Cargando…

Evaluating the Impact of Oncology Care Model Reporting Requirements on Biomarker Testing and Treatment

PURPOSE: The Oncology Care Model (OCM) is Medicare’s first alternative payment model program for patients with cancer. As of October 2017, participating practices were required to report biomarker testing of patients with advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (aNSCLC). Our objective was to evaluate th...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Castellanos, Emily H., Orlando, Abigail, Ma, Xinran, Parikh, Ravi B., O’Connell, Gillian, Meropol, Neal J., Hamrick, James, Adamson, Blythe J. S.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: American Society of Clinical Oncology 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7564129/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32496874
http://dx.doi.org/10.1200/JOP.19.00747
_version_ 1783595643299692544
author Castellanos, Emily H.
Orlando, Abigail
Ma, Xinran
Parikh, Ravi B.
O’Connell, Gillian
Meropol, Neal J.
Hamrick, James
Adamson, Blythe J. S.
author_facet Castellanos, Emily H.
Orlando, Abigail
Ma, Xinran
Parikh, Ravi B.
O’Connell, Gillian
Meropol, Neal J.
Hamrick, James
Adamson, Blythe J. S.
author_sort Castellanos, Emily H.
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: The Oncology Care Model (OCM) is Medicare’s first alternative payment model program for patients with cancer. As of October 2017, participating practices were required to report biomarker testing of patients with advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (aNSCLC). Our objective was to evaluate the effect of this OCM reporting requirement on quality of care. METHODS: We selected patients with aNSCLC receiving care in practices in a nationwide de-identified electronic health record-derived database. We used an adjusted difference-in-differences (DID) logistic regression model to compare changes in biomarker testing rates (EGFR, ROS1, and ALK) and receipt of biomarker-guided therapy between patients in OCM versus non-OCM practices, before and after OCM implementation. RESULTS: The analysis included 14,048 patients from 45 OCM practices (n = 8,151) and 105 non-OCM practices (n = 5,897). The overall unadjusted rates for biomarker testing and receipt of biomarker-guided therapy increased over the study period (2011-2018) in both OCM (55.5% v 71.6%; 89.8% v 94.6%, respectively) and non-OCM (55.2% v 69.7%; 90.1% v 95.2%, respectively) practices. In the adjusted DID model, the rates of biomarker testing (odds ratio [OR], 1.09 [95% CI, 0.88 to 1.34]; P = .45) and receipt of biomarker-guided therapy (OR, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.52 to 1.45]; P = .58) were similar between OCM and non-OCM practices. CONCLUSION: OCM biomarker documentation and reporting requirements did not appear to increase the proportions of patients with aNSCLC who underwent testing or who received biomarker-guided therapy in OCM versus non-OCM practices.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7564129
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher American Society of Clinical Oncology
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-75641292020-10-22 Evaluating the Impact of Oncology Care Model Reporting Requirements on Biomarker Testing and Treatment Castellanos, Emily H. Orlando, Abigail Ma, Xinran Parikh, Ravi B. O’Connell, Gillian Meropol, Neal J. Hamrick, James Adamson, Blythe J. S. JCO Oncol Pract Quality in Action PURPOSE: The Oncology Care Model (OCM) is Medicare’s first alternative payment model program for patients with cancer. As of October 2017, participating practices were required to report biomarker testing of patients with advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (aNSCLC). Our objective was to evaluate the effect of this OCM reporting requirement on quality of care. METHODS: We selected patients with aNSCLC receiving care in practices in a nationwide de-identified electronic health record-derived database. We used an adjusted difference-in-differences (DID) logistic regression model to compare changes in biomarker testing rates (EGFR, ROS1, and ALK) and receipt of biomarker-guided therapy between patients in OCM versus non-OCM practices, before and after OCM implementation. RESULTS: The analysis included 14,048 patients from 45 OCM practices (n = 8,151) and 105 non-OCM practices (n = 5,897). The overall unadjusted rates for biomarker testing and receipt of biomarker-guided therapy increased over the study period (2011-2018) in both OCM (55.5% v 71.6%; 89.8% v 94.6%, respectively) and non-OCM (55.2% v 69.7%; 90.1% v 95.2%, respectively) practices. In the adjusted DID model, the rates of biomarker testing (odds ratio [OR], 1.09 [95% CI, 0.88 to 1.34]; P = .45) and receipt of biomarker-guided therapy (OR, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.52 to 1.45]; P = .58) were similar between OCM and non-OCM practices. CONCLUSION: OCM biomarker documentation and reporting requirements did not appear to increase the proportions of patients with aNSCLC who underwent testing or who received biomarker-guided therapy in OCM versus non-OCM practices. American Society of Clinical Oncology 2020-10 2020-06-04 /pmc/articles/PMC7564129/ /pubmed/32496874 http://dx.doi.org/10.1200/JOP.19.00747 Text en © 2020 by American Society of Clinical Oncology https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives 4.0 License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
spellingShingle Quality in Action
Castellanos, Emily H.
Orlando, Abigail
Ma, Xinran
Parikh, Ravi B.
O’Connell, Gillian
Meropol, Neal J.
Hamrick, James
Adamson, Blythe J. S.
Evaluating the Impact of Oncology Care Model Reporting Requirements on Biomarker Testing and Treatment
title Evaluating the Impact of Oncology Care Model Reporting Requirements on Biomarker Testing and Treatment
title_full Evaluating the Impact of Oncology Care Model Reporting Requirements on Biomarker Testing and Treatment
title_fullStr Evaluating the Impact of Oncology Care Model Reporting Requirements on Biomarker Testing and Treatment
title_full_unstemmed Evaluating the Impact of Oncology Care Model Reporting Requirements on Biomarker Testing and Treatment
title_short Evaluating the Impact of Oncology Care Model Reporting Requirements on Biomarker Testing and Treatment
title_sort evaluating the impact of oncology care model reporting requirements on biomarker testing and treatment
topic Quality in Action
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7564129/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32496874
http://dx.doi.org/10.1200/JOP.19.00747
work_keys_str_mv AT castellanosemilyh evaluatingtheimpactofoncologycaremodelreportingrequirementsonbiomarkertestingandtreatment
AT orlandoabigail evaluatingtheimpactofoncologycaremodelreportingrequirementsonbiomarkertestingandtreatment
AT maxinran evaluatingtheimpactofoncologycaremodelreportingrequirementsonbiomarkertestingandtreatment
AT parikhravib evaluatingtheimpactofoncologycaremodelreportingrequirementsonbiomarkertestingandtreatment
AT oconnellgillian evaluatingtheimpactofoncologycaremodelreportingrequirementsonbiomarkertestingandtreatment
AT meropolnealj evaluatingtheimpactofoncologycaremodelreportingrequirementsonbiomarkertestingandtreatment
AT hamrickjames evaluatingtheimpactofoncologycaremodelreportingrequirementsonbiomarkertestingandtreatment
AT adamsonblythejs evaluatingtheimpactofoncologycaremodelreportingrequirementsonbiomarkertestingandtreatment