Abstract:The design of the traditional Medicare benefit has changed very little since its inception in the 1960s. Enrollees in traditional Medicare can seek care from any clinicians, practices, or health care organizations (hereafter, providers) enrolled in the Medicare program and have unrestricted access to Medicare's covered services. While these benefits are appealing, beneficiary cost sharing is often high. Medicare Advantage addresses limitations of traditional Medicare by reducing cost sharing and setting maximum out-of-pocket cost caps, while also offering additional services (eg, vision, dental). Medicare Advantage plans can provide more generous benefits because they apply strong benefit design policies, including constraining their provider networks and imposing coverage restrictions (such as prior authorization). As enrollment in Medicare Advantage increases—now more than 50% of Medicare beneficiaries are enrolled in Medicare Advantage—researchers have sought to understand the strengths and weaknesses of traditional Medicare and Medicare Advantage and their implications for patients. Elsewhere in JAMA Network Open , Kalidindi and colleagues 1 compared resource use and quality of care for Medicare Advantage vs traditional Medicare enrollees who were undergoing chemotherapy for cancer. They found lower resource use in Medicare Advantage that was primarily associated with savings on physician-administered chemotherapy due to using less expensive chemotherapy regimens and fewer chemotherapy administration visits. The very high and rising spending on oncology drugs relative to other drugs 2 may provide an opportunity to improve the value of care, particularly given the substantial variation in prices for different oncology drugs. Research has demonstrated that plan and patient spending for different guideline-concordant regimens of similar efficacy differs by orders of magnitude. 3 In recent years, spending on infused and oral anticancer drugs accounted for approximately two-thirds of all spending for patients undergoing chemotherapy. 4 If Medicare Advantage plans can prompt the use of lower-priced drugs, they may realize substantial savings. 5 Under fee-for-service compensation models, oncologists are reimbursed for physician-administered drugs based on a percentage of the drug's cost (6% of the average sales price for Medicare). To counteract this incentive to use higher-priced drugs, Medicare Advantage is equipped with utilization management tools. Medicare Advantage plans can—and do—require prescribers to submit prior authorization requests before the plan will approve treatment coverage. They also may implement step therapy and quantity limits. Plans' use of utilization management is increasing, in part due to limited alternatives to control the high prices of drugs and other services. Carefully considered prior authorization policies may be an important tool in improving cancer care value given the extraordinarily high cost of cancer drugs, the wide variation in costs of guideline-supported treatment, and the urgent problem of financial toxicity for cancer patients. Utilization management can reduce resource use, but at a cost. Prior authorization processes impose administrative burdens that may limit access to potentially important medications (not assessed in this study, which included patients already receiving chemotherapy), and it leads to delayed or discontinued care among patients already taking cancer drugs. 6 ,7 Moreover, clinician burnout is a worsening challenge, and physicians are distressed by the rising administrative burden of prior authorization. This dynamic is concerning for patient care in the longer term. Innovation in the design of Medicare coverage for all beneficiaries remains a policy priority. For example, alternative payment models, such as the Oncology Care Model (OCM), have incorporated incentives to use less expensive drugs. OCM practices saw swifter uptake of biosimilar therapies and higher-value use of supportive care drugs, 4 suggesting there may be tools to influence prescribing that are more clinician-friendly than prior authorization. The fewer chemotherapy administration visits for Medicare Advantage beneficiaries observed by Kalindi and colleagues 1 raise questions as to whether plans required less frequent dosing schedules or prioritized chemotherapy regimens with less frequent administration schedules; this is an important question for future study. Another important strategy used by Medicare Advantage plans to lower resource use is defined provider networks. Medicare Advantage plans may seek to steer patients to providers with less-resource intensive practice styles. Alternatively, such networks could result if providers find the utilization management practices of Medicare Advantage plans too onerous. Evidence from Medi -Abstract Truncated-

Secret Sauce-How Diverse Practices Succeed in Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Oncology Care Model

Association of Participation in Medicare's Oncology Care Model With Spending, Utilization, and Quality Outcomes Among Commercially Insured and Medicare Advantage Members

Quality of care for dual eligible beneficiaries in the oncology care model

Evolving oncology care management trends in the United States: A survey among health care decision makers

Chronic care management: An opportunity to drive quality outcomes in oncology care.

Early Health System Experiences with Collaborative Care (CoCM) Billing Codes: a Qualitative Study of Leadership and Support Staff

Morehouse Choice Accountable Care Organization and Education System (MCACO-ES): Integrated Model Delivering Equitable Quality Care

The Promise and Perils of Oncology Care in Medicare Advantage

Continuous Care Provided Through Comprehensive Medication Management in an Acute Care Practice Model

Improving Nursing Facility Care Through an Innovative Payment Demonstration Project: Optimizing Patient Transfers, Impacting Medical Quality, and Improving Symptoms: Transforming Institutional Care Phase 2

Quality improvement scorecards driving innovation and best practice in a large community oncology practice.

Augmenting Predictive Modeling Tools with Clinical Insights for Care Coordination Program Design and Implementation

Operational strategies for achieving comprehensive cancer center community outreach and engagement objectives: impact and logic models

Implementation of an integrated pharmacist collaborative care model in specialty disease state clinics

“In Principle We Have Agreement, But in Practice It Is a Bit More Difficult”: Obtaining Organizational Buy-In to Patient-Centered Medical Home Transformation

Developing innovative models of care for cancer survivors: use of implementation science to guide evaluation of appropriateness and feasibility

Managing medications for patients with cancer and chronic conditions: It's time for collaboration between primary care and oncology pharmacists

The impact on hospice quality after initiation of an internal palliative care program by a community oncology practice.

Medical University of South Carolina case study: A structured approach to improving quality metrics for achieving maximum pay-for-performance incentive payments

Advancing survivorship at a comprehensive cancer center: integrating clinical care, education and research initiatives at Northwestern Medicine and the Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center

Intervention to Optimize Guideline-Recommended Interdependent Care Delivery in Breast and Lung Cancers with the 4R Oncology Model.