Fighting Financial Toxicity: Community Oncology Practices Deliver Affordable, High-Quality Cancer Care
Fighting Financial Toxicity: Community Oncology Practices Deliver Affordable, High-Quality Cancer Care
The annual cost of cancer care in the U.S. is projected to rise from $183 billion in 2015 to $246 billion by 2030. As costs climb, the financial burden on patients and families—known as financial toxicity—has become an important measure of care quality.
An extensive review conducted by physicians and executive leaders of Florida Cancer Specialists & Research Institute details how community oncology practices reduce financial toxicity by consistently delivering high-quality, clinically equivalent cancer care at significantly lower costs than hospital-based settings.
FCS co-authors of the research article, “The Role Of Utilizing Community Oncology Care To Decrease Cancer-Related Financial Toxicity,” published in The American Journal of Public Health, are Lucio N. Gordan, MD, president & managing physician, Ryan Ciarrocchi, CEO, Matthew Fink, MD, director of physician compensation & finance, Josh Eaves, chief development & strategy officer, and Amanda Warner, MS, BSN, director, real-world evidence.
A key takeaway underscored by the authors is that the acquisition and administration of cancer treatment drugs remain the principal drivers of overall cost differentials between community oncology and hospital-based providers.
The authors conducted an integrative literature review encompassing peer-reviewed articles and white papers from the last ten years as well as a historical review of associated healthcare policy impacts, health benefits, and claims data. Their research examines the factors behind cost differences, drawing on scientific and empirical evidence.
A key takeaway underscored by the authors is that the acquisition and administration of cancer treatment drugs remain the principal drivers of overall cost differentials between community oncology and hospital-based providers. They note, “The structural and operational differences between these settings, including the cost of chemotherapy, issues arising from complexity of care, facility fees, discounted treatment pricing arrangements, markups, lack of price transparency, and the impact of regulatory policies such as the 340B Drug Pricing Program contribute to variations in cost.”
Additionally, the authors concluded that community oncology practices provide comparatively lower patient-focused savings through the availability of resources that address social needs. They suggest, “Future reimbursement models for these types of services would include recognizing the value of financial navigation, social work, grant assistance, manufacturer assistance programs, and financial assistance services.”
The study identifies several actionable strategies to address and lessen financial toxicity:
- Adoption of site-neutral payment policies ensuring that identical services are reimbursed at the same rate regardless of the care setting.
- Enforcing the Hospital Price Transparency Rule for oncology drug prices to enable patients, employers, and insurers to make value-based decisions and help curb unnecessary cost inflation.
- Realigning the 340B Drug Pricing Program to reduce financial burden for vulnerable patients by funding patient assistance and charity care.
- Supporting infrastructure initiatives to help community sites deliver advanced therapies safely and equitably outside tertiary hospital centers.
Dr. Gordan said, “Our findings not only confirm that community oncology practices provide top-tier cancer care at substantially lower costs than hospital-based settings, but they also highlight the urgent need for policy interventions to address cost disparities that drive patient financial toxicity.”
FCS Assistant Managing Physician David Wenk, MD, noted, “We at FCS remain committed to advancing initiatives that lessen financial toxicity and ensure equitable, high-value oncology care across Florida and nationwide.”
Comments