Evaluating the Impact of Oncology Care Model Reporting Requirements on Biomarker Testing and Treatment

Emily H Castellanos 1, Abigail Orlando 1, Xinran Ma 1, Ravi B Parikh 2, Gillian O'Connell 1, Neal J Meropol 1, James Hamrick 1, Blythe J S Adamson 1 3

Affiliations

PMID: 32496874
DOI: 10.1200/JOP.19.00747

Abstract

Purpose: The Oncology Care Model (OCM) is Medicare's first alternative payment model program for patients with cancer. As of October 2017, participating practices were required to report biomarker testing of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (aNSCLC). Our objective was to evaluate the effect of this OCM reporting requirement on quality of care.

Methods: We selected patients with aNSCLC receiving care in practices in a nationwide de-identified electronic health record-derived database. We used an adjusted difference-in-differences (DID) logistic regression model to compare changes in biomarker testing rates (EGFR, ROS1, and ALK) and receipt of biomarker-guided therapy between patients in OCM versus non-OCM practices, before and after OCM implementation.

Results: The analysis included 14,048 patients from 45 OCM practices (n = 8,151) and 105 non-OCM practices (n = 5,897). The overall unadjusted rates for biomarker testing and receipt of biomarker-guided therapy increased over the study period (2011-2018) in both OCM (55.5% v 71.6%; 89.8% v 94.6%, respectively) and non-OCM (55.2% v 69.7%; 90.1% v 95.2%, respectively) practices. In the adjusted DID model, the rates of biomarker testing (odds ratio [OR], 1.09 [95% CI, 0.88 to 1.34]; P = .45) and receipt of biomarker-guided therapy (OR, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.52 to 1.45]; P = .58) were similar between OCM and non-OCM practices.

Conclusion: OCM biomarker documentation and reporting requirements did not appear to increase the proportions of patients with aNSCLC who underwent testing or who received biomarker-guided therapy in OCM versus non-OCM practices.