Don’t Blame 340B for Private Cancer Clinics’ Finances

by Admin | June 9, 2015 4:26 pm

Some private cancer clinics blame the 340B program for their financial problems. In an article in The Journal of Oncology Practice, two nationally recognized oncologists argue that 340B isn’t at fault.

Blaming 340B for the the shift in cancer care from doctors’ offices to hospitals and restricting 340B in response “would not address the major causes of this shift and would adversely affect vulnerable patients currently helped by safety-net providers,” write Dr. Hagop Kantarjian, professor and chair of leukemia at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, and Dr. Robert Chapman, director of the Josephine Ford Cancer Institute at Henry Ford Health System in Detroit.

Rather, the pair attributes the trend toward hospital care mainly to “declining profits and revenues in private oncology practices as a result of the Medicare Modernization Act of 2003 and the average sales price plus 6% reimbursement rule.” They also cite declining reimbursement rates for visits and procedures; financial pressures and payment models that do not consider the complexities involved delivering care in an office setting; and increased practice expenses for electronic medical records systems, information technology, billing documentation, and regulatory compliance.

Kantarjian and Chapman offered several solutions, including allowing private oncology practices to qualify for 340B if they agree to shoulder the same burden of care for vulnerable patients as hospitals in the drug discount program.  They also recommend modifying the reimbursement formula for delivering cancer chemotherapy in the doctor’s office “to account for the complexities of care,” and moving away from fee-for-service reimbursement and towards bundled care.

The article appeared online on June 2 and will appear in the July 2015 print edition of the journal.

Source URL: https://340binformed.org/2015/06/dont-blame-340b-for-private-cancer-clinics-finances/