Navigation Links
Penn medicine study finds broad support for rationing of some types of cancer care

PHILADELPHIA The majority of cancer doctors, patients, and members of the general public support cutting health care costs by refusing to pay for drugs that don't improve survival or quality of life, according to results of a new study that will be presented by researchers from the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania during the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology in Chicago in early June (Abstract #6518).

The Penn Medicine team surveyed 326 adult cancer patients receiving treatment at Penn's Abramson Cancer Center, a random sample of 891 adults in the general public, and 250 oncologists across the United States during 2012 to probe their opinions about tactics for controlling costs associated with cancer care.

"We found that the majority of respondents considered Medicare spending a big or moderate problem, and many suggested that Medicare could spend less without causing harm," said the study's lead author, Keerthi Gogineni, MD, MSHP, an instructor in the division of Hematology-Oncology in Penn's Abramson Cancer Center. "We know that cancer patients and their doctors face decisions every day that stand to raise health care costs without conferring much benefit to patients, and our survey has identified some common themes in how these groups of stakeholders might propose to lower costs of care while still protecting patients."

More than 90 percent of all three groups surveyed attributed rising costs to drug companies charging too much, and more than 80 percent of each group cited insurance company profits as a driver of rising costs. Many also thought hospitals and doctors conducted unnecessary tests and provided unnecessary treatments (69 percent of patients, 81 percent of the general public, and 70 percent of doctors).

The research team, which includes senior author Ezekiel J. Emanuel, MD, PhD, chairman of the department of Medical Ethics and Health Policy, presented a variety of potential cost-lowering options to each group and asked whether they supported the idea. Cancer patients, members of the general public, and oncologists tended to be about as likely to say patients who can afford to pay more for care should be asked to pay more (56, 58, and 52 percent, respectively). And large numbers favored not paying for more expensive drugs when cheaper alternatives are equally as effective (78 percent of patients, 86 percent of the general public, and 90 percent of physicians). The majority also supported refusing to cover drugs that do not improve survival or quality of life, though physicians were more apt to refuse payment under those circumstances (79 percent compared to 52 percent of patients and 57 percent of the general public).

Even drugs that confer only incremental gains in survival, however, were found to be worth covering in the eyes of all groups surveyed: Just 12 percent of physicians were willing to refuse payment for a drug that extends life by four months, compared to 20 percent of patients and 28 percent of the general public.

Greater differences of opinion were observed around coverage for drugs offering benefits other than survival gains. When queried about a drug that doesn't extend life but reduces pain, for instance, only 5 percent of patients and 10 percent of the general public voiced support for refusing to cover the medication, compared to 32 percent of physicians. On coverage for a drug that doesn't extend life but adds convenience, 27 and 32 percent of patients and the general public, respectively, said those costs should not be covered, compared to 59 percent of physicians.

"These results suggest that patients and the lay public prioritize quality of life, while oncologists appear focused on controlling disease and increasing length of life," Gogineni says. "Patients have a much broader set of concerns, from the cost of their doctor's visits to the side effects of treatment and the emotional toll of their illness."

Sixty four percent of physicians said they supported the idea of an independent expert panel that would decide which therapies to cover, but that plan was met with resistance from patients (33 percent approved) and the general public (46 percent approved). The authors suggest this may be because physicians are more familiar with such models, which are already used for decision-making around scarce medical resources such as ICU beds and organs for transplantation. And, Gogineni notes, "distancing the locus of responsibility for access to high cost, low benefit cancer treatment may create less strain on the physician-patient relationship."

Gogineni will present the team's findings at ASCO on Sunday, June 2, 2013 in the Health Services Research poster session from 8 a.m. to noon in McCormick Place S405.


Contact: Holly Auer
University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine

Related medicine news :

1. Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai and Bene Pharmachem Gmbh to Collaborate on Clinical Studies for Mucopolysaccaridoses
2. Alternative Wellness Center Provides Bellevue, Washington With Botanical Medicine
3. Queens scientists develop magic bullet nanomedicine for Acute Lung Injury
4. IU School of Medicine Breast Cancer Experts Available for Comment on Angelina Jolie Decision
5. Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai Honors Innovators in Scientific Research and Health Care Philanthropy at 2013 Commencement Ceremony
6. Dr. Augustine M. K. Choi Appointed Chairman of Medicine at Weill Cornell Medical College and Physician-in-Chief at NewYork-Presbyterian/Weill Cornell Medical Center
7. DMG Productions Announces New Episode of Business Update, Focusing on Technology and Medicine
8. Health First and Palm Bay Police Department Receive National Recognition for Innovative Telemedicine Project to Help Patients Before they Get to the Hospital
9. SAGE and AOSSM launch the Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine
10. CWRU School of Medicine researchers discover new target for personalized cancer therapy
11. Northwestern Medicine researchers work to improve heart attack response time
Post Your Comments:
(Date:11/25/2015)... ... November 26, 2015 , ... ... (AUC), European Union (EU), ANDI Pan African Centres of Excellence, and public R&D ... Nairobi (UNON) for the opening of the 5th African Network for Drugs and ...
(Date:11/25/2015)... TX (PRWEB) , ... November 25, 2015 , ... For ... the companies’ “ Two Organizations, One Beat ” campaign. The partnership between the two ... services to aid in MAP International’s cause. , MAP International was founded in 1954 ...
(Date:11/25/2015)... , ... November 25, 2015 , ... ... encouraging people across the country to celebrate their sobriety and show through pictures ... post “before and after” photos this Thanksgiving with the hashtag #FacesOfGratitude on their ...
(Date:11/25/2015)... ... , ... On November 25, 2015, officials of Narconon Arrowhead , the ... of a new cutting edge recovery program that has been 50 years in the ... alcohol-addicted individuals with the purpose to free addicts from the symptoms and negative behaviors ...
(Date:11/25/2015)... Crystal Lake, IL (PRWEB) , ... November 25, 2015 , ... ... pleased to announce a recent successful appellate decision obtained by Attorneys Francisco J. Botto ... the case Adcock v. Illinois Workers’ Compensation Comm’n, 2015 IL App (2d) 130884WC. , ...
Breaking Medicine News(10 mins):
(Date:11/26/2015)... , November 26, 2015 ... the addition of the  "2016 Future ... Global Cell Surface Testing Market: Supplier ... to their offering.  --> ... of the  "2016 Future Horizons and ...
(Date:11/26/2015)... 2015 ... the  "2016 Future Horizons and Growth ... Monitoring (TDM) Market: Supplier Shares, Country ...  report to their offering.  --> ... addition of the  "2016 Future Horizons ...
(Date:11/26/2015)... November 26, 2015 ... the "Radioimmunoassay Market by Type (Reagents ... Industry, Academics, Clinical Diagnostic Labs), Application (Research, ... to 2020" report to their offering. ... the addition of the "Radioimmunoassay Market ...
Breaking Medicine Technology: