Lindsey Enewold

Lindsey Enewold

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

13Years (2014-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
10 June 2020 in Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
AMAngela B. Mariotto
Angela B. Mariotto
LELindsey Enewold
Lindsey Enewold
JZJingxuan Zhao
Jingxuan Zhao
CZChristopher A. Zeruto
Christopher A. Zeruto
KYK. Robin Yabroff
K. Robin Yabroff
Background: The prevalence of cancer survivorship is increasing. In this study, we provide contemporary population–based estimates and projections of the overall and site-specific cancer-attributable medical care costs in the United States. Methods: We identified survivors aged ≥65 years diagnosed with cancer between 2000 and 2012 from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database and used 2007 to 2013 claims to estimate costs by cancer site, phases of care, and stage at diagnosis. Annualized average cancer-attributable costs for medical care (Medicare Parts A and B) and oral prescription drugs (Medicare Part D) were estimated by subtracting costs between patients with cancer and matched controls. Costs are reported in 2019 U.S. dollars. We combined phase-specific attributable costs with prevalence projections to estimate national costs from 2015 through 2030. Results: Overall annualized average costs were highest in the end-of-life–cancer death phase, followed by the initial and continuing phases (medical care: $105,500, $41,800, and $5,300 and oral prescription drugs: $4,200, $1,800, $1,100, respectively). There was considerable variation in costs by cancer site and stage. Overall national costs in 2015 were $183 billion and projected to increase 34% to $246 billion by 2030, based only on population growth. Conclusions: Phase of care cancer-attributable cost estimates by cancer site and stage are key inputs for simulation models and cost-effectiveness analyses. Impact: The national cancer-attributed medical care costs in the United States are substantial and projected to increase dramatically by 2030, due to population changes alone, reflecting the rising burden of cancer care among cancer survivors. See the interview with Angela B. Mariotto, PhD, recipient of the 2024 CEBP Frederick P. Li Impact Award: https://vimeo.com/992980417

13 June 2016 in PLOS ONE
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
LELindsey Enewold
Lindsey Enewold
ATAnish Thomas
Anish Thomas
Despite being the basis of one of the most effective interventions in lung cancer, little is known about the patterns of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation testing in the general population. We assessed the frequencies and determinants of EGFR testing and erlotinib treatment among a population-based sample. A random sample (n = 1,358) of patients diagnosed in 2010 with histologically-confirmed NSCLC, as reported to the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) program, had their medical records abstracted and treating physicians queried. Logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with EGFR testing and erlotinib treatment. Survival was examined using Cox proportional hazards regression. The frequency of EGFR testing was 16.8% overall and 22.6% for stage IV adenocarcinoma patients. Given an EGFR mutation, 33.6% of all patients and 48.3% of stage IV patients received erlotinib. Among stage IV patients, increased age, Medicaid/no/unknown insurance status, death within 2 months of diagnosis and comorbidity were inversely associated with EGFR testing; erlotinib treatment was less likely among smokers and patients with non-adenocarcinomas. EGFR-mutation was associated with improved survival, albeit only among stage IV adenocarcinomas. Less than a quarter of NSCLC patients diagnosed in 2010 received EGFR testing and less than half of the patients with EGFR-mutant stage IV tumors received erlotinib. Significant disparities were observed in EGFR mutation testing by health insurance status, comorbidity and age. A national strategy is imperative to ensure that resources and processes are in place to efficiently implement molecular testing of cancer.

18 November 2014 in Journal of Gastrointestinal Cancer
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
LELindsey Enewold
Lindsey Enewold
LHLinda C Harlan
Linda C Harlan
TTThomas Tucker
Thomas Tucker
SMShaun McKenzie
Shaun McKenzie

10 April 2015 in Breast Cancer Research and Treatment
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
LELindsey Enewold
Lindsey Enewold
AGAnn M. Geiger
Ann M. Geiger
JZJoAnne Zujewski
JoAnne Zujewski
LHLinda C. Harlan
Linda C. Harlan

27 October 2020 in Cancer
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
CBCathy J. Bradley
Cathy J. Bradley
JSJennifer L. Stevens
Jennifer L. Stevens
LELindsey Enewold
Lindsey Enewold
JWJoan L. Warren
Joan L. Warren

30 January 2014 in Journal of Community Health
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
LELindsey Enewold
Lindsey Enewold
MHMarie-Josèphe Horner
Marie-Josèphe Horner
CSCraig Shriver
Craig Shriver
KZKangmin Zhu
Kangmin Zhu