Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Patient and provider-level drivers of healthcare utilization related to a diagnosis of a precancerous condition: monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS)

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Cancer Causes & Control Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) is the precursor of multiple myeloma. This qualitative study described patient (n = 14) experiences and healthcare providers’ (n = 8) opinions and practices concerning care for patients with MGUS in the US.

Methods

Semi-structured, in-depth interviews were analyzed using thematic analysis.

Results

We identified six overarching themes related to the care pathway for patients with MGUS: (1) Process of MGUS diagnosis, (2) Providers’ explanations, (3) Patients’ understanding, (4) Impact of the diagnosis, (5) Follow-up/management, and (6) Factors influencing healthcare utilization. Patients demonstrated a basic understanding of MGUS. However, some patients felt anxiety around the diagnosis, which may affect other aspects of their lives. Non-hematologist providers report having less MGUS-specific knowledge. Older age, high-risk MGUS, and insurance coverage/healthcare costs influenced healthcare utilization.

Conclusion

Patients with MGUS may have difficulty processing this premalignant diagnosis. Non-hematologist providers may have gaps in knowledge around specific care for patients with MGUS.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Enquiries about data availability should be directed to the authors.

References

  1. Landgren O (2013) Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance and smoldering multiple myeloma: biological insights and early treatment strategies. Hematol Am Soc Hematol Educ Progr 2013:478–487

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Go RS, Gundrum JD, Neuner JM (2015) Determining the clinical significance of monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance: a SEER-Medicare population analysis. Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk 15:177-186.e4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Sigurdardottir EE et al (2015) The role of diagnosis and clinical follow-up of monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance on survival in multiple myeloma. JAMA Oncol 1:168–174

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Wadhera RK, Rajkumar SV (2010) Prevalence of monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance: a systematic review. Mayo Clin Proc 85:933–942

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Kyle RA et al (2010) Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) and smoldering (asymptomatic) multiple myeloma: IMWG consensus perspectives risk factors for progression and guidelines for monitoring and management. Leukemia 24:1121–1127

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Axelsson U, Bachmann R, Hällén J (1966) Frequency of pathological proteins (M-components) om 6995 sera from an adult population. Acta Med Scand 179:235–247

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kyle RA, Finkelstein S, Elveback LR, Kurland LT (1972) Incidence of monoclonal proteins in a minnesota community with a cluster of multiple myeloma. Blood 40(5):719–724

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Saleun JP, Vicariot M, Deroff P, Morin JF (1982) Monoclonal gammopathies in the adult population of Finistère. France J Clin Pathol 35:63–68

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Landgren O, Weiss BM (2009) Patterns of monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance and multiple myeloma in various ethnic/racial groups: support for genetic factors in pathogenesis. Leukemia 23:1691–1697

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Zingone A, Kuehl WM (2011) Pathogenesis of monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance and progression to multiple myeloma. Semin Hematol 48:4–12

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Kyle RA et al (2018) Long-term follow-up of monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance. N Engl J Med 378:241–249

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Kyle RA et al (2002) A long-term study of prognosis in monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance. N Engl J Med 346:564–569

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Maatouk I et al (2019) Patients with precursor disease exhibit similar psychological distress and mental HRQOL as patients with active myeloma. Blood Cancer J 9:9

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Murphy B et al (2021) Patient’s perspectives of living with a precancerous condition: monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS). Eur J Oncol Nurs 51:101901

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Go RS, Doyle LM (2009) A monoclonal gammopathy in search of clinical significance: 57 years later. Blood 114(11):2355–2356

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Harris PA et al (2012) ResearchMatch: a national registry to recruit volunteers for clinical research. Acad Med 87:66–73

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Thornton L et al (2016) Recruiting for health, medical or psychosocial research using Facebook: systematic review. Internet Interv 4:72–81

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Ulin PR, Robinson ET, Tolley EE (2005) Qualitative methods in public health: a field guide for applied research. Med Sci Sport Exerc 37:1249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Hsieh H-F, Shannon SE (2005) Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual Health Res 15:1277–1288

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Fisher KJ et al (2013) The effects of primary care on breast cancer mortality and incidence among Medicare beneficiaries. Cancer 119:2964–2972

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Roetzheim RG et al (2012) Influence of primary care on breast cancer outcomes among Medicare beneficiaries. Ann Fam Med 10:401–411

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Wilson RT (2000) The role of primary care patterns in stage at diagnosis outcomes among American Indian cancer patients: New Mexico and Arizona, 1994–1997. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. The University of Iowa

  23. Ferrante JM et al (2013) Primary care utilization and colorectal cancer incidence and mortality among Medicare beneficiaries: a population-based, case-control study. Ann Intern Med 159:437–446

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Shi L (2012) The impact of primary care: a focused review. Scientifica 2012:432892

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Go RS, Heien HC, Sangaralingham LR, Habermann EB, Shah ND (2017) Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance. Mayo Clin Proc Innov Qual Outcomes 1:161–169

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Kristinsson SY et al (2009) Patterns of survival and causes of death following a diagnosis of monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance: a population-based study. Haematologica 94:1714–1720

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Maiese E, Evans K, Chu B-C, Irwin DE (2017) Trends in survival and costs among U.S. patients with multiple myeloma. J Clin Oncol 35:12–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Ravindran A et al (2020) Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance: indications for prediagnostic testing, subsequent diagnoses, and follow-up practice at Mayo Clinic. Mayo Clin Proc 95:944–954

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. McShane CM, Murphy B, Lim KH, Anderson LA (2018) Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance as viewed by haematology healthcare professionals. Eur J Haematol 100:20–26

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Khimani F, Curley B, Almubarak M (2015) Survey of patients referred to a University Cancer Center for Benign Hematology: quality measures and patient understanding. J Oncol Pract 11:26–29

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Bertakis KD, Azari R, Helms LJ, Callahan EJ, Robbins JA (2000) Gender differences in the utilization of health care services. J Fam Pract 49:147–152

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This work was funded by the National Cancer Institute [Grant no. 1 F31 CA247105, 2020].

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School, 368 Plantation Street, A6-1065O, Worcester, MA, 01605, USA

    Maira A. Castañeda-Avila & Kate L. Lapane

  2. Meyers Health Care Institute, A Joint Endeavor of the University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School, Fallon Health, and Reliant Medical Group, Worcester, MA, USA

    Kathleen M. Mazor & Mara M. Epstein

  3. Division of Health Systems Science, Department of Medicine, University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School, Worcester, MA, USA

    Kathleen M. Mazor & Mara M. Epstein

Authors
  1. Maira A. Castañeda-Avila
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kathleen M. Mazor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kate L. Lapane
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mara M. Epstein
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maira A. Castañeda-Avila.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no financial relationship or any conflict of interest to disclose.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Castañeda-Avila, M.A., Mazor, K.M., Lapane, K.L. et al. Patient and provider-level drivers of healthcare utilization related to a diagnosis of a precancerous condition: monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS). Cancer Causes Control 34, 449–457 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10552-023-01675-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10552-023-01675-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation