Health plan expenditures young adults with newly-diagnosed Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) by care at NCI-designated comprehensive cancer centers (CCC) vs. other treatment sites (non-CCC).
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
7081 Background: Patients diagnosed with HL between 22-39y have worse outcomes than younger patients (≤21y); we previously reported that treatment at a CCC mitigates these disparities [Wolfson, Leukemia 2017]. While there is general consensus that CCC care is expensive, expenditures for managing young adults with HL in CCC vs. non-CCC are not known. Methods: Cancer-related expenditures were examined in HL patients diagnosed between 2001-2014 at age 22-39y and treated at CCC and non-CCC sites using commercial insurance claims data (OptumLabs Data Warehouse). Multivariable generalized linear models with log link modeled average monthly health plan paid expenditures, adjusting for sociodemographics, stage, adverse events, pre-existing comorbidities, and diagnostic era. Results: Of the 1501 HL patients, 33% (n = 489) were treated at a CCC. Patients treated at CCC vs. non-CCC did not differ with respect to race, sex, income, diagnostic era or comorbidities (p≥0.3). Mean duration of enrollment was longer in CCC than non-CCC (25 vs. 23 mos; p < 0.001) patients. During the first year after HL diagnosis, total average monthly expenditures were higher in CCC ($9,111) than non-CCC ($7,834, p = 0.001), including those related to inpatient (CCC: $1,790 vs. non-CCC: $1,011; p = 0.001) and outpatient (CCC: $6,971 vs. non-CCC: $6,487; p = 0.001) expenditures. The higher CCC expenditures were associated with higher monthly rates of inpatient admissions (IRR = 1.3, p = 0.001) and outpatient visits (IRR = 1.1, p = 0.02) at CCC. Rates of chemotherapy-related inpatient admissions were higher (IRR = 2.3, p = 0.001) in CCC than non-CCC patients, while outpatient chemotherapy visit rates were lower (IRR = 0.9, p = 0.001) in CCC. During Years 2-3, total average monthly expenditures were higher in CCC ($19,259) than non-CCC ($4,145, p = 0.002) patients. Outpatient expenditures were higher in CCC ($10,164) vs. non-CCC ($2,901, p = 0.001), with higher monthly outpatient visit rates (IRR = 1.7, p = 0.001) at CCC. Conclusions: Inpatient and outpatient cancer-related expenditures in young adults with HL were higher at CCC than non-CCCs. Higher outpatient expenditures at CCC were associated with only higher monthly visit rates. Higher inpatient expenditures were in the setting of higher admission rates, including those related to chemotherapy. Additional work is necessary to understand whether these higher expenditures at CCC are related to supportive care and/or differences in facility structure and billing practices.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,006 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».