Kamboj, Jasmine

55 Background: Prior authorization (PA) processes are known to create administrative burdens and delays in care, but little is known about how these challenges impact rural oncology patients and practice settings. Methods: To understand the broad impact of prior authorization on rural oncology patients and practices, we conducted this study across three community oncology practices serving majority rural patient populations with distinct geography, healthcare infrastructure, and models of care. Sites included one critical access hospital system located in a highly-rural community (Lakewood Health System; Staples, Minnesota), a community-based hub-and-spoke hospital system-based practice located in a mid-sized community (Mayo Clinic Health System – Northfield; Northfield, Minnesota), and a standalone referral level III trauma center serving a highly rural patient base (Self Regional Healthcare; Greenwood, South Carolina). This retrospective cohort study examined all intravenous and subcutaneous cancer-directed therapy plans (no oral therapy) that required PA submission at these locations over a three-month period from October 1, 2024 to December 31, 2024. Results: 129 PA submissions were required during the study period. 82 were due to cancer-directed therapy agents (of which 14 were immunotherapy agents), and 47 were due to adjunctive therapies (of which 22, 16, and 9 were due to granulocyte stimulation, bone preservation, and anti-emesis agents, respectively). All 129 PA submissions ultimately resulted in approval of the desired medication or formulary-approved biosimilar. Delays from PA submission to approval ranged from 0 to 18 days. A total of 209 patient-days were delayed due to PA during the study period, which did not ultimately result in change of care or denial of care in any instance. Conclusions: At all sites included in this study, all PA submissions were eventually authorized. The PA process was found to introduce inconsistent and potentially avoidable delays for hundreds of patients and their care teams. These findings highlight the inefficiency of current PA processes among rural cancer populations and the practices that care for them, underscoring the need for ongoing efforts directed at state and federal PA reform.

Health policy influences health and well-being for patients with cancer. Advocating for evidence-based health policies that aim to prevent cancer, promote health, and improve efficiencies in the health care system is crucial to improving care delivery and cancer outcomes nationwide. The role of the ASCO's Government Relations Committee (GRC) is to advocate for policies at a federal and state level that promote high-quality and equitable cancer care, and ASCO volunteer engagement is critical for the success of creating, changing, and adopting policies that support patients with cancer and their care team. Cancer care professionals are uniquely positioned to advocate at all levels of government, local, state, and federal and to serve as invaluable resources for lawmakers as they work to implement policy changes. Lawmakers are highly responsive to cancer care providers as most lawmakers have family or friends who have been diagnosed with cancer. Multiple advocacy strategies that are effective and efficient in their approach have been used, making advocating feasible for cancer care professionals’ busy schedule. To improve patient care, ASCO’s GRC and ASCO volunteers advocate for increased federal funding for research, greater health care access, value in cancer care, and payment reform. ASCO’s GRC has many programs in place to support ASCO members interested in engaging in advocacy to improve the quality of care for their patients and the support for cancer care professionals to thrive in the field.

This commentary is a call to action for a concerted commitment and effort to transform clinical trials and enable people with cancer to participate in clinical trials closer to home. Three key strategies are identified to address major barriers: confront challenges with the interpretation of US Food and Drug Administration Form 1572 requirements (Statement of Investigator); broaden acceptance of local laboratories and imaging centers; and invest in the creation of effective, sustainable partnerships between research centers and local providers.