Insurance Coverage of Novel Therapies – Where Should We Draw the Line?

Insurance Coverage of Novel Therapies – Where Should We Draw the Line?

A highly publicized UHC denial of care led to more questions than answers.

By now many have read the ProPublica expose on how UnitedHealthcare (UHC) did nearly everything possible to avoid paying for the treatment of an insured patient with ulcerative colitis. If you have not read it, you can find the article here.

Let me start by saying that the behavior of the UHC employees, whether condoned by management or not, was inexcusable, and everyone hopes this leads to change. Many of us have heard from commercial insurers that their staffs, including their medical directors, are in no way incentivized to deny care. And this may be true, but what happened with this patient suggests that there may be more devious factors in play.    

But while the behavior of UHC is abhorrent, the case itself does raise an interesting issue. This patient was quite unique, with a disease that was refractory to all usual treatment regimens. He was clearly receiving the best of care, seeing a world-renowned gastroenterologist who works at what is often referred to as the best health system in the world: the Mayo Clinic. As the article describes, he was receiving two medications that are not normally used together, both at doses that are significantly higher than regularly prescribed. And while the article notes that “there was evidence that the treatment plan for McNaughton might work, including studies that had found dual biologic therapy to be efficacious and safe,” they provided no references. A recent literature review notes that “the overwhelming majority of the literature consists of case reports and case series.”   

In fact, the patient’s gastroenterologist was quoted as stating that “my treatment of Chris was not clinically inappropriate — as was shown by Chris’s positive outcome.” As is commonly noted, the plural of anecdote is not data. In other words, the response of one person, or even a few patients, does not prove that a regimen being used is both effective and safe. It certainly may be, but a proper clinical trial is required to be performed to test that hypothesis.

This case contrasts with a recent denial by Premera Blue Cross that went viral on Twitter and was covered by Medscape News; it was about approval for Keytruda, an immunotherapy for breast cancer. In this case, the treatment was supported by National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) and American Society of Clinical Oncology (ACSO) guidelines for this patient. Clearly, the insurance company was wrong for denying coverage, and according to the article, the vice president of medical management reversed the denial when provided the references.

Even if guidelines and studies are not available, as often happens with cancer therapy, there are compassionate care programs that allow patients to access experimental therapies. Drug companies can, with Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval, allow patients to receive medications that are not yet FDA-approved outside of a clinical trial. Most insurers and Medicare also provide coverage for cancer treatments that are not only FDA-approved, but also supported by clinical compendia or clinical trials published in peer-reviewed journals. And many pharmaceutical companies offer patient assistance programs for their medications when the patient has no coverage or inadequate coverage.

So, the lingering goal with this case is to define the obligation of insurance companies to pay for therapies that have not been properly studied. Certainly, in this situation, it may be difficult to find enough patients with such refractory disease in order to test the treatment in a trial. Should that play a factor? Should there be a definition for rare manifestations of diseases that forces insurers to pay for any treatment proposed by a licensed physician? Should it be based on the qualifications of the treating physician? While I will not address the controversies that manifested during the COVID-19 pandemic, it certainly illustrates the complexities of patients’ rights to access to treatments, and who is obligated to pay for that.

Let me make it clear: I am not a fan of insurance companies. I have written extensively about their tactics in avoiding paying for medically necessary care to maximize their profits. I honestly do not think there is a perfect solution to the issue of healthcare and am confident that no matter what system is tried, there will always be people who figure out how to cheat the system for their own benefit. For some diseases, the literature is clear on what care is beneficial and what care is not, as we see with use of implanted cardiac defibrillators. But if we have learned anything, it is that what may be perceived as beneficial may later prove to either provide no benefit or even cause harm, as with the use of Xigris for septic shock or tight control of diabetes in the frail elderly.

Do I have an answer here? Certainly not. This patient had the benefit of being able to see one of the most renowned gastroenterologists in the world for his treatment, so the decision to try this regimen would appear to have support – and probably obligated the insurance company to pay for it. But would this apply to a patient in another town who is being cared for by a physician who has never treated a patient with such severe disease, but thinks an untested regimen is worth trying? What if that treatment resulted in a catastrophic outcome? Who is responsible? I certainly know that the answer is not that only those who can generate enough social media attention should get their care covered.

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Ronald Hirsch, MD, FACP, ACPA-C, CHCQM, CHRI

Ronald Hirsch, MD, is vice president of the Regulations and Education Group at R1 Physician Advisory Services. Dr. Hirsch’s career in medicine includes many clinical leadership roles at healthcare organizations ranging from acute-care hospitals and home health agencies to long-term care facilities and group medical practices. In addition to serving as a medical director of case management and medical necessity reviewer throughout his career, Dr. Hirsch has delivered numerous peer lectures on case management best practices and is a published author on the topic. He is a member of the Advisory Board of the American College of Physician Advisors, and the National Association of Healthcare Revenue Integrity, a member of the American Case Management Association, and a Fellow of the American College of Physicians. Dr. Hirsch is a member of the RACmonitor editorial board and is regular panelist on Monitor Mondays. The opinions expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views, policies, or opinions of R1 RCM, Inc. or R1 Physician Advisory Services (R1 PAS).

Related Stories

When Quality Rankings Are Misleading

When Quality Rankings Are Misleading

“Quality rankings” are often oxymoronic.  My local paper recently had a headline asking “Does your clinic measure up? Check Minnesota’s quality rankings.” The paper proceeded to report

Read More

Leave a Reply

Please log in to your account to comment on this article.

Featured Webcasts

2025 Coding Clinic Webcast Series

2024 ICD-10-CM/PCS Coding Clinic Update Webcast Series

Uncover critical guidance. HIM coding expert, Kay Piper, RHIA, CDIP, CCS, provides an interactive review on important information in each of the AHA’s 2025 ICD-10-CM/PCS Quarterly Coding Clinics in easy-to-access on-demand webcasts, available shortly after each official publication.

April 14, 2025

Trending News

Featured Webcasts

Audit-Proof Your Wound Care Procedures: Expert Insights on Compliance and Risk Mitigation

Audit-Proof Your Wound Care Procedures: Expert Insights on Compliance and Risk Mitigation

Providers face increasing Medicare audits when using skin substitute grafts, leaving many unprepared for claim denials and financial liabilities. Join veteran healthcare attorney Andrew B. Wachler, Esq., in this essential webcast and master the Medicare audit process, learn best practices for compliant billing and documentation, and mitigate fraud and abuse risks. With actionable insights and a live Q&A session, you’ll gain the tools to defend your practice and ensure compliance in this rapidly evolving landscape.

April 17, 2025
Utilization Review Essentials: What Every Professional Needs to Know About Medicare

Utilization Review Essentials: What Every Professional Needs to Know About Medicare

Dr. Ronald Hirsch dives into the basics of Medicare for clinicians to be successful as utilization review professionals. He’ll break down what Medicare does and doesn’t pay for, what services it provides and how hospitals get paid for providing those services – including both inpatient and outpatient. Learn how claims are prepared and how much patients must pay for their care. By attending our webcast, you will gain a new understanding of these issues and be better equipped to talk to patients, to their medical staff, and to their administrative team.

March 20, 2025

Rethinking Observation Metrics: Standardizing Data for Better Outcomes

Hospitals face growing challenges in measuring observation metrics due to inconsistencies in classification, payer policies, and benchmarking practices. Join Tiffany Ferguson, LMSW, CMAC, ACM, and Anuja Mohla, DO, FACP, MBA, ACPA-C, CHCQM-PHYADV as they provide critical insights into refining observation metrics. This webcast will address key issues affecting observation data integrity and offer strategies for improving consistency in reporting. You will learn how to define meaningful metrics, clarify commonly misinterpreted terms, and apply best practices for benchmarking, and gain actionable strategies to enhance observation data reliability, mitigate financial risk, and drive better decision-making.

February 25, 2025
Navigating the 2025 Medicare Physician Fee Schedule: Key Changes and Strategies for Success

Navigating the 2025 Medicare Physician Fee Schedule: Key Changes and Strategies for Success

The 2025 Medicare Physician Fee Schedule brings significant changes to payment rates, coverage, and coding for physician services, impacting practices nationwide. Join Stanley Nachimson, MS., as he provides a comprehensive guide to understanding these updates, offering actionable insights on new Medicare-covered services, revised coding rules, and payment policies effective January 1. Learn how to adapt your practices to maintain compliance, maximize reimbursement, and plan for revenue in 2025. Whether you’re a physician, coder, or financial staff member, this session equips you with the tools to navigate Medicare’s evolving requirements confidently and efficiently.

January 21, 2025

Trending News

Happy National Doctor’s Day! Learn how to get a complimentary webcast on ‘Inpatient Admission Order: Master the Who, When, and How Webcast‘ as a token of our heartfelt appreciation! Click here to learn more →

Get 15% OFF on all educational webcasts at ICD10monitor with code JULYFOURTH24 until July 4, 2024—start learning today!

Happy National Doctor’s Day! Learn how to get a complimentary webcast on ‘Decoding Social Admissions’ as a token of our heartfelt appreciation! Click here to learn more →

CYBER WEEK IS HERE! Don’t miss your chance to get 20% off now until Dec. 2 with code CYBER24