ArticleJournal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology2025
Quality of Treatment Selection for Medicare Beneficiaries With Cancer.
Article in Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quality, Cost, and Timeliness of Cancer Treatment in Medicare Advantage and Traditional Medicare.JAMA internal medicine · 2026Article
- Changes in Cost of Guideline-Concordant Cancer Treatment: Observations and Implications.JCO oncology practice · 2026Article
- How often do oncologists receive industry payments from competing companies?The oncologist · 2026Article
- What Is the Cost Impact of Second Opinions in Oncology? A Retrospective Review.JCO oncology practice · 2025Article
- Provider billing margin and cancer treatment selection: population based cohort study.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2025Article
- Racial and Ethnic Disparities Along the Treatment Cascade Among Medicare Fee-for-Service Beneficiaries With Metastatic Breast, Colorectal, Lung, and Prostate Cancers.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe Medicare part D Low-Income Subsidy (LIS) improves access to oral cancer drugs, but provides no assistance for clinician-administered/part B drugs. This analysis assessed the association between LIS participation and receipt of optimal cancer treatment.
methodsWe investigated initial systemic therapy using SEER-Medicare data (2015-2017) and National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Evidence Blocks (EB) as the standard for treatment recommendations. We included cancer clinical scenarios wherein (1) ≥one treatment was optimal (higher efficacy and safety scores) versus other treatments; (2) identifiable in SEER-Medicare (eg, not defined by clinical data unavailable in registry data or claims); and (3) both EB and ASCO Value Framework agreed regarding optimal treatment. We fit logistic regression models to assess the association between receipt of systemic therapy (
resultsNine thousand two hundred and ninety patients were included across 11 clinical scenarios. Fifty-seven percent (5,336) of patients received any systemic therapy and 43% (3,954) received no systemic therapy. Compared with non-LIS participants, LIS participants were less likely to receive any systemic therapy versus no systemic therapy (odds ratio, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.57 to 0.72]). Contingent on receiving systemic therapy, LIS participants received treatment ranked within the worst quartile 24.8% of the time, compared with 21.9% of non-LIS patients (adjusted prevalence difference, 4.3% [95% CI, 0.5 to 8.2]).
conclusionLIS participants were less likely to receive systemic therapy at all and were more likely to receive treatments that receive low NCCN EB scores.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.