Coverage for evidence-based cancer survivorship care services.

PURPOSE: The American Society of Clinical Oncology Cancer Survivorship Committee established a task force to determine which survivorship care services were being denied by public and private payers for coverage and reimbursement. METHODS: A quantitative survey instrument was developed to determine the clinical practice-reported rates of coverage denials for evidence-based cancer survivorship care services. Additionally, qualitative interviews were conducted to understand whether coverage denials were based on payer policies, cost-sharing, or prior authorization. RESULTS: Of 122 respondents from 50 states, respondents reported that coverage denials were common ("always," "most of the time," or "some of the time") for maintenance therapies, screening for new primary cancers or cancer recurrence. Respondents reported that denials in coverage for maintenance therapies were highest for immunotherapy (41.74%) and maintenance chemotherapy (40.17%). Coverage denials for new primary cancer screenings were highest for Hodgkin lymphoma survivors needing a PET/CT scan (49.04%) and breast cancer survivors at a high risk of recurrence who needed an MRI (63.46%), respectively. More than half of survey respondents reported denials for symptom management and supportive care services. Fertility services, dental services when indicated, and mental health services were denied "always" or "most of the time" 23.1%, 22.5%, and 12.8%, respectively. Respondents reported they often had a process in place to automatically appeal denials for evidence-based services. The denial process, however, resulted in greater stress for the patient and provider. CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrates that additional advocacy with payers is needed to ensure that reimbursement policies are consistent with evidence-based survivorship care services.

The unequal burden of time toxicity.

Many cancer treatments impose large time investments on patients. We have termed these time burdens 'time toxicity' and have urged their consideration as adverse events of treatment. Here, we discuss time toxicity measures while considering inequitable access to healthcare, time as a resource, and patterns of time toxicity.

The least costly pharmacy for cancer supportive care medications over time: the logistic toxicity of playing catch up.

PURPOSE: No single pharmacy in an urban zip code is consistently the least expensive across medications. If medication prices change differently across pharmacies, patients and clinicians will face challenges accessing affordable medications when refilling medications. This is especially pertinent to people with cancer with multiple fills of supportive care medications over time. We evaluated if the lowest-priced pharmacy for a formulation remains the lowest-priced over time. METHODS: We compiled generic medications used to manage nausea/vomiting (14 formulations) and anorexia/cachexia (12 formulations). We extracted discounted prices in October 2021 and again in March 2022 for a typical fill at 8 pharmacies in Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA (zip code 55,414) using GoodRx.com. We examined how prices changed across formulations and pharmacies over time. RESULTS: Data were available for all 208 possible pharmacy-formulation combinations (8 pharmacies × 26 formulations). For 172 (83%) of the 208 pharmacy-formulation combinations, the March 2022 price was within 20% of the October 2021 price. Across pharmacy-formulation combinations, the price change over time ranged from - 76 to + 292%. For 12 (46%) of the 26 formulations, at least one pharmacy with the lowest price in October 2021 no longer was the least costly in March 2022. For one formulation (dronabinol tablets), the least expensive pharmacy became the most expensive, with an absolute and relative price increase of a fill of $22 and 85%. CONCLUSION: For almost half of formulations studied, at least one pharmacy with the lowest price was no longer the least costly a few months later. The lowest price for a formulation (across pharmacies) could also change considerably. Thus, even if a patient accesses the least expensive pharmacy for a medication, they may need to re-check prices across all pharmacies with each subsequent fill to access the lowest prices. In addition to safety concerns, directing medications to and accessing medications at multiple pharmacies can add time and logistic toxicity to patients with cancer, their care partners, prescribers, and pharmacy teams.

Price Comparison of Human and Veterinary Formulations of Common Medications.

This cross-sectional study compares prices of commonly prescribed medications used to treat both humans and pets.

Evaluation of Medicare Coverage and Estimated Out-of-Pocket Costs for Generic Abiraterone Products.

This cross-sectional study evaluates the association of generic competition and changes in product coverage and cost-sharing by using Medicare data and estimated out-of-pocket costs for the oral specialty drug abiraterone.

Forgoing physician visits due to cost: regional clustering among cancer survivors by age, sex, and race/ethnicity.

BACKGROUND: Innovative treatments have improved cancer survival but also increased financial hardship for patients. While demographic factors associated with financial hardship among cancer survivors are known in the USA, the role of geography is less clear. METHODS: We evaluated prevalence of forgoing care due to cost within 12 months by US Census region (Northeast, North Central/Midwest [NCMW], South, West) by demographic factors (age, sex, race/ethnicity) among 217,981 cancer survivors aged 18 to 82 years from the 2015-2019 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System survey. We summarized region- and group-specific prevalence of forgoing physician visits due to cost and used multilevel logistic regression models to compare regions. RESULTS: The prevalence of forgoing physician visits due to cost was highest in the South (aged < 65 years: 19-38%; aged ≥ 65: 4-21%; adjusted odds ratios [OR], NCMW versus South, OR: 0.63 [0.56-0.71]; Northeast versus South, OR: 0.63 [0.55-0.73]; West versus South, OR: 0.73 [0.64-0.84]). Across the USA, including regions with broad Medicaid expansion, younger, female, and persons of color most often reported cost-related forgoing physician visits. CONCLUSION: Forgoing physician visits due to cost among cancer survivors is regionally clustered, raising concerns for concentrated poor long-term cancer outcomes. Underlying factors likely include variation in regional population compositions and contextual factors, such as Medicaid expansion and social policies. Disproportionate cost burden among survivors of color in all regions highlight systemic barriers, underscoring the need to improve access to the entire spectrum of care for cancer survivors, and especially for those most vulnerable.

Financial Burden of Drugs Prescribed for Cancer-Associated Symptoms.

PURPOSE: The financial toxicity of anticancer drugs is well-documented, but little is known about the costs of drugs used to manage cancer-associated symptoms. METHODS: We reviewed relevant guidelines and compiled drugs used to manage seven cancer-associated symptoms (anorexia and cachexia, chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy, constipation, diarrhea, exocrine pancreatic insufficiency, cancer-associated fatigue, and chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting). Using GoodRx website, we identified the retail price (cash price at retail pharmacies) and lowest price (discounted, best-case scenario of out-of-pocket costs) for patients without insurance for each drug or formulation for a typical fill. We describe lowest prices here. RESULTS: For anorexia and cachexia, costs ranged from $5 US dollars (USD; generic olanzapine or mirtazapine tablets) to $1,156 USD (brand-name dronabinol solution) and varied widely by formulation of the same drug or dosage: for olanzapine 5 mg, $5 USD (generic tablet) to $239 USD (brand-name orally disintegrating tablet). For chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy, costs of duloxetine varied from $12 USD (generic) to $529 USD (brand-name). For constipation, the cost of sennosides or polyethylene glycol was <$15 USD, whereas newer agents such as methylnaltrexone were expensive ($1,001 USD). For diarrhea, the cost of generic loperamide or diphenoxylate-atropine tablets was <$15 USD. For exocrine pancreatic insufficiency, only brand-name formulations were available, range of cost, $1,072 USD-$1,514 USD. For cancer-associated fatigue, the cost of generic dexamethasone or dexmethylphenidate was <$15 USD, whereas brand-name modafinil was more costly ($1,284 USD). For a 4-drug nausea and vomiting prophylaxis regimen, costs ranged from $181 USD to $1,430 USD. CONCLUSION: We highlight the high costs of many symptom control drugs and the wide variation in the costs of these drugs. These findings can guide patient-clinician discussions about cost-effectively managing symptoms, while promoting the use of less expensive formulations when possible.

Prevalence of patients with nonmetastatic prostate cancer on androgen deprivation therapy in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: To provide the first comprehensive assessment of the number of men exposed to continuous androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in the nonmetastatic setting in the United States. METHODS: We assembled 2 point-prevalent cohorts on December 31, 2008: men aged 18-64 years enrolled in commercial health plans (MarketScan) and men aged ≥67 years enrolled in fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare (Medicare 5% sample). We identified men with nonmetastatic prostate cancer who were actively receiving continuous ADT (gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists or bilateral orchiectomy) for at least 6 months on the point-prevalence date. The number of prevalent ADT users in the national commercially insured (45-64 years) and FFS Medicare (≥65 years) populations was extrapolated with person-level weights. Using age-specific prevalence estimates derived from the 2 data sources, the number of prevalent users in the entire U.S. male population aged ≥45 years was also estimated. RESULTS: We estimate that 11,935 commercially insured men aged 45-64 years (95% confidence interval [CI], 11,310-12,561) and 115,468 FFS Medicare male beneficiaries aged ≥65 years (95% CI, 112,304-118,633) represented patients with nonmetastatic prostate cancer actively receiving continuous ADT for ≥6 months in the United States on December 31, 2008. Extrapolated to the total U.S. male population aged ≥45 years, this estimate was 188,916 (95% CI, 184,104-193,727). CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that a substantial number of men with nonmetastatic prostate cancer are managed with continuous ADT for ≥6 months during the course of their disease.