Adoption of Innovative Therapies Across Oncology Practices—Evidence From Immunotherapy

Abstract

ImportanceImmunotherapies reflect an important breakthrough in cancer treatment, substantially improving outcomes for patients with a variety of cancer types, yet little is known about which practices have adopted this novel therapy or the pace of adoption.ObjectiveTo assess adoption of immunotherapies across US oncology practices and examine variation in adoption by practice type.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis cohort study used data from Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries undergoing 6-month chemotherapy episodes between 2010 and 2017. Data were analyzed January 19, 2021, to September 28, 2022, for patients with cancer types for which immunotherapy was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) during the study period: melanoma, kidney cancer, lung cancer, and head and neck cancer.ExposuresOncology practice location (rural vs urban), affiliation type (academic system, nonacademic system, independent), and size (1 to 5 physicians vs 6 or more physicians).Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary outcome was whether a practice adopted immunotherapy. Adoption rates for each practice type were estimated using multivariate linear models that adjusted for patient characteristics (age, sex, race and ethnicity, cancer type, Charlson Comorbidity Index, and median household income).ResultsData included 71 659 episodes at 1732 oncology practices. Of these, 264 practices (15%) were rural, 900 (52%) were independent, and 492 (28%) had 1 to 5 physicians. Most practices adopted immunotherapy within 2 years of FDA approval, but there was substantial variation in adoption rates across practice types. After FDA approval, adoption of immunotherapy was 11 (95% CI, −16 to −6) percentage points lower at rural practices than urban practices and 27 (95% CI, −32 to −22) percentage points lower at practices with 1 to 5 physicians than practices with 6 or more physicians. Adoption rates were similar at independent practices and nonacademic systems; however, both practice types had lower adoption than academic systems (independent practice difference, −6 [95% CI, −9 to −3] percentage points; nonacademic systems difference, −9 [95% CI, −11 to −6] percentage points).Conclusions and RelevanceIn this cohort study of Medicare claims, practice characteristics, especially practice size and rural location, were associated with adoption of immunotherapy. These findings suggest that there may be geographic disparities in access to important innovations for treating patients with cancer.

Novel Antiendosialin Therapy and Soft Tissue Sarcoma in Children

“…Although this study uncovered a novel approach that can potentially be a treatment for STS, more research is required to establish the use of this novel therapy in children, as molecular mechanisms of STS are similar in both adults and children but precision medicine approach may vary. Moreover, a recent cohort study showed that the adoption of novel therapies in oncology practices that are not part of academic systems was lower in comparison to the practices that were part of academic systems 7 . Hence, more thorough studies exploring this novel drug are required, so that this precision medicine approach can become a standard-of-care regimen for children diagnosed with STS.…”