Objectives

To describe the composition of the US provider workforce for adults with cancer older than 65 years and to determine whether there were differences in patients who received care from different providers (eg, nurse practitioners [NPs], physician assistants [PAs], and specialty physicians).

Design

Observational, cross-sectional study.

Setting

Adults within the 2013 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results cancer registries linked to the Medicare claims database.

Participants

Medicare beneficiaries who received ambulatory care for any solid or hematologic malignancies.

Measurements

International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9), diagnosis codes were used to identify Medicare patient claims for malignancies in older adults. Providers for those ambulatory claims were identified using taxonomy codes associated with their National Provider Identifier number.

Results

A total of 2.5 million malignancy claims were identified for 201, 237 patients, with 15, 227 providers linked to claims. NPs comprised the largest group (31.5%; n = 4,806), followed by hematology/oncology physicians (27.7%; n = 4,222), PAs (24.7%; n = 3767), medical oncologists (10.9%; n = 661), gynecological oncologists (2.6%; n = 403), and hematologists (2.4%; n = 368). Rural cancer patients were more likely to receive care from NPs (odds ratio [OR] = 1.84; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.65-2.05) or PAs (OR = 1.57; 95% CI = 1.40-1.77) than from physicians. Patients in the South were more likely to receive care from NPs (OR = 1.36; 95% CI = 1.24-1.49).

Conclusions

A large proportion of older adults with cancer receive care from NPs and PAs, particularly those who reside in rural settings and in the southern United States. Workforce strategies need to integrate these provider groups to effectively respond to the rising need for cancer care within the older adult population.

Purpose

Racial/ethnic differences in cancer symptom burden are well documented, but limited research has evaluated modifiable factors underlying these differences. Our objective was to examine the role of patient-provider interactions to help explain the relationship between race/ethnicity and cancer-specific physical well-being (PWB) among women with breast cancer.

Methods

The Pathways Study is a prospective cohort study of 4505 women diagnosed with breast cancer at Kaiser Permanente Northern California between 2006 and 2013. Our analysis included white, black, Hispanic, and Asian participants who completed baseline assessments of PWB, measured using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy for Breast Cancer, and patient-provider interactions, measured by the Interpersonal Processes of Care Survey (IPC) (N = 4002). Using step-wise linear regression, we examined associations of race/ethnicity with PWB, and changes in associations when IPC domains were added.

Results

We observed racial/ethnic differences in PWB, with minorities reporting lower scores than whites (beta, black: - 1.79; beta, Hispanic: - 1.92; beta, Asian: - 1.68; p < 0.0001 for all comparisons). With the addition of health and demographic covariates to the model, associations between race/ethnicity and PWB score became attenuated for blacks and Asians (beta: - 0.63, p = 0.06; beta: - 0.68, p = 0.02, respectively) and, to a lesser extent, for Hispanic women (beta: - 1.06, p = 0.0003). Adjusting for IPC domains did not affect Hispanic-white differences (beta: - 1.08, p = 0.0002), and slightly attenuated black-white differences (beta: - 0.51, p = 0.14). Asian-white differences narrowed substantially (beta: - 0.31, p = 0.28).

Conclusions

IPC domains, including those capturing perceived discrimination, respect, and clarity of communication, appeared to partly explain PWB differences for black and Asian women. Results highlight opportunities to improve providers' interactions with minority patients, and communication with minority patients about their supportive care needs.

Purposes

To delineate operational changes in Kaiser Permanente Northern California breast care and evaluate the impact of these changes during the initial COVID-19 Shelter-in-Place period (SiP, 3/17/20-5/17/20).

Methods

By extracting data from institutional databases and reviewing electronic medical charts, we compared clinical and treatment characteristics of breast cancer patients diagnosed 3/17/20-5/17/20 to those diagnosed 3/17/19-5/17/2019. Outcomes included time from biopsy to consultation and treatment. Comparisons were made using Chi-square or Wilcoxon rank-sum tests.

Results

Fewer new breast cancers were diagnosed in 2020 during the SiP period than during a similar period in 2019 (n = 247 vs n = 703). A higher percentage presented with symptomatic disease in 2020 than 2019 (78% vs 37%, p < 0.001). Higher percentages of 2020 patients presented with grade 3 (37% vs 25%, p = 0.004) and triple-negative tumors (16% vs 10%, p = 0.04). A smaller percentage underwent surgery first in 2020 (71% vs 83%, p < 0.001) and a larger percentage had neoadjuvant chemotherapy (16% vs 11%, p < 0.001). Telehealth utilization increased from 0.8% in 2019 to 70.0% in 2020. Times to surgery and neoadjuvant chemotherapy were shorter in 2020 than 2019 (19 vs 26 days, p < 0.001, and 23 vs 28 days, p = 0.03, respectively).

Conclusions

During SiP, fewer breast cancers were diagnosed than during a similar period in 2019, and a higher proportion presented with symptomatic disease. Early-stage breast cancer diagnoses decreased, while metastatic cancer diagnoses remained similar. Telehealth increased significantly, and times to treatment were shorter in 2020 than 2019. Our system continued to provide timely breast cancer treatment despite significant pandemic-driven disruption.