Advertisement


Manali I. Patel, MD, MPH, on Equitable, Value-Based Care: The Effectiveness of Community Health Worker–Led Interventions

2022 ASCO Annual Meeting

Advertisement

Manali I. Patel, MD, MPH, of Stanford University School of Medicine, discusses clinical trial findings on the best ways to integrate community-based interventions into cancer care delivery for low-income and minority populations. Such interventions may improve quality of life and patient activation (often defined as patients having the knowledge, skills, and confidence to manage their health), as well as reduce hospitalizations and the total costs of care (Abstract 6500).



Transcript

Disclaimer: This video transcript has not been proofread or edited and may contain errors.
I'm so excited to present our work that's been a multi-year collaboration with a community-based organization and employer union health fund that provides health benefits to individuals who would otherwise not have health insurance. These are individuals that drove us to McCormick. They're individuals that work in our hotels here in Chicago. They're also individuals that work in casinos across the United States. They approached us almost 10 years ago, asking for us to help to consider how to redesign cancer care, such that their employees, once they were diagnosed with cancer, would be able to achieve equitable care at lower costs. 10 years ago, we launched an initiative. We conducted a pilot study in Chicago amongst individuals here where we paired them with a community health worker to help to engage patients in advanced care planning, as well as symptom management. And we found significant improvements in goals-of-care documentation. Using community-based participatory research methods, which means that we involved a community advisory board who guided us throughout every aspect of the project, we created a randomized trial of the pilot. Individuals that were randomized to the intervention arm received a community health worker as part of their care. This community health worker was bilingual and bicultural and would assist patients with advanced care planning and symptom management, but then also assisted patients with screening for complications from social determinants of health. So, for example, they would screen for food insecurity and connect patients to the local food bank, or they would screen for housing insecurity and connect individuals to the housing authority. Individuals as part of usual care received a benefit redesign. Every individual, either in the intervention arm or in the usual care arm, which received usual care, which was the control group, they received cancer care services that were free of charge if they went to the oncology provider that was the highest performing in the city. We conducted this randomized trial in Atlantic City and Chicago. There were 160 individuals that were randomized, 80 into each arm. And we followed patients for 12 months in an intent-to-treat analysis. And what we found was a significant improvement in our primary outcome, which was health-related quality of life. And that was an improvement of almost 11 points in the functional assessment cancer therapeutics general assessment. We also found significant reductions in acute care use, meaning hospitalizations reduced over a 12-month period. So mean hospitalizations amongst individuals in the intervention arms was significantly lower than those in the control room. We also found significant improvements in people's engagement and confidence to manage their own health, something called patient activation. And then here at ASCO, we presented the results on total cost of care as well, and found a significant reduction in total cost of care of almost 50% median total cost of care difference. These results move us from action of disparities to interventions that help to achieve health equity. And the next step is to disseminate this work across all the employer union health fund practices across the United States.

Related Videos

Breast Cancer

Richard Finn, MD, on Advanced Breast Cancer: New Data on Palbociclib Plus Letrozole From PALOMA-2

Richard Finn, MD, of the Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA and the Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center, discusses analyses from the PALOMA-2 trial on overall survival with first-line palbociclib plus letrozole vs placebo plus letrozole in women with ER-positive/HER2-negative advanced breast cancer. The study met its primary endpoint of improving progression-free survival but not the secondary endpoint of overall survival. Although patients receiving palbociclib plus letrozole had numerically longer overall survival than those receiving placebo plus letrozole, the results were not statistically significant (Abstract LBA1003).

Prostate Cancer

Alicia K. Morgans, MD, MPH, and Michael S. Hofman, MBBS, on Prostate Cancer: New Data on Lutetium-177–PSMA-617 (LuPSMA) vs Cabazitaxel

Alicia K. Morgans, MD, MPH, of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, and Michael S. Hofman, MBBS, of Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, University of Melbourne, discuss follow-up results on LuPSMA vs cabazitaxel in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer progressing after docetaxel treatment. The findings suggest that LuPSMA is a suitable option for this population, with fewer adverse events, higher response rates, improved patient-reported outcomes, and similar overall survival compared with cabazitaxel (Abstract 5000).

Sarcoma

Martin McCabe, PhD, on Ewing Sarcoma: Assessment of Topotecan, Cyclophosphamide, and High-Dose Ifosfamide

Martin McCabe, PhD, of the University of Manchester, discusses a phase III assessment of chemotherapy for patients with recurrent and primary refractory Ewing sarcoma. The trial, called rEECur, is the first study to provide comparative toxicity and survival data for the four most commonly used chemotherapy regimens in this disease. The analysis showed that high-dose ifosfamide is more effective in prolonging survival than topotecan plus cyclophosphamide (Abstract LBA2).

Breast Cancer

Ann H. Partridge, MD, MPH, and Véronique Diéras, MD, on the Future of Cytotoxic Therapy: Antibody-Drug Conjugates?

Ann H. Partridge, MD, MPH, of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, and Véronique Diéras, MD, of the Centre Eugène Marquis, discuss the many challenges posed by next-generation antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs). They include side effects such as hematotoxicity, gastrointestinal toxicities, and interstitial lung disease; tumor targeting and payload release; drug resistance; and the urgent need to understand ADCs’ mechanisms of action to better sequence and combine drugs.

Myelodysplastic Syndromes

Ruben A. Mesa, MD, on Myelofibrosis: Phase III Results on Momelotinib vs Danazol

Ruben A. Mesa, MD, of Mays Cancer Center at UT Health San Antonio MD Anderson Cancer Center, discusses new findings from the MOMENTUM study. This trial showed that in symptomatic and anemic patients with myelofibrosis, momelotinib was superior to danazol for symptom and spleen responses, as well as transfusion requirements (Abstract 7002).

Advertisement

Advertisement




Advertisement