Patient navigation for underserved patients diagnosed with breast cancer

The elimination of cancer disparities is critically important for lessening the burden of breast cancer (BC). Patient navigator programs (PNPs) have been shown to improve rates of BC screening in underserved communities, but there is a dearth of evidence regarding their benefits after the actual diagnosis of BC. We retrospectively examined sociodemographic characteristics, disease characteristics, and concordance to quality measures (QMs) of BC care among women participating in a PNP that services disadvantaged minority communities in the greater Boston area. Of the 186 PNP patients diagnosed with BC in 2001-2011 in three neighborhood community health centers, treatment data was available for 158 (85%) and race and disease stage information was available for 149 (80%). Regarding stage, 25% were diagnosed with in situ cancer, 32% had stage 1, 25% had stage 2, 13% had stage 3, and 5% had stage 4 BC. Guideline-indicated care was received by 70 of 74 patients (95%) for the hormonal therapy QM, 15 of 17 (88%) patients for the chemotherapy QM, and 65 of 71 (92%) patients for the radiation QM, all similar to published concordance rates at elite National Comprehensive Cancer Network institutions. These findings suggest that PNPs may facilitate evidence-based quality care for vulnerable populations. Future research should prospectively analyze quality metrics to assess measures to improve the process and outcomes of patient navigation in diverse underserved settings, compared with control non-navigated populations.     

Effects of an outreach and internal navigation program on breast cancer diagnosis in an urban cancer center with a large African-American population

BACKGROUND: Compared with white women, African-American (AA) women who are diagnosed with breast cancer experience an excess in mortality. To improve outcomes, the authors implemented community education and outreach initiatives in their cancer center, at affiliated primary care sites, and in the surrounding communities. They then assessed the effectiveness of these outreach initiatives and internal patient navigation on stage of diagnosis. METHODS: This cross-sectional study was an analysis of all women with breast cancer who were diagnosed and/or treated in the years from 2001 through 2004. The outreach initiatives were implemented in 2001; 125 trained Community Health Advocates (CHAs) provided educational programs to the community, and Patient Navigators communicated directly with patients to encourage screening, diagnostic procedures, and treatment. RESULTS: In total, 487 patients were diagnosed/treated from 2001 through 2004. Since 2001, there were 1148 community interventions by CHAs with an estimated program attendance of >10,000 participants. In the interval from 2001 through 2004, the proportion of stage 0 (in situ) breast cancers increased from 12.4% (n = 14) to 25.8% (n = 33; P < .005), and there was a decline in stage IV invasive breast cancers from 16.8% (n = 19) to 9.4% (n = 12; P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: The outreach initiatives and internal patient navigation appear to have improved stage at diagnosis. To determine whether specific patients presented earlier as a result of specific community outreach initiatives, prospective work is underway to measure the effects of these interventions on potential stage migration. Similarly, prospective data are being collected to determine whether Patient Navigators influence treatment and appointment adherence as well as the underlying reasons for barriers to specific interventions in this underserved minority population.     

Disparities in cancer screening in individuals with a family history of breast or colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND:

Understanding racial/ethnic disparities in cancer screening by family history risk could identify critical opportunities for patient and provider interventions tailored to specific racial/ethnic groups. The authors evaluated whether breast cancer (BC) and colorectal cancer (CRC) disparities varied by family history risk using a large, multiethnic population‐based survey.

METHODS:

By using the 2005 California Health Interview Survey, BC and CRC screening were evaluated separately with weighted multivariate regression analyses, and stratified by family history risk. Screening was defined for BC as mammogram within the past 2 years for women aged 40 to 64 years; for CRC, screening was defined as annual fecal occult blood test, sigmoidoscopy within the past 5 years, or colonoscopy within the past 10 years for adults aged 50 to 64 years.

RESULTS:

The authors found no significant BC screening disparities by race/ethnicity or income in the family history risk groups. Racial/ethnic disparities were more evident in CRC screening, and the Latino‐white gap widened among individuals with family history risk. Among adults with a family history for CRC, the magnitude of the Latino‐white difference in CRC screening (odds ratio [OR], 0.28; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.11‐0.60) was more substantial than that for individuals with no family history (OR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.59‐0.92).

CONCLUSIONS:

Knowledge of their family history widened the Latino‐white gap in CRC screening among adults. More aggressive interventions that enhance the communication between Latinos and their physicians about family history and cancer risk could reduce the substantial Latino‐white screening disparity in Latinos most susceptible to CRC. Cancer 2011;. © 2011 American Cancer Society.     

Untreated colorectal cancer in a community hospital

The tumor registry of a community hospital has been reviewed, and 60 patients with untreated colon and rectal cancer have been identified. Thirty-four patients were black and 26 patients were white. Sixty-five percent of black patients had specified colonic lesions primarily distributed in the right colon and proximal to the splenic flexure. Sixty-three percent of white patients had specified lesions localized to the sigmoid colon. The patients had disease in local, regional, and disseminated stages, and lethality was associated with all stages. Forty-eight percent of patients expired in less than 30 days after presenting to the hospital, and two-thirds expired between 1 and 2 months of presentation. Only two patients survived more than 1 year. These data suggest that untreated colorectal cancer will be nearly uniformly fatal early in all patients who go untreated.     

Cost analysis of a patient navigation system to increase screening colonoscopy adherence among urban minorities

BACKGROUND:

Patient navigation (PN) is being used increasingly to help patients complete screening colonoscopy (SC) to prevent colorectal cancer. At their large, urban academic medical center with an open‐access endoscopy system, the authors previously demonstrated that PN programs produced a colonoscopy completion rate of 78.5% in a cohort of 503 patients (predominantly African Americans and Latinos with public health insurance). Very little is known about the direct costs of implementing PN programs. The objective of the current study was to perform a detailed cost analysis of PN programs at the authors' institution from an institutional perspective.

METHODS:

In 2 randomized controlled trials, average‐risk patients who were referred for SC by primary care providers were recruited for PN between May 2008 and May 2010. Patients were randomized to 1 of 4 PN groups. The cost of PN and net income to the institution were determined in a cost analysis.

RESULTS:

Among 395 patients who completed colonoscopy, 53.4% underwent SC alone, 30.1% underwent colonoscopy with biopsy, and 16.5% underwent snare polypectomy. Accounting for the average contribution margins of each procedure type, the total revenue was $95,266.00. The total cost of PN was $14,027.30. Net income was $81,238.70. In a model sample of 1000 patients, net incomes for the institutional completion rate (approximately 80%), the historic PN program (approximately 65%), and the national average (approximately 50%) were compared. The current PN program generated additional net incomes of $35,035.50 and $44,956.00, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS:

PN among minority patients with mostly public health insurance generated additional income to the institution, mainly because of increased colonoscopy completion rates. Cancer 2013. © 2012 American Cancer Society.     

Patient navigation across the cancer care continuum: An overview of systematic reviews and emerging literature

Patient navigation is a strategy for overcoming barriers to reduce disparities and to improve access and outcomes. The aim of this umbrella review was to identify, critically appraise, synthesize, and present the best available evidence to inform policy and planning regarding patient navigation across the cancer continuum. Systematic reviews examining navigation in cancer care were identified in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed, Embase, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health (CINAHL), Epistemonikos, and Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) databases and in the gray literature from January 1, 2012, to April 19, 2022. Data were screened, extracted, and appraised independently by two authors. The JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Systematic Review and Research Syntheses was used for quality appraisal. Emerging literature up to May 25, 2022, was also explored to capture primary research published beyond the coverage of included systematic reviews. Of the 2062 unique records identified, 61 systematic reviews were included. Fifty-four reviews were quantitative or mixed-methods reviews, reporting on the effectiveness of cancer patient navigation, including 12 reviews reporting costs or cost-effectiveness outcomes. Seven qualitative reviews explored navigation needs, barriers, and experiences. In addition, 53 primary studies published since 2021 were included. Patient navigation is effective in improving participation in cancer screening and reducing the time from screening to diagnosis and from diagnosis to treatment initiation. Emerging evidence suggests that patient navigation improves quality of life and patient satisfaction with care in the survivorship phase and reduces hospital readmission in the active treatment and survivorship care phases. Palliative care data were extremely limited. Economic evaluations from the United States suggest the potential cost-effectiveness of navigation in screening programs.     

Patient navigation and activation interventions for elderly patients with cancer: A systematic review

Patient navigation (PN) and patient activation (PA) interventions are widely used to help patients with cancer to manage the disease and the care trajectory. However, the usability and impact of these interventions on older patients and their well‐being are unclear. This study aims to show which PN and PA interventions are being used and what impact they have. After systematically searching the literature, we assessed the quality of the publications we found. The publications had to involve at least a subgroup of older people with minimally one abnormal oncologic test result each, and they had to focus on PN or PA interventions. Six PA publications examined the interventions exclusively for elderly patients. Each of the 11 PN and PA publications contained at least one comment about the impact on older patients. The types of impact varied substantially, but there was scant attention to the quality of life. The type of intervention, the outcome measures and the quality of publications also varied considerably. Generally, age is not an important factor in PN and PA studies. To facilitate adjustment of navigation and activation interventions to the individual patient, more rigorous research into the impact of PN and PA interventions on older patients is necessary.     

The efficacy and cost-effectiveness of patient navigation programs across the cancer continuum: A systematic review

Published studies regarding patient navigation (PN) and cancer were reviewed to assess quality, determine gaps, and identify avenues for future research. The PubMed and EMBASE databases were searched for studies investigating the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of PN across the cancer continuum. Each included article was scored independently by 2 separate reviewers with the Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies. The current review identified 113 published articles that assessed PN and cancer care, between August 1, 2010, and February 1, 2018, 14 of which reported on the cost-effectiveness of PN programs. Most publications focused on the effectiveness of PN in screening (50%) and diagnosis (27%) along the continuum of cancer care. Many described the effectiveness of PN for breast cancer (52%) or colorectal cancer outcomes (51%). Most studies reported favorable outcomes for PN programs, including increased uptake of and adherence to cancer screenings, timely diagnostic resolution and follow-up, higher completion rates for cancer therapy, and higher rates of attending medical appointments. Cost-effectiveness studies showed that PN programs yielded financial benefits. Quality assessment showed that 75 of the 113 included articles (65%) had 2 or more weak components. In conclusion, this review indicates numerous gaps within the PN and cancer literature where improvement is needed. For example, more research is needed at other points along the continuum of cancer care outside of screening and diagnosis. In addition, future research into the effectiveness of PN for understudied cancers outside of breast and colorectal cancer is necessary along with an assessment of cost-effectiveness and more rigorous reporting of study designs and results in published articles.     

Cost implications of new treatments for advanced colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND:

Since 1996, 6 new drugs have been introduced for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. Although they are promising, these drugs frequently are given in the palliative and are much more expensive than older treatments. The objective of the current study was to measure the cost implications of treatment with sequential regimens that include chemotherapy and/or monoclonal antibodies.

METHODS:

A Markov model was used to evaluate a hypothetical cohort of 1000 patients with newly diagnosed, metastatic colorectal cancer. Patients supposedly received up to 3 lines of treatment before supportive care and subsequent death. Data were obtained from published, multicenter phase 2 and randomized phase 3 clinical trials. Sensitivity analyses were conducted on the efficacy, toxicity, and cost.

RESULTS:

Using drug costs alone, treatment that included new chemotherapeutic agents increased survival at an incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $100,000 per discounted life‐year (DLY). The addition of monoclonal antibodies improved survival at an ICER of >$170,000 per DLY. The results were most sensitive to changes in the initial regimen. Even with significant improvements in clinical characteristics (efficacy and toxicity), treatment with the most effective regimens still had very high ICERs.

CONCLUSIONS:

Treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer with the most effective regimens came at very high incremental costs. The authors concluded that cost‐effectiveness analyses should be a routine component of the drug‐development process, so that physicians and patients are informed appropriately regarding the value of new innovations. Cancer 2009. © 2009 American Cancer Society.     

Cost-effectiveness of targeted and tailored interventions on colorectal cancer screening use

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is cost-effective but underused. The objective of this study was to determine the cost-effectiveness of targeted and tailored behavioral interventions to increase CRC screening use by conducting an economic analysis associated with a randomized trial among patients in a large, racially and ethnically diverse, urban family practice in Philadelphia. METHODS: The incremental costs per unit increase were measured in individuals who were screened during the 24 months after intervention. Percent increase in screening was adjusted for baseline differences in the study groups. Each intervention arm received a targeted screening invitation letter, stool blood test (SBT) cards, informational booklet, and reminder letter. Tailored interventions incrementally added tailored messages and reminder telephone calls. RESULTS: Program costs of the targeted intervention were 42 dollars per participant. Additional costs of adding tailored print materials and of delivering a reminder telephone call were 150 dollars and 200 dollars per participant, respectively. The cost per additional individual screened was 319 dollars when comparing the no intervention group with the targeted intervention group. CONCLUSIONS: The targeted intervention was more effective and less costly than the tailored intervention. Although tailoring plus reminder telephone call was the most effective strategy, it was very costly per additional individual screened. Mailed SBT cards significantly boosted CRC screening use. However, going beyond the targeted intervention to include tailoring or tailoring plus reminder calls in the manner used in this study did not appear to be an economically attractive strategy.     

Genetic counseling program in familial breast cancer: analysis of its effectiveness, cost and cost-effectiveness ratio

Women with a family history of breast cancer are at increased risk for developing this neoplasm. Starting surveillance more frequently at a younger age than the general population and the possibility of undergoing genetic testing are options for their medical management. We analyzed the benefits and costs of our clinical program in familial breast cancer (FBC) and carried out a cost-effectiveness analysis of such procedure. The benefits and costs of performing genetic counseling and a screening program in FBC based on 143 high-risk families registered in our database between June 1995 and December 2001 were analyzed. A decision tree was constructed to estimate the survival benefit and cost-effectiveness of the clinical genetic counseling program compared with the strategy of not performing any screening protocol. We estimated that the prevalence of a BRCA mutation in an unaffected relative of our high-risk cohort was 10% and that 53% of the mutations are found in the BRCA1 gene. We assigned a 58.5% lifetime risk of breast cancer for a 30-year-old mutation carrier according to the SEER data. The effectiveness of the screening was obtained from our experience and data for estimating survival were derived from other studies with longer follow-up. We used our local payment data to calculate the costs of the program. A mutation in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes was identified in 20% of the probands. Seventy primary breast cancer cases were recorded since the onset of the program. Thirty percent of the tumors were diagnosed through the screening program and 71% of them were lymph node-negative compared to 49% of the tumors diagnosed outside the program (p=0.1). The cost-effectiveness ratio of our FBC genetic counseling and screening program was 4,294 euros per life-year gained. The model was sensitive to the prevalence of mutation carriers, the lifetime risk of breast cancer and the effectiveness of the screening. In our setting and according to our model, this analysis suggests that a program of genetic testing and screening for breast cancer in a high-risk population may be cost-effective. These results need to be confirmed as more effective interventions for cancer prevention and screening are being implemented.     

Improving colorectal cancer screening by using community volunteers: results of the Carolinas cancer education and screening (CARES) project

BACKGROUND: The goal of the Carolinas Cancer Education and Screening (CARES) Project was to improve colorectal cancer (CRC) screening among low-income women in subsidized housing communities in 11 cities in North and South Carolina who were traditionally underserved by cancer control efforts. METHODS: Cross-sectional samples were randomly selected from housing authority lists at 5 timepoints in this nonrandomized community-based intervention study. Face-to-face interviews focused on CRC knowledge, beliefs, barriers to screening, and screening behaviors. The intervention components were based on a previous evidence-based program. RESULTS: A total of 2098 surveys were completed. Seventy-eight percent of the respondents were African American, 62% were 65+ years, and 4% were married. At baseline, the rate of CRC screening within guidelines was 49.3% and physician recommendation was the strongest predictor (odds ratio [OR] = 21.9) of being within guidelines. There was an increase in positive beliefs about CRC screening (P = .010) and in the intention to complete CRC screening in the next 12 months (P = .053) after the intervention. The odds of being within CRC screening guidelines for women living in a city that had received the intervention were not significantly different from women living in a city that had not received the intervention (P = .496). CONCLUSIONS: Although CRC screening rates were not significantly better after the intervention, there was a positive change in beliefs about screening and intention to be screened. The results suggest that the dissemination of an evidence-based behavioral intervention may require a longer duration to engage hard-to-reach populations and change behaviors.     

Cost-effectiveness of chemoprevention of breast cancer using tamoxifen in a postmenopausal US population

BACKGROUND:

Previous cost‐effectiveness analyses of tamoxifen therapy account for breast cancer risk reduction during active treatment but not for its persistent protective effect after active treatment.

METHODS:

A detailed, continuous time, mathematical model of breast cancer and healthcare processes was used to simulate a postmenopausal population aged <55 years in a virtual trial comparing tamoxifen treatment with no treatment for lifetime follow‐up. Unlike previous work, the current model of tamoxifen therapy is based on a meta‐analysis of 4 randomized, placebo‐controlled chemoprevention trials with breast cancer risk reduction continuing for 10 years after treatment termination. Cancer incidence and survival data were derived from Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results statistics. Noncancer disease incidences, quality‐adjusted life year (QALY) utility weights, and costs were derived from the literature.

RESULTS:

Tamoxifen treatment (vs no treatment) saved 29 QALYs in a population of 1000 postmenopausal women aged <55 years with an additional cost of $333,000 over the population's lifetime (average cost‐effectiveness ratio, $11,530 per QALY). Tamoxifen therapy, compared with no treatment, was cost saving when higher risk populations were targeted (5‐year risk ≥1.66%). The cost‐effectiveness results were sensitive to parameters that characterized menopausal symptoms and adverse side effects of tamoxifen.

CONCLUSIONS:

The current results indicated that tamoxifen chemoprophylaxis for postmenopausal women aged <55 years is a cost‐effective health policy that reduces breast cancer incidence and improves life expectancy. Focusing on a postmenopausal population aged <55 years minimized the threat of adverse events associated with tamoxifen. Cancer 2011. © 2011 American Cancer Society.