Insurance denials for cancer clinical trial participation after the Affordable Care Act mandate

Abstract

Despite the ACA's mandate for most insurers to cover routine care costs for cancer clinical trial participation, denials and delays continue. Denials may continue because some insurers remain exempt from the law, or they may signal an implementation failure. Delays in coverage may affect patient participation in trials. Additional efforts to eliminate this barrier will be needed to achieve federal initiatives to double the pace of cancer research over the next 5 years. Future work should assess the law's effectiveness at the patient level to inform these efforts. Cancer 2017;123:2893-900. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

The Affordable Care Act and access to care across the cancer control continuum: A review at 10 years

“…On the basis of data from a single clinical center, the percentage of health insurance clearance for patients with cancer who were being considered for clinical trials during 2012 through 2015 increased, and the likelihood of prolonged clearance lowered, after the clinical trial coverage provision in 2014 105 . However, another study using data from 252 cancer research centers and community‐based institutions showed that insurance denials and delays continued after the ACA provision 106 …”

Oncology clinical trials and insurance coverage: An update in a tenuous insurance landscape

“…Grandfathered plans, out-of-network providers/sites, and claims by insurers that they did not cover clinical trials were the most common reasons for denial of coverage. 46 (Table 3). Some states cover only specific phases of oncology clinical trials.…”

Low clinical adoption of tumor genomic profiling: cause for concern?

“…Perhaps the most distressing drawback of current genomic profiling techniques is a lack of concordance between clinical-grade laboratories. The same patient sample, if sent to multiple Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA)-licensed laboratories for sequencing, will often yield disparate results 22 . Practically speaking, a patient’s clinical care may differ based only on the molecular pathology group that performed the genomic profiling.…”

“…Practically speaking, a patient’s clinical care may differ based only on the molecular pathology group that performed the genomic profiling. This inconsistency may lead to poorly informed clinical decisions, inappropriate clinical trial enrollment, and skewed interpretations of efficacy for targeted therapies being investigated in molecularly-inspired clinical trials 22 .…”

“…Low rates of reimbursement and the administrative burden of recouping the costs of testing might contribute to reduced frequency of tumor molecular profiling. Single institution studies have demonstrated that third party payers reject the majority (55%) of claims submitted for NGS panels containing more than 50 genes 23 . This places an undue administrative burden on physicians, especially those with higher volume practices, and may discourage uptake of tumor molecular profiling.…”