Associations between insurance status and the cancer clinical trial enrollment process.

Authors

null

Nicole E. Caston

University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL

Nicole E. Caston, Fallon Lalor, Jaclyn Wall, Jesse Sussell, Shilpen A. Patel, Courtney Williams, Andres Azuero, Rebecca Christian Arend, Margaret Irene Liang, Gabrielle Betty Rocque

Organizations

University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, Genentech, Inc., South San Francisco, CA, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, UCLA Gynecologic Oncology, Santa Monica, CA

Research Funding

Pharmaceutical/Biotech Company
Genentech.

Background: Most patients with cancer experience multi-leveled barriers to clinical trial participation, potentially including financial concerns due to the complexity surrounding trial-related insurance coverage. Our study sought to understand the association between insurance status and cancer clinical trial eligibility, offer, and enrollment. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included patients with breast or ovarian cancer receiving a therapeutic cancer drug at the University of Alabama at Birmingham between January 2017 and February 2020. Available clinical trials and eligibility criteria were abstracted from OnCore and ClinicalTrials.gov. Patient trial eligibility, offer from provider, demographics, and clinical characteristics were abstracted from electronic medical records. Patient trial enrollment was determined via OnCore. Odds of clinical trial eligibility, offer, and enrollment by insurance status (private, public [Medicaid, Medicare]) were estimated using logistic regression models. Models estimating odds of trial offer and enrollment contained only eligible patients. Models were adjusted for patient age at diagnosis, race and ethnicity, rural-urban residence, Area Deprivation Index, cancer type, and cancer stage (early, late). Results: A total of 513 patients with breast (71%) or ovarian (29%) cancer were included in our analyses. Median age at diagnosis was 60 (interquartile range: 49-67) years; the majority were White (69%) and had early stage cancer (65%). Half of patients had private insurance (54%), and 46% of patients had public insurance (38% Medicare, 8% Medicaid). Patients with private insurance more often had early stage cancer compared to patients with public insurance (73% vs 57%). Almost two-thirds of patients (65%) were eligible for clinical trial enrollment. Of eligible patients (n = 333), 68% were offered a trial and 47% enrolled onto a trial. In adjusted analyses, patients with public vs private insurance had similar odds of clinical trial eligibility (odds ratio [OR] 0.95, 95% confidence intervals [CI] 0.61-1.48), being offered to participate (OR 1.23, 95% CI 0.71-2.14), and clinical trial enrollment (OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.68-1.89). Conclusions: Our results suggest oncologists do not assess trial eligibility or offering a trial based on insurance status, and patients do not differentially participate based on their insurance coverage. Further research is needed to understand implications of trial participation (e.g., out-of-pocket and time costs) for patients covered by differing insurance.

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2022 ASCO Quality Care Symposium

Session Type

Poster Session

Session Title

Poster Session A

Track

Cost, Value, and Policy,Health Care Access, Equity, and Disparities,Patient Experience

Sub Track

Access to Clinical Trials

Citation

J Clin Oncol 40, 2022 (suppl 28; abstr 85)

DOI

10.1200/JCO.2022.40.28_suppl.085

Abstract #

85

Poster Bd #

C18

Abstract Disclosures

Similar Abstracts

First Author: Alec Czaplicki

First Author: Saad Javaid

Abstract

2023 ASCO Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium

Clinical outcomes and healthcare utilization among young adults with colon cancer on Medicaid vs private insurance.

First Author: Vaishali Deenadayalan