Download PDF
J Neurol Surg B Skull Base 2023; 84(03): 248-254
DOI: 10.1055/a-1808-1445
Original Article

Pituitary Adenomas as a Barometer for Health Care Access

Nathan John Wallace 
1   Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, United States
,
William Jackson Palmer
1   Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, United States
,
Anand K. Devaiah 
2   Departments of Otolaryngology, Neurological Surgery, and Ophthalmology, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, United States
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Introduction Expanding access to care has been shown to impact patient care and disease epidemiology for different disease states, but has not been studied in pituitary adenoma. We hypothesize that increasing access to care—which includes diagnostics—through the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and Medicaid expansion has increased identification of pituitary adenomas.

Methods The National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database was utilized to identify patients with pituitary adenomas from 2007–to 2016 yielding 39,120 cases. Demographic, histologic, and insurance data were extracted. After stratification based on their insurance status, they were plotted to examine trends in insurance status after introduction of the ACA and Medicaid expansion.

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data was gathered from the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. A linear regression model was developed to describe the relationship between pituitary adenoma discovery and the number of MRI exams.

Results Pituitary adenoma diagnoses (37.6%) and MRI examinations per 1,000 in the U.S. (32.3%) increased concurrently from 2007 to 2016. Linear regression analysis revealed a statistically significant relationship (p = 0.0004). Those patients without insurance diagnosed with pituitary adenomas decreased 36.8% after Medicaid expansion (p = 0.023). With respect to Medicaid utilization, significant increases of 28.5% (p = 0.014) and 30.3% (p = 0.00096) were noted after both the ACA enactment and Medicaid expansion, respectively.

Conclusion The ACA has expanded health care access which has increased the ability to identify patients with pituitary adenomas. The present study also provides evidence that access to care is important for less prevalent diseases such as pituitary adenomas.

Keywords

pituitary adenoma - health care disparities - Affordable Care Act - MRI

Authors' Contributions

N.W. was involved in conceptualization, data curation, methodology, writing – original draft, and formal analysis. W.P. was involved in writing – original draft and writing – review and editing while A.K.D. was involved in conceptualization, methodology, supervision, and writing – review and editing.




Publication History

Received: 29 September 2021

Accepted: 18 March 2022

Accepted Manuscript online:
24 March 2022

Article published online:
16 May 2022

© 2022. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • References

  • 1 Asa SL, Casar-Borota O, Chanson P. et al; attendees of 14th Meeting of the International Pituitary Pathology Club, Annecy, France, November 2016. From pituitary adenoma to pituitary neuroendocrine tumor (PitNET): an International Pituitary Pathology Club proposal. Endocr Relat Cancer 2017; 24 (04) C5-C8
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Trouillas J, Jaffrain-Rea ML, Vasiljevic A, Raverot G, Roncaroli F, Villa C. How to classify the pituitary neuroendocrine tumors (PitNET)s in 2020. Cancers (Basel) 2020; 12 (02) 514
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Zada G, Woodmansee WW, Ramkissoon S, Amadio J, Nose V, Laws Jr ER. Atypical pituitary adenomas: incidence, clinical characteristics, and implications. J Neurosurg 2011; 114 (02) 336-344
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Daly AF, Rixhon M, Adam C, Dempegioti A, Tichomirowa MA, Beckers A. High prevalence of pituitary adenomas: a cross-sectional study in the province of Liege, Belgium. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2006; 91 (12) 4769-4775
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Fontana E, Gaillard R. Epidémiologie des adénomes hypophysaires: étude dans une agglomération urbaine de Suisse. [Epidemiology of pituitary adenoma: results of the first Swiss study] Rev Med Suisse 2009; 5 (223) 2172-2174
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Fernandez A, Karavitaki N, Wass JA. Prevalence of pituitary adenomas: a community-based, cross-sectional study in Banbury (Oxfordshire, UK). Clin Endocrinol (Oxf) 2010; 72 (03) 377-382
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Raappana A, Koivukangas J, Ebeling T, Pirilä T. Incidence of pituitary adenomas in Northern Finland in 1992-2007. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2010; 95 (09) 4268-4275
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Gruppetta M, Mercieca C, Vassallo J. Prevalence and incidence of pituitary adenomas: a population based study in Malta. Pituitary 2013; 16 (04) 545-553
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Agustsson TT, Baldvinsdottir T, Jonasson JG. et al. The epidemiology of pituitary adenomas in Iceland, 1955-2012: a nationwide population-based study. Eur J Endocrinol 2015; 173 (05) 655-664
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Ezzat S, Asa SL, Couldwell WT. et al. The prevalence of pituitary adenomas: a systematic review. Cancer 2004; 101 (03) 613-619
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Hall WA, Luciano MG, Doppman JL, Patronas NJ, Oldfield EH. Pituitary magnetic resonance imaging in normal human volunteers: occult adenomas in the general population. Ann Intern Med 1994; 120 (10) 817-820
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Smith-Bindman R, Kwan ML, Marlow EC. et al. Trends in use of medical imaging in US health care systems and in Ontario, Canada, 2000-2016. JAMA 2019; 322 (09) 843-856
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Obama B. United States Health Care Reform: progress to date and next steps. JAMA 2016; 316 (05) 525-532
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 About the SEER Program. SEER. Accessed February 28, 2021 at: https://seer.cancer.gov/about/overview.html
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Surveillance Research Program, National Cancer Institute SEER*Stat software (seer.cancer.gov/seerstat) version 8.3.8
    PubMed
  • 16 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program (www.seer.cancer.gov) SEER*Stat Database: Incidence - SEER 18 Regs Research Data + Hurricane Katrina Impacted Louisiana Cases, Nov 2018 Sub (1975–2016 varying) - Linked To County Attributes - Total U.S., 1969–2017 Counties, National Cancer Institute, DCCPS, Surveillance Research Program, released April 2019, based on the November 2018 submission
    PubMed
  • 17 OECD. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) exams (indicator). 2021 DOI: 10.1787/1d89353f-en https://www.oecd.org/ . Accessed March 10, 2021
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 GraphPad Prism version 9.0.2 for Windows, GraphPad Software, San Diego, California, USA. www.graphpad.com . Accessed April 5, 2022
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Zinner MJ, Loughlin KR. The evolution of health care in America. Urol Clin North Am 2009; 36 (01) 1-10 , v
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Robinson JC. The end of managed care. JAMA 2001; 285 (20) 2622-2628
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Halpern MT, Ward EM, Pavluck AL, Schrag NM, Bian J, Chen AY. Association of insurance status and ethnicity with cancer stage at diagnosis for 12 cancer sites: a retrospective analysis. Lancet Oncol 2008; 9 (03) 222-231
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Rohlfing ML, Mays AC, Isom S, Waltonen JD. Insurance status as a predictor of mortality in patients undergoing head and neck cancer surgery. Laryngoscope 2017; 127 (12) 2784-2789
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar