2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Out-of-pocket payment and financial risk protection for breast cancer treatment: a prospective study from India

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Summary

          Background

          Available data on cost of cancer treatment, out-of-pocket payment and reimbursement are limited in India. We estimated the treatment costs, out-of-pocket payment, and reimbursement in a cohort of breast cancer patients who sought treatment at a publicly funded tertiary cancer care hospital in India.

          Methods

          A prospective longitudinal study was conducted from June 2019 to March 2022 at Tata Memorial Centre (TMC), Mumbai. Data on expenditure during each visit of treatment was collected by a team of trained medical social workers. The primary outcome variables were total cost (TC) of treatment, out-of-pocket payment (OOP), and reimbursement. TC included cost incurred by breast cancer patients during treatment at TMC. OOP was defined as the total cost incurred at TMC less of reimbursement. Reimbursement was any form of financial assistance (cashless or repayment), including social health insurance, private health insurance, employee health schemes, and assistance from charitable trusts, received by the patients for breast cancer treatment.

          Findings

          Of the 500 patients included in the study, 45 discontinued treatment (due to financial or other reasons) and 26 died during treatment. The mean TC of breast cancer treatment was ₹258,095/US$3531 (95% CI: 238,225, 277,934). Direct medical cost (MC) accounted for 56.3% of the TC. Systemic therapy costs (₹50,869/US$696) were higher than radiotherapy (₹33,483/US$458) and surgery costs (₹25,075/US$343). About 74.4% patients availed some form of financial assistance at TMC; 8% patients received full reimbursement. The mean OOP for breast cancer treatment was ₹186,461/US$2551 (95% CI: 167,666, 205,257), accounting for 72.2% of the TC. Social health insurance (SHI) had a reasonable coverage (33.1%), followed by charitable trusts (29.6%), employee health insurance (5.1%), private health insurance (4.4%) and 25.6% had no reimbursement. But SHI covered only 40.1% of the TC of treatment compared to private health insurance that covered as much as 57.1% of it. Both TC and OOP were higher for patients who were younger, belonged to rural areas, had a comorbidity, were diagnosed at an advanced stage, and were from outside Maharashtra.

          Interpretation

          In India, the cost and OOP for breast cancer treatment are high and reimbursement for the treatment flows from multiple sources. Though many of the patients receive some form of reimbursement, it is insufficient to prevent high OOP. Hence both wider insurance coverage as well as higher cap of the insurance packages in the health insurance schemes is suggested. Allowing for the automatic inclusion of cancer treatment in SHI can mitigate the financial burden of cancer patients in India.

          Funding

          This work was funded by an extramural grant from the Women’s Cancer Initiative and the doi 10.13039/100019758, Nag Foundation; and an intramural grant from the International Institute of Population Sciences, Mumbai.

          Related collections

          Most cited references47

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries

          This article provides an update on the global cancer burden using the GLOBOCAN 2020 estimates of cancer incidence and mortality produced by the International Agency for Research on Cancer. Worldwide, an estimated 19.3 million new cancer cases (18.1 million excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer) and almost 10.0 million cancer deaths (9.9 million excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer) occurred in 2020. Female breast cancer has surpassed lung cancer as the most commonly diagnosed cancer, with an estimated 2.3 million new cases (11.7%), followed by lung (11.4%), colorectal (10.0 %), prostate (7.3%), and stomach (5.6%) cancers. Lung cancer remained the leading cause of cancer death, with an estimated 1.8 million deaths (18%), followed by colorectal (9.4%), liver (8.3%), stomach (7.7%), and female breast (6.9%) cancers. Overall incidence was from 2-fold to 3-fold higher in transitioned versus transitioning countries for both sexes, whereas mortality varied <2-fold for men and little for women. Death rates for female breast and cervical cancers, however, were considerably higher in transitioning versus transitioned countries (15.0 vs 12.8 per 100,000 and 12.4 vs 5.2 per 100,000, respectively). The global cancer burden is expected to be 28.4 million cases in 2040, a 47% rise from 2020, with a larger increase in transitioning (64% to 95%) versus transitioned (32% to 56%) countries due to demographic changes, although this may be further exacerbated by increasing risk factors associated with globalization and a growing economy. Efforts to build a sustainable infrastructure for the dissemination of cancer prevention measures and provision of cancer care in transitioning countries is critical for global cancer control.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Modeling Health Care Expenditures and Use

            Health care expenditures and use are challenging to model because these dependent variables typically have distributions that are skewed with a large mass at zero. In this article, we describe estimation and interpretation of the effects of a natural experiment using two classes of nonlinear statistical models: one for health care expenditures and the other for counts of health care use. We extend prior analyses to test the effect of the ACA's young adult expansion on three different outcomes: total health care expenditures, office-based visits, and emergency department visits. Modeling the outcomes with a two-part or hurdle model, instead of a single-equation model, reveals that the ACA policy increased the number of office-based visits but decreased emergency department visits and overall spending.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The high price of anticancer drugs: origins, implications, barriers, solutions

              The costs of both newly approved, and established anticancer drugs have risen dramatically in the past decade, to the point where the costs of such treatments are becoming unsustainable. In this perspective, the authors outline the extent of this problem, and how it is likely to continue, while also suggesting measures that could be taken in future to address these rising costs.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Lancet Reg Health Southeast Asia
                Lancet Reg Health Southeast Asia
                The Lancet Regional Health - Southeast Asia
                Elsevier
                2772-3682
                16 January 2024
                May 2024
                16 January 2024
                : 24
                : 100346
                Affiliations
                [a ]Department of Radiation Oncology, Advanced Centre for Treatment, Research and Education in Cancer (ACTREC), Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Kharghar, Navi Mumbai 410 210, India
                [b ]Department of Population and Development, International Institute for Population Sciences, Mumbai 400 088, India
                [c ]International Institute for Population Sciences, Mumbai 400 088, India
                [d ]Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Kharghar, Navi Mumbai 410 210, India
                [e ]Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Parel, Mumbai 400 012, India
                [f ]Department of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Parel, Mumbai 400 012, India
                [g ]Department of Surgical Oncology, Advanced Centre for Treatment, Research and Education in Cancer (ACTREC), Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Kharghar, Navi Mumbai 410 210, India
                Author notes
                []Corresponding author. twadasadawala@ 123456actrec.gov.in
                [i]

                Contributed equally and are first authors.

                Article
                S2772-3682(23)00206-8 100346
                10.1016/j.lansea.2023.100346
                11096681
                38756158
                1c1eff0f-e0e9-4b52-b10f-9373aaa01f35
                © 2023 The Author(s)

                This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

                History
                : 2 April 2023
                : 2 November 2023
                : 26 December 2023
                Categories
                Articles

                breast cancer,oncology,health policy,health economics,cancer costs,oop,health care expenditure,health insurance,reimbursement

                Comments

                Comment on this article