PURPOSE Although financial toxicity is a growing cancer survivorship issue, no studies have used credit data to estimate the relative risk of financial hardship in patients with cancer versus individuals without cancer. We conducted a population-based retrospective matched cohort study using credit reports to investigate the impact of a cancer diagnosis on the risk of adverse financial events (AFEs). METHODS Western Washington SEER cancer registry (cases) and voter registry (controls) records from 2013 to 2018 were linked to quarterly credit records from TransUnion. Controls were age-, sex-, and zip code–matched to cancer cases and assigned an index date corresponding to the case's diagnosis date. Cases and controls experiencing past-due credit card payments and any of the following AFEs at 24 months from diagnosis or index were compared, using two-sample z tests: third-party collections, charge-offs, tax liens, delinquent mortgage payments, foreclosures, and repossessions. Multivariate logistic regression models were used to evaluate the association of cancer diagnosis with AFEs and past-due credit payments. RESULTS A total of 190,722 individuals (63,574 cases and 127,148 controls, mean age 66 years) were included. AFEs (4.3% v 2.4%, P < .0001) and past-due credit payments (2.6% v 1.9%, P < .0001) were more common in cases than in controls. After adjusting for age, sex, average baseline credit line, area deprivation index, and index/diagnosis year, patients with cancer had a higher risk of AFEs (odds ratio 1.71; 95% CI, 1.61 to 1.81; P < .0001) and past-due credit payments (odds ratio 1.28; 95% CI, 1.19 to 1.37; P < .0001) than controls. CONCLUSION Patients with cancer were at significantly increased risk of experiencing AFEs and past-due credit card payments relative to controls. Studies are needed to investigate the impact of these events on treatment decisions, quality of life, and clinical outcomes.

Introduction Though the treatment landscape for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has evolved significantly with the refinement of liver-directed therapy techniques and the introduction of new drugs, few studies have investigated the impact of the changing treatment landscape on lifetime treatment costs, particularly in Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stage C disease. We sought to investigate real-world clinical characteristics, treatment patterns, and healthcare costs in a cohort of HCC patients treated at a single high-volume institution in Washington (WA) state. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients diagnosed with HCC between 2007 and 2018 using abstracted electronic medical record (EMR) data linked to cancer registry data and health claims from commercial plans, Medicare, and Medicaid. We described clinical and treatment characteristics, including BCLC stage and Child Pugh score. We investigated median survival and mean lifetime treatment costs by BCLC stage using Kaplan–Meier cost estimator methods. A multivariate Cox proportional hazards model was used to investigate factors associated with overall survival. Results The final cohort included 215 patients, the majority of whom were white (71%), male (68%), and with underlying hepatitis C (61%). Mean per patient lifetime costs were highest in BCLC A and BCLC C patients. Mean lifetime costs in BCLC A patients ($292,134) was driven by surgery, hospital, pharmacy, imaging, and outpatient costs. Chemotherapy costs were highest in BCLC C patients, though not the predominant area of spending. Median survival was highest in patients with BCLC 0 and A disease; BCLC stage C and higher area deprivation index (ADI) were associated with poorer survival. Conclusion In a cohort of WA state HCC patients, mean lifetime costs were highest in patients with BCLC A disease, attributable to surgery and hospital costs. As increased utilization of newer and less toxic therapies improves survival in BCLC C patients, mean lifetime costs in this group may also rise.

6546 Background: Washington was the first US state to experience the COVID-19 pandemic. Transmission risks and patient fears of visiting oncology practices during its onset resulted in rapid adoption of telehealth services. We hypothesized that the pandemic would widen disparities in oncology practice visits between Medicaid and commercially insured patients, resulting higher rates of emergency department (ED) visits during initial treatment. Methods: Linking Washington State SEER records with Medicaid and commercial insurance enrollment and claims records, we compared adults age <65 with new solid tumor malignancies who received systemic treatment at academic and community oncology practices. Persons starting therapy March – June 2020 (COVID) were compared with those starting therapy March-June 2017-2019 (Pre-COVID). Poisson regressions were used to evaluate differences in oncology practice office visits and telehealth visits. Logistic regressions were used to evaluate the likelihood of at least one ED admission among patients starting systemic therapy pre- and post-COVID. Results: Among patients who met inclusion criteria (652 Commercial, 349 Medicaid), Medicaid enrollees had more advanced disease and more comorbidity versus commercial enrollees. In unadjusted analysis of E&M and telehealth service visit codes, office-based visits fell for both insurance groups (Table) while telehealth service visits (negligible pre-COVID) were higher for commercial versus Medicaid enrollees post-COVID. The proportion of persons with ≥ 1 ED visit during therapy fell for both insurance groups. In Poisson models, Medicaid enrollees had significantly fewer total visits (P=0.001) and fewer telehealth visits (p<0.001) compared commercial enrollees during the COVID period. In the logit models, ED visits trended lower for both groups after COVID (OR 0.53 95% CI 0.279 to 1.008). Among Medicaid enrollees, persons ages 40-49 and breast cancer patients were more likely to visit the ED. Among the commercially insured, persons with 2 or more comorbidities were more likely to visit the ED. The pre-post COVID change in likelihood of an ED visit was not significantly different between insurance groups (p=0.355). Conclusions: In Washington State, the COVID-19 pandemic created a substantial disparity in access to office-based and telehealth care for low-income patients receiving systemic therapy for new cancers. Reduced oncology practice visits among Medicaid patients did not widen existing disparities in utilization of emergency care.[Table: see text]

PURPOSE The COVID-19 pandemic–related disruptions in health care delivery might have affected end-of-life care in patients with cancer. We examined changes in place of death and hospice support for Medicaid and commercially insured patients during the pandemic. PATIENTS AND METHODS We linked Washington State cancer registry records with claims from Medicaid and two commercial insurers for patients with solid tumor age 18-64 years. The study included 322 Medicaid and 162 commercial patients who died between March 2017 and June 2019 (pre–COVID-19), along with 90 Medicaid and 47 commercial patients who died between March and June 2020 (COVID-19). Place of death was categorized as hospital, hospice (home or nonhospital facility), and home without hospice. Place of death was compared using adjusted multinomial logistic regressions stratified by payer and time period (pre–COVID-19 v COVID-19). The clinical and sociodemographic factors associated with dying at home without hospice were examined, and adjusted marginal effects (ME) are reported. RESULTS In the adjusted pre–COVID-19 analysis, Medicaid patients were more likely than commercially insured patients to die in hospital (48% v 36%; adjusted ME, 11%; P = .02). In the pre–COVID-19/COVID-19 analysis, Medicaid patients' place of death shifted from hospital (48% v 32%; ME, −16%; P < .01) to home without hospice (19.9% v 38.0%; ME, 16.5%; P < .01). However, there were no statistically significant changes pre–COVID-19/COVID-19 for commercial patients. As a result, during COVID-19, Medicaid patients were more likely than commercial patients to die at home without hospice (38% v 22%; ME, 16%; P = .04) as were male versus female patients (ME, 16%; P < .01). CONCLUSION The pandemic might have disproportionately worsened the end-of-life experience for Medicaid enrollees with cancer. Attention should be paid to societal and health system factors that decrease access to care for Medicaid patients.

6504 Background: Increasing evidence shows that cancer patients (pts) experience financial hardships after diagnosis. Few studies, however, have used objective financial data to estimate the relative risk of adverse financial events (AFEs) in cancer pts versus individuals without cancer. Using a retrospective case-control design, we investigated whether cancer pts are at increased risk of new AFEs, as measured by their credit reports. Methods: Western Washington Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) cancer registry (cases) and voter registry (controls) records from 2013 to 2018 were linked to quarterly credit records from TransUnion (2012-2020), one of the 3 largest national credit agencies. Controls were age and sex matched to cases and assigned an index date corresponding to the diagnosis (dx) date of the matched case. Individuals with evidence of any AFE in the credit report closest to index/dx date or did not survive to 24 months were excluded. Cases and controls experiencing any of the following AFEs within 24 months were compared, using two-sample z tests: severe (3rd party collections, charge-offs), more severe (tax liens, delinquent mortgage payments), and most severe (foreclosures, repossessions). Multivariate logistic regression models were used to evaluate the association between cancer dx and AFE, adjusting for age, sex, dx year, and available credit 6 months before the index/dx date. Results: A total of 332,825 individuals (84,185 cases and 248,640 controls, mean age 66 (SD 13), 52.7% female) were included. The mean available line of credit in the year before index/dx date was $12,303. AFEs were more common in cases versus controls (Table). After adjusting for age, sex, available credit above or below $12,303, and dx year, cancer dx was significantly associated with any AFE (OR 1.77, 95% CI 1.7-1.85, p<0.0001), severe AFEs (OR 1.94, 95% CI 1.85-2.03, p<0.0001), more severe AFEs (OR 1.23, 95% CI 1.12-1.36, p<0.0001), and most severe AFEs (OR 1.46, 95% CI 1.16-1.86, p=0.0016). Age >65 and higher available baseline credit were associated with decreased risk of any and each category of AFE. Conclusions: Within 24 months from dx, significantly higher proportions of cancer pts experienced AFEs relative to controls. Such events on credit reports have serious and long-lasting consequences on financial status. Studies that link clinical and financial data to investigate the impacts of these events on treatment decisions, quality of life, and clinical outcomes are needed.[Table: see text]