Costs for Women Undergoing Breast-Conserving Surgery.

PURPOSE: This study was designed to provide a comprehensive and up-to-date understanding of population-level reoperation rates and incremental healthcare costs associated with reoperation for patients who underwent breast-conserving surgery (BCS). METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study using Merative™ MarketScan® commercial insurance data and Medicare 5% fee-for-service claims data. The study included females aged 18-64 years in the commercial cohort and females aged 18 years and older in the Medicare cohort, who underwent initial BCS for breast cancer in 2017-2019. Reoperation rates within a year of the initial BCS and overall 1-year healthcare costs stratified by reoperation status were measured. RESULTS: The commercial cohort included 17,129 women with a median age of 55 (interquartile range [IQR] 49-59) years, and the Medicare cohort included 6977 women with a median age of 73 (IQR 69-78) years. Overall reoperation rates were 21.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] 20.5-21.8%) for the commercial cohort and 14.9% (95% CI 14.1-15.7%) for the Medicare cohort. In both cohorts, reoperation rates decreased as age increased, and conversion to mastectomy was more prevalent among younger women in the commercial cohort. The mean healthcare costs during 1 year of follow-up from the initial BCS were $95,165 for the commercial cohort and $36,313 for the Medicare cohort. Reoperations were associated with 24% higher costs in both the commercial and Medicare cohorts, which translated into $21,607 and $8559 incremental costs, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The rates of reoperation after BCS have remained high and have contributed to increased healthcare costs. Continuing efforts to reduce reoperation need more attention.

Exercise versus usual care after non-reconstructive breast cancer surgery (UK PROSPER): multicentre randomised controlled trial and economic evaluation.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether a structured exercise programme improved functional and health related quality of life outcomes compared with usual care for women at high risk of upper limb disability after breast cancer surgery. DESIGN: Multicentre, pragmatic, superiority, randomised controlled trial with economic evaluation. SETTING: 17 UK National Health Service cancer centres. PARTICIPANTS: 392 women undergoing breast cancer surgery, at risk of postoperative upper limb morbidity, randomised (1:1) to usual care with structured exercise (n=196) or usual care alone (n=196). INTERVENTIONS: Usual care (information leaflets) only or usual care plus a physiotherapy led exercise programme, incorporating stretching, strengthening, physical activity, and behavioural change techniques to support adherence to exercise, introduced at 7-10 days postoperatively, with two further appointments at one and three months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Disability of Arm, Hand and Shoulder (DASH) questionnaire at 12 months, analysed by intention to treat. Secondary outcomes included DASH subscales, pain, complications, health related quality of life, and resource use, from a health and personal social services perspective. RESULTS: Between 26 January 2016 and 31 July 2017, 951 patients were screened and 392 (mean age 58.1 years) were randomly allocated, with 382 (97%) eligible for intention to treat analysis. 181 (95%) of 191 participants allocated to exercise attended at least one appointment. Upper limb function improved after exercise compared with usual care (mean DASH 16.3 (SD 17.6) for exercise (n=132); 23.7 (22.9) usual care (n=138); adjusted mean difference 7.81, 95% confidence interval 3.17 to 12.44; P=0.001). Secondary outcomes favoured exercise over usual care, with lower pain intensity at 12 months (adjusted mean difference on numerical rating scale -0.68, -1.23 to -0.12; P=0.02) and fewer arm disability symptoms at 12 months (adjusted mean difference on Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast+4 (FACT-B+4) -2.02, -3.11 to -0.93; P=0.001). No increase in complications, lymphoedema, or adverse events was noted in participants allocated to exercise. Exercise accrued lower costs per patient (on average -£387 (€457; $533) (95% confidence interval -£2491 to £1718; 2015 pricing) and was cost effective compared with usual care. CONCLUSIONS: The PROSPER exercise programme was clinically effective and cost effective and reduced upper limb disability one year after breast cancer treatment in patients at risk of treatment related postoperative complications. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN35358984.

Factors Associated With State-Specific Medicaid Expansion and Receipt of Autologous Breast Reconstruction Among Patients Undergoing Mastectomy.

Importance: Despite demonstrated psychosocial benefits, autologous breast reconstruction remains underutilized. An analysis of the association between Medicaid expansion and autologous breast reconstruction has yet to be performed. Objective: To compare autologous breast reconstruction rates and determine the association between Medicaid expansion and breast reconstruction. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective cross-sectional study was performed using the State Inpatient Database from January 1, 2012, through September 30, 2015, and included 51 340 patients. Patients were identified using the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, codes for breast cancer, mastectomy, and autologous breast reconstruction. Data from states that expanded Medicaid (New Jersey, New York, and Washington) were compared with states that did not expand Medicaid (Florida, North Carolina, and Wisconsin). Data were analyzed from June 1, 2020, through February 28, 2021. Exposures: The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act's Medicaid expansion was implemented in 2014; the preexpansion period ranged from 2012 to 2013 (2 years), whereas the postexpansion period ranged from 2014 to 2015 quarter 3 (1.75 years). Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes included use of autologous breast reconstruction before and after expansion. Independent covariates included patient demographics, comorbidities, and state of residence. Results: Among 45 850 patients who underwent mastectomy and 9215 patients who received autologous breast reconstruction, 36 777 (67%) were White and 32 205 (59%) had private insurance. The use of immediate or delayed autologous reconstruction increased from 18.1% (4951 of 27 290) to 23.0% (4264 of 18 560) throughout the study period. Compared with 2012, the odds of reconstruction were 64% higher in 2015 (odds ratio [OR], 1.64; 95% CI, 1.48-1.80; P < .001). African American (OR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.33-1.55; P < .001) and Hispanic (OR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.31-1.60; P < .001) patients had higher odds of reconstruction compared with White patients regardless of state of residence. However, Medicaid expansion was associated with a 28% decrease in the odds of reconstruction (OR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.61-0.87; P < .001) for African American patients, a 40% decrease (OR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.50-0.74; P < .001) for Hispanic patients, and 20% decrease (OR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.67-0.96; P = .01) for patients with Asian, Native American, or other minority race/ethnicity. Medicaid expansion was not associated with changes in the odds of reconstruction for White patients. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study, although the odds of receiving autologous breast reconstruction increased annually, Medicaid expansion was associated with decreased odds of reconstruction for African American patients, Hispanic patients, and other patients of color.

Changes in Korean National Healthcare Insurance Policy and Breast Cancer Surgery Trend in Korea.

BACKGROUND: Since April 2015, the Korean National Health Insurance (NHI) has reimbursed breast cancer patients, approximately 50% of the cost of the breast reconstruction (BR) procedure. We aimed to investigate NHI reimbursement policy influence on the rate of immediate BR (IBR) following total mastectomy (TM). METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed breast cancer data between April 2011 and June 2016. We divided patients who underwent IBR following TM for primary breast cancer into "uninsured" and "insured" groups using their NHI statuses at the time of surgery. Univariate analyses determined the insurance influence on the decision to undergo IBR. RESULTS: Of 2,897 breast cancer patients, fewer uninsured patients (n = 625) underwent IBR compared with those insured (n = 325) (30.0% vs. 39.8%, P < 0.001). Uninsured patients were younger than those insured (median age [range], 43 [38-48] vs. 45 [40-50] years; P < 0.001). Pathologic breast cancer stage did not differ between the groups (P = 0.383). More insured patients underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy (P = 0.011), adjuvant radiotherapy (P < 0.001), and IBR with tissue expander insertion (P = 0.005) compared with those uninsured. CONCLUSION: IBR rate in patients undergoing TM increased after NHI reimbursement.

Relationship Between Financial Toxicity and Surgical Treatment for Early-Stage Breast Cancer: A Propensity Score-Matched Comparison of Breast-Conserving Therapy and Mastectomy.

BACKGROUND: Financial toxicity (FT) can lead to decreased quality of life and poor treatment outcomes. However, there is limited published data on the extent to which the various surgical treatment approaches for early-stage breast cancer are determinants for FT. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a single-institution cross-sectional survey of adult female patients with stage 0 to II breast cancer undergoing unilateral breast-conserving therapy or unilateral mastectomy. FT was measured using the Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity (COST) survey. Propensity matching was performed to optimize comparability of study groups. A multivariate regression model was used to identify factors associated with worsening FT as a robustness check. Our secondary end point was prevalence of coping strategies associated with cost of cancer care. RESULTS: Among 294 patients who met inclusion criteria, 203 underwent breast-conserving therapy and 91 received mastectomy. We generated 72 total matched pairs and noted no differences in demographic and socioeconomic characteristics. Of these, 55 pairs had complete COST information, which was comparable on adjusted analysis (26.6 vs 24.7; p = 0.481). High annual income (ß = 4.83; p < 0.001) and supplemental insurance (ß = 5.37; p < 0.001) were significantly associated with higher COST scores, while change in employment status (ß = -4.81; p < 0.001) correlated significantly with lower COST scores. No significant differences were observed in coping strategies. CONCLUSIONS: Choice of BCT or mastectomy was not associated with a differential risk for FT in early-stage cancer. Decisions on ablative approach should be made based on patient preferences and disease-specific criteria. Transparent counseling on FT for high-risk populations promotes patient-centricity.

Cost-Effectiveness Modeling of Surgery Plus Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy Versus Primary Endocrine Therapy Alone in UK Women Aged 70 and Over With Early Breast Cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Approximately 20% of UK women aged 70+ with early breast cancer receive primary endocrine therapy (PET) instead of surgery. PET reduces surgical morbidity but with some survival decrement. To complement and utilize a treatment dependent prognostic model, we investigated the cost-effectiveness of surgery plus adjuvant therapies versus PET for women with varying health and fitness, identifying subgroups for which each treatment is cost-effective. METHODS: Survival outcomes from a statistical model, and published data on recurrence, were combined with data from a large, multicenter, prospective cohort study of over 3400 UK women aged 70+ with early breast cancer and median 52-month follow-up, to populate a probabilistic economic model. This model evaluated the cost-effectiveness of surgery plus adjuvant therapies relative to PET for 24 illustrative subgroups: Age {70, 80, 90} × Nodal status {FALSE (F), TRUE (T)} × Comorbidity score {0, 1, 2, 3+}. RESULTS: For a 70-year-old with no lymph node involvement and no comorbidities (70, F, 0), surgery plus adjuvant therapies was cheaper and more effective than PET. For other subgroups, surgery plus adjuvant therapies was more effective but more expensive. Surgery plus adjuvant therapies was not cost-effective for 4 of the 24 subgroups: (90, F, 2), (90, F, 3), (90, T, 2), (90, T, 3). CONCLUSION: From a UK perspective, surgery plus adjuvant therapies is clinically effective and cost-effective for most women aged 70+ with early breast cancer. Cost-effectiveness reduces with age and comorbidities, and for women over 90 with multiple comorbidities, there is little cost benefit and a negative impact on quality of life.

Cost-effectiveness of different surgical treatment approaches for early breast cancer: a retrospective matched cohort study from China.

BACKGROUND: Both breast-conserving surgery and breast reconstruction surgery are less popular in China, although they can improve patients' quality of life. The main reason comes from the economy. There is currently no economic evaluation of different surgical treatment options for early breast cancer. Our study aims to assess the economic impact and long-term cost-effectiveness of different surgical treatments for early breast cancer. The surgical approaches are including mastectomy (MAST), breast-conserving therapy (BCT), and mastectomy with reconstruction (MAST+RECON). METHODS: Based on demographic data, disease-related information and other treatments, we applied propensity score matching (PSM) to perform 1: 1 matching among patients who underwent these three types of surgery in the tertiary academic medical center from 2011 to 2017 to obtain a balanced sample of covariates between groups. A Markov model was established. Clinical data and cost data were obtained from the medical records. Health utility values were derived from clinical investigations. Strategies were compared using an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). RESULTS: After PSM, there were 205 cases in each group. In the matched data set, the distribution of covariates was fully balanced. The total cost of MAST, MAST+RECON and BCT was $37,392.84, $70,556.03 and $82,330.97, respectively. The quality-adjusted life year (QALYs) were 17.11, 18.40 and 20.20, respectively. Compared with MAST, MAST+RECON and BCT have an ICER of $25,707.90/QALY and $14,543.08/QALY, respectively. The ICER of BCT vs. MAST was less than the threshold of $27,931.04. The reliability and stability of the results were confirmed by Monte Carlo simulation and sensitivity analysis. CONCLUSIONS: We believe that in the context of the limited resources in China, after comparing the three surgical approaches, BCT is the more cost-effective and preferred solution.

The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Surgical Management of Breast Cancer: Global Trends and Future Perspectives.

INTRODUCTION: The rapid spread of COVID-19 across the globe is forcing surgical oncologists to change their daily practice. We sought to evaluate how breast surgeons are adapting their surgical activity to limit viral spread and spare hospital resources. METHODS: A panel of 12 breast surgeons from the most affected regions of the world convened a virtual meeting on April 7, 2020, to discuss the changes in their local surgical practice during the COVID-19 pandemic. Similarly, a Web-based poll based was created to evaluate changes in surgical practice among breast surgeons from several countries. RESULTS: The virtual meeting showed that distinct countries and regions were experiencing different phases of the pandemic. Surgical priority was given to patients with aggressive disease not candidate for primary systemic therapy, those with progressive disease under neoadjuvant systemic therapy, and patients who have finished neoadjuvant therapy. One hundred breast surgeons filled out the poll. The trend showed reductions in operating room schedules, indications for surgery, and consultations, with an increasingly restrictive approach to elective surgery with worsening of the pandemic. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 emergency should not compromise treatment of a potentially lethal disease such as breast cancer. Our results reveal that physicians are instinctively reluctant to abandon conventional standards of care when possible. However, as the situation deteriorates, alternative strategies of de-escalation are being adopted. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This study aimed to characterize how the COVID-19 pandemic is affecting breast cancer surgery and which strategies are being adopted to cope with the situation.

Correlation Between Financial Toxicity, Quality of Life, and Patient Satisfaction in an Insured Population of Breast Cancer Surgical Patients: A Single-Institution Retrospective Study.

BACKGROUND: The relationship between treatment-related, cost-associated distress "financial toxicity" (FT) and quality-of life (QOL) in breast cancer patients remains poorly characterized. This study leverages validated patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) to analyze the association between FT and QOL and satisfaction among women undergoing ablative breast cancer surgery. STUDY DESIGN: This is a single-institution cross-sectional survey of all female breast cancer patients (>18 years old) who underwent lumpectomy or mastectomy between January 2018 and June 2019. FT was measured via the 11-item COmprehensive Score for financial Toxicity (COST) instrument. The BREAST-Q and SF-12 were used to asses condition-specific and global QOL, respectively. Responses were linked with demographic and clinical data. Pearson correlation coefficient and multivariable regression were used to examine associations. RESULTS: Our analytical sample consisted of 532 patients; mean age 58, mostly white (76.7%), employed (63.7%), married/committed (73.7%), with 64.3% undergoing reconstruction. Median household income was $80,000 to $120,000/year, and mean COST score was 28.0. After multivariable adjustment, a positive relationship for all outcomes was noted; lower COST (greater cost-associated distress) was associated with lower BREAST-Q and SF-12 scores. This relationship was strongest for BREAST-Q psychosocial well-being, for which we observed a 0.89 (95% CI 0.76-1.03) change per unit change in COST score. CONCLUSIONS: Financial toxicity captured in this study correlates with statistically significant and clinically important differences in BREAST-Q psychosocial well-being, patient satisfaction with reconstructed breasts, and SF-12 global mental and physical quality of life. Treatment costs should be included in the shared decision-making for breast cancer surgery. Future prospective outcomes research should integrate COST.

Impact of Body Mass Index on Outcomes After Breast Cancer Surgery: Nationwide Inpatient Database Study in Japan.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies have shown better postoperative outcomes in mildly obese patients, a phenomenon called the obesity paradox. In the field of breast cancer surgery, however, previous studies have only shown an association between obesity and worse postoperative outcomes using multivariable analysis; the obesity paradox has not been investigated in patients undergoing breast cancer surgery. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We identified patients who underwent mastectomy for stage 0 to III breast cancer from July 2010 to March 2017 using a Japanese nationwide inpatient database. We used restricted cubic spline analyses to investigate potential nonlinear associations between body mass index (BMI) and outcomes (postoperative complications, 30-day readmission, duration of anesthesia, length of hospital stay, and hospitalization costs). We also performed multivariable regression analyses for the outcomes. RESULTS: Among 239,108 eligible patients, 25.6% had a BMI of > 25.0 kg/m2. BMI showed U-shaped associations with postoperative complications, length of stay, and hospitalization costs, and a linear association with duration of anesthesia. The proportion of postoperative complications was lowest at a BMI of around 22.0 kg/m2, while the length of stay was shortest and total costs were lowest at a BMI of around 20.0 kg/m2. Compared to a BMI of 22.0 kg/m2, a BMI of > 30.0 kg/m2 was significantly associated with greater postoperative complications, 30-day readmission, duration of anesthesia, length of stay, and hospitalization costs. CONCLUSION: Restricted cubic spline analyses displayed U-shaped associations between BMI and in-hospital complications, length of stay, and hospitalization costs, but none of the associations showed the obesity paradox.

Association between variations in the number of hospital beds and inpatient chemo/radiotherapy for breast cancer: a study using a large claim database.

OBJECTIVE: Chemo/radiotherapy for breast cancer patients does not require hospitalisation in most cases. We investigated the relationship between the proportion of hospitalisation for chemo/radiotherapy over total hospitalisation and the number of hospital beds per capita among breast cancer cases. DESIGN: A retrospective observational study. SETTING: Hospitals in Japan. PARTICIPANTS: In total, 561,165 records of hospitalisation of breast cancer cases were extracted from the Japanese Diagnosis Procedure Combination database from April 2012 to March 2016.Intervention(s) and main outcome measure(s): A multivariable beta regression model accounting for the clustering effect within each prefecture was used to examine the relationship between the number of hospital beds per capita in each prefecture and the proportion of hospitalisation for inpatient chemo/radiotherapy treatment or the number of surgical operations for breast cancer patients in each prefecture. RESULTS: The proportion of hospitalisation for inpatient chemo/radiotherapy treatment varied from 2.6% to 61.8% in 2016. The logit proportion of hospitalisation for inpatient chemo/radiotherapy treatment was significantly higher for every additional hospital bed per capita (0.0027, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.0014-0.0040). In contrast, no significant relationship was observed between the number of surgical operations for breast cancer per capita and the number of hospital beds per capita. CONCLUSIONS: We found that a higher number of regional hospital beds were associated with a higher proportion of hospitalisation for chemo/radiotherapy treatment, suggesting that inpatient chemo/radiotherapy may be a provider-induced practice.

Canadian cost-effectiveness model of BRCA-driven surgical prevention of breast/ovarian cancers compared to treatment if cancer develops.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the cost effectiveness from a Canadian perspective of index patient germline BRCA testing and then, if positive, family members with subsequent risk-reducing surgery (RRS) in as yet unaffected mutation carriers compared with no testing and treatment of cancer when it develops. METHODS: A patient level simulation was developed comparing outcomes between two groups using Canadian data. Group 1: no mutation testing with treatment if cancer developed. Group 2: cascade testing (index patient BRCA tested and first-/second-degree relatives tested if index patient/first-degree relative is positive) with RRS in carriers. End points were the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and budget impact. RESULTS: There were 29,102 index patients: 2,786 ovarian cancer and 26,316 breast cancer (BC). Using the base-case assumption of 44 percent and 21 percent of women with a BRCA mutation receiving risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and risk-reducing mastectomy, respectively, testing was cost effective versus no testing and treatment on cancer development, with an ICER of CAD 14,942 (USD 10,555) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), 127 and 104 fewer cases of ovarian and BC, respectively, and twenty-one fewer all-cause deaths. Testing remained cost effective versus no testing at the commonly accepted North American threshold of approximately CAD 100,000 (or USD 100,000) per QALY gained in all scenario analyses, and cost effectiveness improved as RRS uptake rates increased. CONCLUSIONS: Prevention via testing and RRS is cost effective at current RRS uptake rates; however, optimization of uptake rates and RRS will increase cost effectiveness and can provide cost savings.

Financial toxicity and its associated patient and cancer factors among women with breast cancer: a single-center analysis of low-middle income region in China.

PURPOSE: To assess the financial toxicity (FT) and to investigate patients and cancer characteristic that associated with it in patients admitted in a tertiary hospital in central China. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study of 166 patients from 188 with stage 0-III women breast cancer admitted in Bethune hospital in Taiyuan, Shanxi province during January-May 2019. FT was self-reported using of financial Toxicity Comprehensive Rating Scale (COST-FACIT). Patients' sociodemographic factors, clinical examination, and cancer treatment were collected from questionnaire and hospital record. The financial concern and coping strategy was self-reported. Factors associated with FT were identified using linear regression analysis. RESULTS: Of the 166 completed the survey, the COST score ranged 0-40 with a mean of 21.2 (median 22.5, standard deviation 8.1). On multivariate linear regression analysis, older age (ß coefficient: 0.20, 95% CI 0.11-0.29, p < 0.001), higher household income (ß coefficient: 3000-5000 Yuan: 7.88, 95% CI 4.74-11.01, p < 0.001; ≥ 5000 Yuan: 12.81, 95% CI 9.54-16.08, p < 0.001) were positively associated with COST scores. Advanced cancer stage was the strongest predictor of FT among the cancer characteristics (ß coefficient: - 4.52, 95% CI - 7.13-1.92, p = 0.001). To cope with the FT, 131 (78.8%) patients decreased non-medical expenses, and 56 (33.7%) reduced or quitted treatment. CONCLUSIONS: FT was significantly associated with patient's age, income, and cancer stage. Women having financial concerns after diagnosis were more likely to reduce their non-medical expenses and even quit treatments. Clinicians should take into account the FT levels in all patients and work out appropriate treatment strategies for optimal clinical outcome.

Robotic versus conventional nipple sparing mastectomy and immediate gel implant breast reconstruction in the management of breast cancer- A case control comparison study with analysis of clinical outcome, medical cost, and patient-reported cosmetic results.

BACKGROUND: Robotic nipple sparing mastectomy (R-NSM), which uses the da Vinci surgical platform, could perform NSM and immediate breast reconstruction through a small and inconspicuous extra-mammary axillary or lateral chest incision. R-NSM was reported with extremely low nipple areolar complex (NAC) necrosis rate, good cosmetic results, and high patient satisfaction. However, there was little evidence available comparing the effectiveness and safety of R-NSM and conventional NSM (C-NSM) in the management of breast cancer. METHODS: A case control comparison study was conducted for patients with breast cancer who underwent R-NSM or C-NSM with immediate gel implant breast reconstruction (IGBR) from July 2011 to September 2019 at a single institution to compare the clinical outcomes, patient-reported esthetic results, and medical cost. RESULTS: According to the study design, 54 procedures of R-NSM were compared with 62 procedures of C-NSM in the surgical management of breast cancer combined with IGBR. Compared with C-NSM, R-NSM was associated with higher overall satisfaction (92% excellent and 8% good versus 75.6% excellent and 24.4% good, P = 0.046), and wound/scar related outcome in patient-reported esthetic results. The NAC ischemia/necrosis risk, overall complication rate, and blood loss were not significantly different between R-NSM and C-NSM groups. However, longer operation time and higher overall medical cost (10,877 ±â€¯796 versus 5,702 ±â€¯661 US Dollars, P<0.01) was observed in R-NSM group. CONCLUSION: Compared with C-NSM, R-NSM showed comparable clinical outcomes and favorable patients' satisfaction with the esthetic results, but at the price of longer operation time and higher cost.

An economic analysis of prophylactic lymphovenous anastomosis among breast cancer patients receiving mastectomy with axillary lymph node dissection.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Prophylactic lymphovenous anastomosis (LVA) has been shown to decrease the incidence of postoperative lymphedema among patients receiving mastectomy with axillary lymph node dissection (ALND). However, the economic impact of this intervention on overall healthcare costs has not been adequately studied and insurance reimbursement for lymphedema treatment is limited resulting in substantial out-of-pocket patient expenses. METHODS: We performed a cost-minimization decision analysis from the societal perspective to assess two different patient scenarios: (a) mastectomy with ALND alone, (b) mastectomy with ALND and prophylactic LVA. RESULTS: The annual cost of lymphedema-related care is estimated to be $5,691.88 ($3,160.52 direct, $2,531.36 indirect). If all patients undergoing mastectomy with ALND undergo prophylactic LVA, the average expected lifetime cost per patient in the entire population (whether or not they develop lymphedema) is approximately $6,295.61, compared to $13,942.26 if no patients in the same population receive prophylactic LVA. CONCLUSIONS: Prophylactic LVA is economically preferred over mastectomy and ALND alone from a cost minimization perspective, and results in an average of $7,646.65 (45.2%) cost saving per patient over the course of their lifetime.

Impact of Physician Payments on Microvascular Breast Reconstruction: An All-Payer Claim Database Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Rates of autologous breast reconstruction are stagnant compared with prosthetic techniques. Insufficient physician payment for microsurgical autologous breast reconstruction is one possible explanation. The payment difference between governmental and commercial payers creates a natural experiment to evaluate its impact on method of reconstruction. This study assessed the influence of physician payment differences for microsurgical autologous breast reconstruction and implants by insurance type on the likelihood of undergoing microsurgical reconstruction. METHODS: The Massachusetts All-Payer Claims Database was queried for women undergoing immediate autologous or implant breast reconstruction from 2010 to 2014. Univariate analyses compared demographic and clinical characteristics between different reconstructive approaches. Logistic regression explored the relative impact of insurance type and physician payments on breast reconstruction modality. RESULTS: Of the women in this study, 82.7 percent had commercial and 17.3 percent had governmental insurance. Implants were performed in 80 percent of women, whereas 20 percent underwent microsurgical autologous reconstruction. Women with Medicaid versus commercial insurance were less likely to undergo microsurgical reconstruction (16.4 percent versus 20.3 percent; p = 0.063). Commercial insurance, older age, and obesity independently increased the odds of microsurgical reconstruction (p < 0.01). When comparing median physician payments, governmental payers reimbursed 78 percent and 63 percent less than commercial payers for microsurgical reconstruction ($1831 versus $8435) and implants ($1249 versus $3359, respectively). Stratified analysis demonstrated that as physician payment increased, the likelihood of undergoing microsurgical reconstruction increased, independent of insurance type (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Women with governmental insurance had lower odds of undergoing microsurgical autologous breast reconstruction compared with commercial payers. Regardless of payer, greater reimbursement for microsurgical reconstruction increased the likelihood of microsurgical reconstruction. Current microsurgical autologous breast reconstruction reimbursements may not be commensurate with physician effort when compared to prosthetic techniques. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Risk, II.

Timeliness of Treatment Initiation in Newly Diagnosed Patients With Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based timeliness benchmarks have been established to assess quality of breast cancer care, as delays in treatment are associated with poor clinical outcomes. However, few studies have evaluated how current breast cancer care meets these benchmarks and what factors may delay the timely initiation of treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Demographic and disease characteristics of 377 newly diagnosed patients with breast cancer who initiated treatment at Tufts Medical Center (2009-2015) were extracted from electronic medical records. Time from diagnosis to initial surgery and time from diagnosis to initiation of hormone therapy were estimated with Kaplan-Meier curves. Multivariable regression analysis was used to identify factors associated with treatment delays. Thematic analysis was performed to categorize reasons for delay. RESULTS: Of 319 patients who had surgery recommended as the first treatment, 248 (78%) met the 45-day benchmark (median, 28 days; 25th-75th %, 19-43). After adjusting for potential confounders, multivariable regression analysis revealed that negative hormone receptor status (odds ratio, 3.48; 95% confidence interval, 1.44-8.43) and mastectomy (odds ratio, 4.07; 95% confidence interval, 2.10-8.06) were significantly associated with delays in surgery. Delays were mostly owing to clinical complexity or logistical/financial reasons. Of 241 patients eligible for hormone therapy initiation, 232 (96%) met the 1-year benchmark (median, 147 days; 25th-75th %, 79-217). CONCLUSION: Most patients met timeliness guidelines for surgery and initiation of hormone therapy, although risk factors for delay were identified. Knowledge of reasons for breast cancer treatment delay, including clinical complexity and logistical/financial issues, may allow targeting interventions for patients at greatest risk of care delays.

Income disparities in needle biopsy patients prior to breast cancer surgery across physician peer groups.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate income disparities in receipt of needle biopsy among Medicare beneficiaries and describe the magnitude of this variation across physician peer groups. METHODS: The Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database was queried from 2007-2009. Physician peer groups were constructed. The magnitude of income disparities and the patient-level and physician peer group-level effects were assessed. RESULTS: Among 9770 patients, 65.4% received needle biopsy. Patients with low income (median area-level household income < $33K) were less likely to receive needle biopsy (58.5%) compared to patients with high income (≥ $50K) (68.6%; adjusted odds ratio 0.77; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.65-0.91). Needle biopsy varied substantially across physician peer groups (interquartile range 43.4-81.9%). The magnitude of the disparity ranged from an odds ratio (OR) of 0.50 (95% CI 0.23-1.07) for low vs. high income patients to 1.27 (95% CI 0.60-2.68). The effect of being treated by a physician peer group that treated mostly low-income patients on receipt of needle biopsy was nearly three times the effect of being a low-income patient. CONCLUSIONS: Needle biopsy continues to be underused and disparities by income exist. The magnitude of this disparity varies substantially across physician peer groups, suggesting that further work is needed to improve quality and reduce inequities.