Simon J Craddock Lee1,2, Caitlin C Murphy1,2, David E Gerber1,2,3, Ann M Geiger4, Ethan Halm1,2,3, Rasmi G Nair1, John V Cox3, Jasmin A Tiro1,2, Celette S Skinner1,2. 1. Department of Population & Data Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center. 2. Harold C. Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center. 3. Department of Internal Medicine, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX. 4. Healthcare Delivery Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Accrual to cancer clinical trials is suboptimal. Few data exist regarding whether financial reimbursement might increase accruals. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess perceptions about reimbursement to overcome barriers to trial accrual. RESEARCH DESIGN: This was a cross-sectional survey. SUBJECTS: Oncologists identified from the American Medical Association Physician Masterfile. MEASURES: We report descriptive statistics, associations of physician characteristics with perceptions of reimbursement, domains, and subthemes of free-text comments. RESULTS: Respondents (n=1030) were mostly medical oncologists (59.4%), ages 35-54 (67%), and male (75%). Overall, 30% reported discussing trials with >25% of patients. Barriers perceived were administrative/regulatory, physician/staff time, and eligibility criteria. National Cancer Institute cooperative group participants and practice owners were more likely to endorse higher reimbursement. Respondents indicated targeted reimbursement would help improve infrastructure, but also noted potential ethical problems with reimbursement for discussion (40.7%) and accrual (85.9%). Free-text comments addressed reimbursement sources, recipients, and concerns about the real and apparent conflict of interest. CONCLUSIONS: Though concerns about a potential conflict of interest remain paramount and must be addressed in any new system of reimbursement, oncologists believe reimbursement to enhance infrastructure could help overcome barriers to trial accrual.
BACKGROUND: Accrual to cancer clinical trials is suboptimal. Few data exist regarding whether financial reimbursement might increase accruals. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess perceptions about reimbursement to overcome barriers to trial accrual. RESEARCH DESIGN: This was a cross-sectional survey. SUBJECTS: Oncologists identified from the American Medical Association Physician Masterfile. MEASURES: We report descriptive statistics, associations of physician characteristics with perceptions of reimbursement, domains, and subthemes of free-text comments. RESULTS: Respondents (n=1030) were mostly medical oncologists (59.4%), ages 35-54 (67%), and male (75%). Overall, 30% reported discussing trials with >25% of patients. Barriers perceived were administrative/regulatory, physician/staff time, and eligibility criteria. National Cancer Institute cooperative group participants and practice owners were more likely to endorse higher reimbursement. Respondents indicated targeted reimbursement would help improve infrastructure, but also noted potential ethical problems with reimbursement for discussion (40.7%) and accrual (85.9%). Free-text comments addressed reimbursement sources, recipients, and concerns about the real and apparent conflict of interest. CONCLUSIONS: Though concerns about a potential conflict of interest remain paramount and must be addressed in any new system of reimbursement, oncologists believe reimbursement to enhance infrastructure could help overcome barriers to trial accrual.
Authors: Allison R Baer; Chelsey A Kelly; Suanna S Bruinooge; Carolyn D Runowicz; Douglas W Blayney Journal: J Oncol Pract Date: 2010-04-15 Impact factor: 3.840
Authors: Peter J Neumann; Jennifer A Palmer; Eric Nadler; Chihui Fang; Peter Ubel Journal: Health Aff (Millwood) Date: 2010 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 6.301
Authors: Simon J Craddock Lee; Caitlin C Murphy; Ann M Geiger; David E Gerber; John V Cox; Rasmi Nair; Celette Sugg Skinner Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2019-06-05 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Hsien-Yeang Seow; Patrick Whelan; Mark N Levine; Kathryn Cowan; Barbara Lysakowski; Brenda Kowaleski; Anne Snider; Rebecca Y Xu; Andrew Arnold Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2012-03-26 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: M Kelsey Kirkwood; Amy Hanley; Suanna S Bruinooge; Elizabeth Garrett-Mayer; Laura A Levit; Caroline Schenkel; Jerome E Seid; Blase N Polite; Richard L Schilsky Journal: J Oncol Pract Date: 2018-06-15 Impact factor: 3.840
Authors: William F Pirl; Anna Muriel; Vivian Hwang; Alice Kornblith; Joseph Greer; Karen Donelan; Donna B Greenberg; Jennifer Temel; Lidia Schapira Journal: J Support Oncol Date: 2007 Nov-Dec