Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30557673›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics2019

Insurance Approval for Proton Beam Therapy and its Impact on Delays in Treatment.

Apar Gupta, Atif J Khan, Sharad Goyal, Rihan Millevoi, Natalia Elsebai, Salma K Jabbour, Ning J Yue, Bruce G Haffty, Rahul R Parikh

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

34 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Apar GuptaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, New Jersey.
Atif J KhanDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
Sharad GoyalDepartment of Radiation Oncology, George Washington University Hospital, Washington, District of Columbia.
Rihan MillevoiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Robert Wood Johnson University Hospital, New Brunswick, New Jersey.
Natalia ElsebaiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Robert Wood Johnson University Hospital, New Brunswick, New Jersey.
Salma K JabbourDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, New Jersey.
Ning J YueDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, New Jersey.
Bruce G HafftyDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, New Jersey.
Rahul R ParikhDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, New Jersey. Electronic address: parikhrr@cinj.rutgers.edu.

Funding

Dr. Salma Jabbour’s NCI Research Specialist (Clinician Scientist) Award (R50)R50CA275877 · NCI · RUTGERS BIOMEDICAL AND HEALTH SCIENCES · PI Salma Jabbour · 2023 to 2026
$785k
NCI NIH HHS R50 CA275877
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposePrior authorization (PA) has been widely implemented for proton beam therapy (PBT). We sought to determine the association between PA determination and patient characteristics, practice guidelines, and potential treatment delays. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A single-institution retrospective analysis was performed of all patients considered for PBT between 2015 and 2018 at a National Cancer Institute-designated Comprehensive Cancer Center. Differences in treatment start times and denial rates over time were compared, and multivariable logistic regression was used to identify predictors of initial denial.

resultsA total of 444 patients were considered for PBT, including 396 adult and 48 pediatric patients. The American Society for Radiation Oncology model policy supported PBT coverage for 77% of the cohort. Of adult patients requiring PA, 64% were initially denied and 32% remained denied after appeal. In patients considered for reirradiation or randomized phase 3 trial enrollment, initial denial rates were 57% and 64%, respectively. Insurance coverage was not related to diagnosis, reirradiation, trial enrollment, or the American Society for Radiation Oncology model policy guidelines, but it was related to insurance category on multivariable analysis (P < .001). Over a 3-year timespan, initial denial rates increased from 55% to 74% (P = .034). PA delayed treatment start by an average of 3 weeks (and up to 4 months) for those requiring appeal (P < .001) and resulted in 19% of denied patients abandoning radiation treatment altogether. Of pediatric patients, 9% were initially denied, all of whom were approved after appeal, and PA requirement did not delay treatment start (P = .47).

conclusionsPA requirements in adults represent a significant burden in initiating PBT and cause significant delays in patient care. Insurance approval is arbitrary and has become more restrictive over time, discordant with national clinical practice guidelines. Payors and providers should seek to streamline coverage policies in alignment with established guidelines to ensure appropriate and timely patient care.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overChildFemaleHumansInsurance Claim ReviewInsurance CoverageInsurance, Health, ReimbursementMaleMedicareMiddle AgedNeoplasmsPrior AuthorizationProton Therapy

Identifiers

PMID30557673
PMCPMC10915745

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.