It is known that genetic testing plays a role in the management of prostate cancer, but community practices are still trying to understand and overcome the challenges for increased adoption and find better ways to decide which patients require hereditary testing, how to utilize the test information, and when genetic counseling is needed. Raoul S. Concepcion, MD, covered this topic during a presentation at the 2019 Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference.
In the past month, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) shared the results of Oncology Care Model (OCM) performance period 4 (PP4) with participating practices. Charles Saunders, MD, chief executive officer, Integra Connect, provides a brief commentary on a surprising trend in the OCM PP4 results, considerations for practices contemplating two-sided risk, and how predictive analytics will help practices meet their bottom line moving forward.
With Oncology Care Model performance period 4 results out now, it’s a transformative point in the model in which practices that have not yet achieved a performance-based payment have to either enter 2-sided risk or leave the model. To dive into the most recent results and their implications, we spoke with Charles Saunders, MD, chief executive officer of Integra Connect.
The health care sector has undergone a shift in the way care is delivered, in the way outcomes are measured, and in how services are reimbursed. The movement has been toward more data-driven science with an emphasis on high-quality outcomes at less cost.
Payers and providers alike seek to ensure clinical decisions are based foremost on the best and latest evidence across all settings...
The number of approved cancer therapies continues to rise, with 63 cancer drugs launched within the past five years.
This proliferation of new drugs on the market, coupled with biosimilars getting fast-tracked by the FDA, has resulted in mounting competitive pressures for the biopharma industry. In response, the industry has been eagerly embracing the idea of leveraging real-world evidence as a means to reduce time to market, whether by supporting the repurposing of existing drugs for new indications or for post-approval studies.
Oncology spending has grown unabated for years, with systemic cancer costs forecast to grow by as much as 40% from 2010 to 2020, reaching $173 billion, according to Community Oncology Alliance (COA). While this growth can be attributed to improved longevity, earlier detection and changes in care settings—such as the increased use of hospital settings for patient care in lieu of less-expensive, community-based settings—novel therapies continue to remain a primary cost driver.
This year’s ASCO Annual Meeting included several major successes that should translate to new molecular targets in advanced non-small cell lung cancer, but recent real-world evidence should lead us to take a hard look in the mirror and realize we’re failing to deliver on the promise of the treatments we already have.
Nearly three years after its introduction, the CMS’s Oncology Care Model (OCM) remains the most ambitious and far-reaching initiative to shift cancer care toward value-based models.
The impact on community oncology, where almost 55% of U.S. cancer patients receive treatment1, has been especially pronounced. Our experiences supporting the success of one of the largest OCM cohorts—approximately 900 providers and 25,000 patients—has enabled us to aggregate their experiences into a snapshot of the program’s positive impacts, its challenges, and the broader implications for providers, pharma, and payers.
At the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Annual Meeting (May 31 – June 4, 2019; Chicago, IL), Journal of Clinical Pathways spoke with Adil Akhtar, MD, Michigan Health Professionals, and Charles Saunders, MD, Integra Connect, regarding the cost implications and quality improvement opportunity of a palliative care program at a large Oncology Care Model (OCM) community practice, along with the “cultural change” surrounding palliative care in oncology.
January 2019 represented another major inflection point for the Oncology Care Model (OCM), marking the halfway point of the 5-year program. Overall, while OCM participants have expressed concerns about perceived flaws in the program, from attribution logic to novel therapy adjustment, the cohort of OCM participants who work with Integra Connect all agree that value-based cancer care is inevitable and are motivated to help drive its success—both under the OCM and in the long-term as more commercial payers adopt value-based models.