Oncology

Data interoperability remains a challenge among practicing physicians and health plans, mainly because each system operates on its own standards and vocabulary, explained Jason C. Goldwater, MA, MPA, senior director, National Quality Forum.

Patient-reported outcome measures help providers and health plans better understand what the patient wants and needs; however, there are still many challenges standing in the way of reaching its full potential, said Jason C. Goldwater, MA, MPA, senior director, National Quality Forum.

Linda Bosserman, MD, assistant clinical professor and staff physician, City of Hope, explained that quality measurements allow patients access to important information that can help them make decisions about their care.

While the science of quality measurements is still in its infancy, Jennifer Malin, MD, staff vice president, Clinical Strategy, Anthem, said these metrics have allowed her and her team to open the door of communication among providers on how important quality truly is.

Jason C. Goldwater, MA, MPA, senior director, National Quality Forum, explained that quality metrics exist for 3 purposes: to ensure the best science and practices are being utilized, to set the bar for what good quality looks like, and to keep up with the evolving nature of healthcare.

A provider, a payer, and an expert from an organization that endorses quality measures in healthcare participated in a panel discussion on measuring the quality of care in oncology.

A newly formed data-sharing initiative, Oncology Precision Network (OPeN), is promising a boost to precision medicine via data access to several health systems and cancer patients in the nation.

Maximizing the utility of technology platforms and making them meaningful to ensure quality cancer care was the underlying theme of Emerging Issues and Opportunities in Health Information Technology, a National Comprehensive Cancer Network Policy Summit.

What is the best way to measure quality care in cancer? As explored in the current issue of Evidence-Based Oncology, it depends on who you ask, and which tools are used to evaluate care.

Exposure of patients to the dangers of certain diagnostic equipment can have unwanted long-term effects, which healthcare providers may be underestimating, according to research conducted at the University of Saskatchewan.

Bringing up palliative care is inherently difficult for providers, because it means bringing up death and dying, said Toby C. Campbell, MD, MSCI, associate professor of medicine, hematology-oncology at the University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health.

A report developed by Avalere Health, based on a survey that the company conducted among health plans in 2015, states that a majority of health plans want to sign outcomes-based contracts with biopharmaceutical companies, especially for oncology and hepatitis C drugs.

A new study in the New England Journal of Medicine has established that, at least in the case of lymphoma, a positron emission tomography (PET) scan can spare the patients serious side effects of chemotherapy.

A scoping document explaining the review process to evaluate existing treatment options for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has been released by the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER).

An expert panel at The Community Oncology Conference: Innovation in Cancer Care, held in Orlando, Florida, April 13-15, 2016, provided insight on current transitions in healthcare reform, and their predictions for the future.