Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Perspectives of private payers on multicancer early-detection tests: informing research, implementation, and policy.
Trosman, Julia R; Weldon, Christine B; Kurian, Allison W; Pasquinelli, Mary M; Kircher, Sheetal M; Martin, Nikki; Douglas, Michael P; Phillips, Kathryn A.
Affiliation
  • Trosman JR; UCSF Center for Translational and Policy Research on Precision Medicine (TRANSPERS), San Francisco, CA 94143, United States.
  • Weldon CB; Department of Clinical Pharmacy, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94143, United States.
  • Kurian AW; Center for Business Models in Healthcare, Glencoe, IL 60022, United States.
  • Pasquinelli MM; UCSF Center for Translational and Policy Research on Precision Medicine (TRANSPERS), San Francisco, CA 94143, United States.
  • Kircher SM; Center for Business Models in Healthcare, Glencoe, IL 60022, United States.
  • Martin N; Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94301, United States.
  • Douglas MP; University of Illinois Chicago, Chicago, IL 60607, United States.
  • Phillips KA; Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL 60611, United States.
Health Aff Sch ; 1(1): qxad005, 2023 Jul.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38756840
ABSTRACT
Emerging blood-based multicancer early-detection (MCED) tests may redefine cancer screening, reduce mortality, and address health disparities if their benefit is demonstrated. U.S. payers' coverage policies will impact MCED test adoption and access; thus, their perspectives must be understood. We examined views, coverage barriers, and evidentiary needs for MCED from 19 private payers collectively covering 150 000 000 enrollees. Most saw an MCED test's potential merit for cancers without current screening (84%), but fewer saw its merit for cancers with existing screening (37%). The largest coverage barriers were inclusion of cancers without demonstrated benefits of early diagnosis (73%), a high false-negative rate (53%), and lack of care protocols for MCED-detected but unconfirmed cancers (53%). The majority (58%) would not require mortality evidence and would accept surrogate endpoints. Most payers (64%) would accept rigorous real-world evidence in the absence of a large randomized controlled trial. The majority (74%) did not expect MCED to reduce disparities due to potential harm from overtreatment resulting from an MCED and barriers to downstream care. Payers' perspectives and evidentiary needs may inform MCED test developers, researchers producing evidence, and health systems framing MCED screening programs. Private payers should be stakeholders of a national MCED policy and equity agenda.
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Language: En Journal: Health Aff Sch Year: 2023 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Estados Unidos Country of publication: Reino Unido

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Language: En Journal: Health Aff Sch Year: 2023 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Estados Unidos Country of publication: Reino Unido