TY - JOUR
T1 - Gaps in hepatocellular carcinoma surveillance in a United States cohort of insured patients with cirrhosis
AU - Nguyen, Mindie H.
AU - Roberts, Lewis R.
AU - Engel-Nitz, Nicole M.
AU - Bancroft, Tim
AU - Ozbay, A. Burak
AU - Singal, Amit G.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
PY - 2022
Y1 - 2022
N2 - Objective: Surveillance for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is known to be underutilized; however, neither the variation of surveillance adherence by cirrhosis etiology nor the patient-side economic burden of surveillance are well understood. To identify potential barriers to HCC surveillance, we assessed utilization patterns and costs among US patients with cirrhosis monitored in routine clinical practice. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study of insured adult patients with cirrhosis using national administrative claims data from January 2013 through June 2019. Time up-to-date with recommended surveillance, correlates of surveillance receipt, and surveillance-associated costs were assessed during a ≥ 6-month follow-up. Results: Among 15,543 patients with cirrhosis (mean [SD] age 64.0 [11.1] years, 50.7% male), 45.8% and 58.7% had received any abdominal imaging at 6 and 12 months, respectively. Patients were up-to-date with recommended surveillance for only 31% of a median 1.3-year follow-up. Those with viral hepatitis were more likely to receive surveillance than those with other etiologies (hazard ratio [HR] 1.55, 95% CI 1.11–2.17, p =.010 for patients without a baseline gastroenterologist [GI] visit and 2.69, 95% CI 1.77–4.09, p <.001 for patients with a GI visit, relative to those with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease and no GI visit). For all etiologies except NAFLD, the HR (95% CI) for surveillance receipt was higher among patients with vs without a baseline GI visit (alcohol-related, 1.164 [1.002–1.351] vs 0.880 [0.796–0.972]; viral hepatitis, 2.688 [1.765–4.093] vs 1.553 [1.111–2.171]; Other, 0.612 [0.519–0.722] vs 0.549 [0.470–0.641]). Mean total and patient-paid daily surveillance-related costs ranged from $540 and $113, respectively (ultrasound) to $1580 and $300, respectively (magnetic resonance imaging), and mean estimated patient productivity costs were $730–$2514 annually. Conclusion: HCC surveillance was underutilized and was lowest among patients with nonviral etiologies and those who had not seen a gastroenterologist. Surveillance-related out-of-pocket expenses and lost productivity were substantial. The development of surveillance strategies that reduce patient burden, such as those using blood-based biomarkers, may help improve surveillance adherence and effectiveness.
AB - Objective: Surveillance for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is known to be underutilized; however, neither the variation of surveillance adherence by cirrhosis etiology nor the patient-side economic burden of surveillance are well understood. To identify potential barriers to HCC surveillance, we assessed utilization patterns and costs among US patients with cirrhosis monitored in routine clinical practice. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study of insured adult patients with cirrhosis using national administrative claims data from January 2013 through June 2019. Time up-to-date with recommended surveillance, correlates of surveillance receipt, and surveillance-associated costs were assessed during a ≥ 6-month follow-up. Results: Among 15,543 patients with cirrhosis (mean [SD] age 64.0 [11.1] years, 50.7% male), 45.8% and 58.7% had received any abdominal imaging at 6 and 12 months, respectively. Patients were up-to-date with recommended surveillance for only 31% of a median 1.3-year follow-up. Those with viral hepatitis were more likely to receive surveillance than those with other etiologies (hazard ratio [HR] 1.55, 95% CI 1.11–2.17, p =.010 for patients without a baseline gastroenterologist [GI] visit and 2.69, 95% CI 1.77–4.09, p <.001 for patients with a GI visit, relative to those with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease and no GI visit). For all etiologies except NAFLD, the HR (95% CI) for surveillance receipt was higher among patients with vs without a baseline GI visit (alcohol-related, 1.164 [1.002–1.351] vs 0.880 [0.796–0.972]; viral hepatitis, 2.688 [1.765–4.093] vs 1.553 [1.111–2.171]; Other, 0.612 [0.519–0.722] vs 0.549 [0.470–0.641]). Mean total and patient-paid daily surveillance-related costs ranged from $540 and $113, respectively (ultrasound) to $1580 and $300, respectively (magnetic resonance imaging), and mean estimated patient productivity costs were $730–$2514 annually. Conclusion: HCC surveillance was underutilized and was lowest among patients with nonviral etiologies and those who had not seen a gastroenterologist. Surveillance-related out-of-pocket expenses and lost productivity were substantial. The development of surveillance strategies that reduce patient burden, such as those using blood-based biomarkers, may help improve surveillance adherence and effectiveness.
KW - Hepatocellular carcinoma
KW - cost of illness
KW - health expenditures
KW - healthcare costs
KW - liver cirrhosis
KW - retrospective studies
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85139168460&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85139168460&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/03007995.2022.2124070
DO - 10.1080/03007995.2022.2124070
M3 - Article
C2 - 36111416
AN - SCOPUS:85139168460
SN - 0300-7995
VL - 38
SP - 2163
EP - 2173
JO - Current Medical Research and Opinion
JF - Current Medical Research and Opinion
IS - 12
ER -