The Insurance Approval Process for Proton Radiation Therapy: A Significant Barrier to Patient Care

被引:53
作者
Ning, Matthew S. [1 ]
Gomez, Daniel R. [1 ,2 ]
Shah, Aashish K. [2 ]
Kim, Charissa R. [1 ]
Palmer, Matthew B. [2 ]
Thaker, Nikhil G. [3 ]
Grosshans, David R. [1 ,2 ]
Liao, Zhongxing [1 ,2 ]
Chapman, Bhavana V. [1 ]
Brooks, Eric D. [1 ]
Tang, Chad [1 ,2 ]
Rosenthal, David I. [1 ,2 ]
Garden, Adam S. [1 ,2 ]
Frank, Steven J. [1 ,2 ]
Gunn, G. Brandon [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Texas MD Anderson Canc Ctr, Dept Radiat Oncol, Unit 0097,1515 Holcombe Blvd, Houston, TX 77030 USA
[2] Univ Texas MD Anderson Canc Ctr, Proton Therapy Ctr, Houston, TX 77030 USA
[3] US Oncol Network, Arizona Oncol, Dept Radiat Oncol, Tucson, AZ USA
来源
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS | 2019年 / 104卷 / 04期
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
MODULATED PHOTON THERAPY; CELL LUNG-CANCER; OROPHARYNGEAL CANCER; STAGE; HEAD; OUTCOMES; TRIAL; EXPOSURE; COVERAGE; BEAM;
D O I
10.1016/j.ijrobp.2018.12.019
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Purpose: Proton therapy is increasingly prescribed for cancer treatment, given its potential for improvements in clinical outcomes and toxicity reduction; however, insurance coverage continues to be a barrier to patient access. This study examined insurance approval and appeal outcomes at a large-volume proton therapy center to clarify the process and identify areas for improvement. Methods and Materials: In 2013 to 2016, 1753 patients with thoracic or head and neck cancer were considered for proton therapy; 903 (553 thoracic, 350 head and neck) entered the insurance process. Rates of and times to approval and successful appeal after initial denial were calculated. Clinical factors were evaluated for association with insurance outcomes via logistic regression. Results: Approval rates by Medicare (n = 538) and private insurance (n = 365) were 91% and 30% on initial request, at a median 3 days and 14 days from inquiry to determination. Of the 306 patients initially denied coverage, 276 appealed the decision, and denial was overturned for 189 patients (68%; median time, 21 days from initial inquiry). On multivariable analysis, Medicare (odds ratio [OR], 14.20; P < .001) was the strongest predictor of initial approval. Approval rates decreased from 2013 to 2014 versus 2015 to 2016 (OR 0.54; P = .001). For patients who appealed denial, multivariable analysis found no associations between approval and trial enrollment or tumor type. Submission of a comparison treatment plan (proton vs photon) indicating dosimetric advantage to normal tissues was associated with decreased likelihood of approval (OR 0.43; P = .006), as was a prescribed dose of >= 66 Gy (OR 0.48; P = .019). Conclusions: Despite an 87% ultimate approval rate for proton therapy, the insurance process is a resource-intensive barrier to patient access associated with significant time delays to cancer treatment. These findings, plus the lack of clinical correlates with insurance outcomes, highlight a need for increased efficiency, transparency, and collaboration among stakeholders to promote timely patient care and research. (C) 2018 Published by Elsevier Inc.
引用
收藏
页码:724 / 733
页数:10
相关论文
共 38 条
[1]  
American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO), 2017, ASTRO PROT BEAM THER
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2021, PLYMOUTH M
[3]   Limits on Medicare's Ability to Control Rising Spending on Cancer Drugs [J].
Bach, Peter B. .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2009, 360 (06) :626-633
[4]   Randomized Trials of Proton Therapy: Why They Are at Risk, Proposed Solutions, and Implications for Evaluating Advanced Technologies to Diagnose and Treat Cancer [J].
Bekelman, Justin E. ;
Denicoff, Andrea ;
Buchsbaum, Jeffrey .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2018, 36 (24) :2461-+
[5]   Principles and Reality of Proton Therapy Treatment Allocation [J].
Bekelman, Justin E. ;
Asch, David A. ;
Tochner, Zelig ;
Friedberg, Joseph ;
Vaughn, David J. ;
Rash, Ellen ;
Raksowski, Kevin ;
Hahn, Stephen M. .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2014, 89 (03) :499-508
[6]   An in-silico comparison of proton beam and IMRT for postoperative radiotherapy in completely resected stage IIIA non-small cell lung cancer [J].
Berman, Abigail T. ;
Teo, Boon-Keng Kevin ;
Dolney, Derek ;
Swisher-McClure, Samuel ;
Shahnazi, Kambiz ;
Both, Stefan ;
Rengan, Ramesh .
RADIATION ONCOLOGY, 2013, 8
[7]   Proton Therapy for Head and Neck Cancers [J].
Blanchard, Pierre ;
Gunn, Gary Brandon ;
Lin, Alexander ;
Foote, Robert L. ;
Lee, Nancy Y. ;
Frank, Steven J. .
SEMINARS IN RADIATION ONCOLOGY, 2018, 28 (01) :53-63
[8]   Intensity-modulated proton beam therapy (IMPT) versus intensity-modulated photon therapy (IMRT) for patients with oropharynx cancer - A case matched analysis [J].
Blanchard, Pierre ;
Garden, Adam S. ;
Gunn, G. Brandon ;
Rosenthal, David I. ;
Morrison, William H. ;
Hernandez, Mike ;
Crutison, Joseph ;
Lee, Jack J. ;
Ye, Rong ;
Fuller, C. David ;
Mohamed, Abdallah S. R. ;
Hutcheson, Kate A. ;
Holliday, Emma B. ;
Thaker, Nikhil G. ;
Sturgis, Erich M. ;
Kies, Merrill S. ;
Zhu, X. Ronald ;
Mohan, Radhe ;
Frank, Steven J. .
RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2016, 120 (01) :48-55
[9]   Three ways to make proton therapy affordable [J].
Bortfeld, Thomas R. ;
Loeffler, Jay S. .
NATURE, 2017, 549 (7673) :451-453
[10]   Significant reduction of normal tissue dose by proton radiotherapy compared with three-dimensional conformal or intensity-modulated radiation therapy in Stage I or Stage III non-small-cell lung cancer [J].
Chang, Joe Y. ;
Zhang, Xiaodong ;
Wang, Xiaochun ;
Kang, Yixiu ;
Riley, Beverly ;
Bilton, Stephen ;
Mohan, Radhe ;
Komaki, Ritsuko ;
Cox, James D. .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2006, 65 (04) :1087-1096