Literature DB >> 26452570

Impact of Insurance Status on Radiation Treatment Modality Selection Among Potential Candidates for Prostate, Breast, or Gynecologic Brachytherapy.

Stephen R Grant1, Gary V Walker2, Matthew Koshy3, Simona F Shaitelman2, Ann H Klopp2, Steven J Frank2, Thomas J Pugh2, Pamela K Allen2, Usama Mahmood4.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act looks to expand both private and Medicaid insurance. To evaluate how these changes may affect the field of radiation oncology, we evaluated the association of insurance status with the use of brachytherapy in cancers for which this treatment technique is used. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 190,467 patients met the inclusion criteria, of whom 95,292 (50.0%) had breast cancer, 61,096 (32.1%) had prostate cancer, 28,194 (14.8%) had endometrial cancer, and 5885 (3.1%) had cervical cancer. A multivariate logistic regression model was used to determine the association between insurance status and receipt of brachytherapy among patients treated definitively for prostate and cervical cancer or postoperatively for breast and endometrial cancer.
RESULTS: The rates of non-Medicaid insurance were 49.9% (cervical), 85.3% (endometrial), 87.4% (breast), and 90.9% (prostate) (P<.001). In a logistic regression, patients who received radiation therapy were less likely to receive brachytherapy if they had Medicaid coverage (odds ratio [OR] 0.57, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.53-0.61, P<.001) or did not have insurance coverage (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.45-0.56, P<.001) compared with those with non-Medicaid insurance. On subset analysis, patients with Medicaid coverage or without insurance coverage were significantly less likely to receive brachytherapy than were those with non-Medicaid insurance for all 4 sites, except for patients with endometrial cancer.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite being a cost-effective treatment modality, brachytherapy is less often used in the definitive or postoperative management of cancer in patients with Medicaid coverage or without insurance. Upcoming health policy changes resulting in the expansion of private insurance and Medicaid will likely increase access to and demand for brachytherapy.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26452570     DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2015.08.036

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys        ISSN: 0360-3016            Impact factor:   7.038


  10 in total

1.  Failure to administer recommended chemotherapy: acceptable variation or cancer care quality blind spot?

Authors:  Ryan J Ellis; Cary Jo R Schlick; Joe Feinglass; Mary F Mulcahy; Al B Benson; Sheetal M Kircher; Tony D Yang; David D Odell; Karl Bilimoria; Ryan P Merkow
Journal:  BMJ Qual Saf       Date:  2019-07-31       Impact factor: 7.035

2.  Medical costs of treating breast cancer among younger Medicaid beneficiaries by stage at diagnosis.

Authors:  Justin G Trogdon; Donatus U Ekwueme; Diana Poehler; Cheryll C Thomas; Katherine Reeder-Hayes; Benjamin T Allaire
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2017-07-12       Impact factor: 4.872

3.  Disparities in the management and outcome of cervical cancer in the United States according to health insurance status.

Authors:  Thomas Churilla; Brian Egleston; Yanqun Dong; Talha Shaikh; Colin Murphy; Gina Mantia-Smaldone; Christina Chu; Stephen Rubin; Penny Anderson
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2016-03-25       Impact factor: 5.482

4.  Socioeconomic inequality and omission of adjuvant radiation therapy in high-risk, early-stage endometrial cancer.

Authors:  Leo Y Luo; Emeline M Aviki; Anna Lee; Marisa A Kollmeier; Nadeem R Abu-Rustum; C Jillian Tsai; Kaled M Alektiar
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2021-02-15       Impact factor: 5.482

5.  Insurance status and cancer treatment mediate the association between race/ethnicity and cervical cancer survival.

Authors:  Sarah C Markt; Tianyu Tang; Angel M Cronin; Ingrid T Katz; Brooke E Howitt; Neil S Horowitz; Larissa J Lee; Alexi A Wright
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-02-15       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 6.  Disparities in radiation therapy delivery: current evidence and future directions in head and neck cancer.

Authors:  Henry S Park; Roy H Decker
Journal:  Cancers Head Neck       Date:  2016-06-13

7.  Adoption of immunotherapy in the community for patients diagnosed with metastatic melanoma.

Authors:  Marieke J Krimphove; Karl H Tully; David F Friedlander; Maya Marchese; Praful Ravi; Stuart R Lipsitz; Kerry L Kilbridge; Adam S Kibel; Luis A Kluth; Patrick A Ott; Toni K Choueiri; Quoc-Dien Trinh
Journal:  J Immunother Cancer       Date:  2019-11-07       Impact factor: 13.751

8.  Development of a Prognostic Model to Identify the Suitable Definitive Radiation Therapy Candidates in de Novo Metastatic Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: A Real-World Study.

Authors:  Wang-Zhong Li; Shu-Hui Lv; Guo-Ying Liu; Hu Liang; Xiang Guo; Xing Lv; Kui-Yuan Liu; Meng-Yun Qiang; Xi Chen; Sophie Z Gu; Chang-Qing Xie; Wei-Xiong Xia; Yan-Qun Xiang
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2020-08-24       Impact factor: 8.013

9.  Impact of care disparities in radiation oncology.

Authors:  Tasneem Kaleem; Grace Li Smith; Robert C Miller
Journal:  Adv Radiat Oncol       Date:  2017-09-28

10.  Disparities in quality of cancer care: The role of health insurance and population demographics.

Authors:  Arti Parikh-Patel; Cyllene R Morris; Kenneth W Kizer
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2017-12       Impact factor: 1.817

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.