Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29554880›Full record

ArticleBMC cancer2018

Underutilization and disparities in access to EGFR testing among Medicare patients with lung cancer from 2010 - 2013.

Julie A Lynch, Brygida Berse, Merry Rabb, Paul Mosquin, Rob Chew, Suzanne L West, Nicole Coomer, Daniel Becker, John Kautter

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cancer, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 46 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
46citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

46 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 72 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Julie A LynchDepartment of Veterans Affairs Salt Lake City Health Care System, Salt Lake City, UT, USA. Julie.Lynch@va.gov.
Brygida BerseRTI International Waltham, Waltham, MA, USA.
Merry RabbRTI International, Research Triangle Park, Durham, NC, USA.
Paul MosquinRTI International, Research Triangle Park, Durham, NC, USA.
Rob ChewRTI International, Research Triangle Park, Durham, NC, USA.
Suzanne L WestRTI International, Research Triangle Park, Durham, NC, USA.
Nicole CoomerRTI International, Research Triangle Park, Durham, NC, USA.
Daniel BeckerVeterans Health Administration, New York, NY, USA.
John KautterRTI International Waltham, Waltham, MA, USA.
RTI International · USUnited States Department of Veterans Affairs · USVA Salt Lake City Healthcare System · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTumor testing for mutations in the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) gene is indicated for all newly diagnosed, metastatic lung cancer patients, who may be candidates for first-line treatment with an EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor. Few studies have analyzed population-level testing.

methodsWe identified clinical, demographic, and regional predictors of EGFR & KRAS testing among Medicare beneficiaries with a new diagnosis of lung cancer in 2011-2013 claims. The outcome variable was whether the patient underwent molecular, EGFR and KRAS testing. Independent variables included: patient demographics, Medicaid status, clinical characteristics, and region where the patient lived. We performed multivariate logistic regression to identify factors that predicted testing.

resultsFrom 2011 to 2013, there was a 19.7% increase in the rate of EGFR testing. Patient zip code had the greatest impact on odds to undergo testing; for example, patients who lived in the Boston, Massachusetts hospital referral region were the most likely to be tested (odds ratio (OR) of 4.94, with a 95% confidence interval (CI) of 1.67-14.62). Patient demographics also impacted odds to be tested. Asian/Pacific Islanders were most likely to be tested (OR 1.63, CI 1.53-1.79). Minorities and Medicaid patients were less likely to be tested. Medicaid recipients had an OR of 0.74 (CI 0.72-0.77). Hispanics and Blacks were also less likely to be tested (OR 0.97, CI 0.78-0.99 and 0.95, CI 0.92-0.99), respectively. Clinical procedures were also correlated with testing. Patients who underwent transcatheter biopsies were 2.54 times more likely to be tested (CI 2.49-2.60) than those who did not undergo this type of biopsy.

conclusionsDespite an overall increase in EGFR testing, there is widespread underutilization of guideline-recommended testing. We observed racial, income, and regional disparities in testing. Precision medicine has increased the complexity of cancer diagnosis and treatment. Targeted interventions and clinical decision support tools are needed to ensure that all patients are benefitting from advances in precision medicine. Without such interventions, precision medicine may exacerbate racial disparities in cancer care and health outcomes.

Indexed as

Health Status DisparitiesMutationAdolescentAdultAgedChildChild, PreschoolDiagnostic Tests, RoutineErbB ReceptorsFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHealthcare DisparitiesHealth Services AccessibilityHumansInfantInfant, NewbornEGFR protein, humanErbB ReceptorsProtein Kinase InhibitorsBilling codeEGFR testingHospital referral regionLung cancerMedicare

Identifiers

PMID29554880
PMCPMC5859516
OpenAlexW2803336504

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.