IMPORTANCE Significant controversy exists regarding whether physicians factor personal financial considerations into their clinical decision making. Within oncology, several reimbursement policies may incentivize physicians to increase health care use.OBJECTIVE To evaluate whether the financial incentives presented by oncology reimbursement policies affect physician practice patterns.EVIDENCE REVIEW Studies evaluating an association between reimbursement incentives and changes in reimbursement policy on oncology care delivery were reviewed. Articles were identified systematically by searching PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, Proquest Health Management, Econlit, and Business Source Premier. English-language articles focused on the US health care system that made empirical estimates of the association between a measurement of physician reimbursement/compensation and a measurement of delivery of cancer treatment services were included. The Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions tool was used to assess risk of bias. There were no date restrictions on the publications, and literature searches were finalized on February 14, 2018.FINDINGS Eighteen studies were included. All were observational cohort studies, and most had a moderate risk of bias. Heterogeneity of reimbursement policies and outcomes precluded meta-analysis; therefore, a qualitative synthesis was performed. Most studies (15 of 18 [83%]) reported an association between reimbursement and care delivery consistent with physician responsiveness to financial incentives, although such an association was not identified in all studies. Findings consistently suggested that self-referral arrangements may increase use of radiotherapy and that profitability of systemic anticancer agents may affect physicians' choice of drug. Findings were less conclusive as to whether profitability of systemic anticancer therapy affects the decision of whether to use any systemic therapy. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCETo date, this study is the first systematic review of reimbursement policy and clinical care delivery in oncology. The findings suggest that some oncologists may, in certain circumstances, alter treatment recommendations based on personal revenue considerations. An implication of this finding is that value-based reimbursement policies may be a useful tool to better align physician incentives with patient need and increase the value of oncology care.

This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

There is heated debate surrounding policy reform granting full state-level nurse practitioner (NP) scope of practice (SOP) in all U.S. states. NP SOP policy is argued to impact access to care; however, a synthesis of empirical studies assessing this relationship has yet to be performed. Our study fills this critical gap by systematically reviewing studies that examine this relationship. We apply Aday and Andersen's Access Framework to operationalize access to care. We also use this framework to map components of access to care that may relate to NP SOP through concepts identified in this review. Our findings suggest that full state-level NP SOP policy is associated with increases in various components of access to care, but additional work is needed to evaluate causality and underlying mechanisms behind this policy's effect on access. This work is necessary to align research, practice, and policy efforts surrounding NP SOP with healthcare accessibility.

No abstract

Apoptosis-associated speck-like protein containing a caspase recruitment domain (ASC) is silenced by promoter methylation in many types of tumors, yet ASC’s role in most cancers remains unknown. Here, we show that ASC is highly expressed in a model of medulloblastoma, the most common malignant pediatric brain cancer; ASC is also expressed in human medulloblastomas. Importantly, while ASC deficiency did not affect normal cerebellar development, ASC knock-out mice on the Smoothened (ND2:SmoA1) transgenic model of medulloblastoma exhibited a profound reduction in medulloblastoma incidence and a delayed tumor onset. A similar decrease in tumorigenesis with ASC deficiency was also seen in the hGFAP-Cre:SmoM2 mouse model of medulloblastoma. Interestingly, hyperproliferation of the external granule layer (EGL) was comparable at P20 in both the wildtype and ASC-deficient SmoA1 mice. However, while the apoptosis and differentiation markers remained unchanged at this age, proliferation makers were decreased, and the EGL was reduced in thickness and area by P60. This reduction in proliferation with ASC deficiency was also seen in isolated SmoA1 cerebellar granule precursor cells in vitro, indicating that the effect of ASC deletion on proliferation was cell autonomous. Interestingly, ASC deficient SmoA1 cerebella exhibited disrupted expression of genes in the TGF-β pathway and increased level of nuclear Smad3. Together, these results demonstrate an unexpected role for ASC in Sonic hedgehog-driven medulloblastoma tumorigenesis, thus identifying ASC as a promising novel target for anti-tumor therapy.