Managing conflicting cancer care preferences during COVID
ValuateHealth.com | EntreeHealth.com
Cancer care delivery has arrived at yet another crossroads, and per usual, external forces are driving change. Divergence exists between providers who embrace home infusion of chemotherapy and those refuse to even consider at-home infusion as a treatment option.
Last year the University of Pennsylvania piloted a program called Cancer Care at Home and referred a few dozen patients for the procedure. A successful early pilot positioned this team to grow business dramatically after only few weeks:
· From March 10 through April 7, 135 patients were referred for home therapy
· Criteria for home-based cancer therapy included patients who previously tolerated treatment and proved toxicity management is possible in the home
· Regimens for lymphoma, breast, and prostate cancer were the first disease states tested
· Plans to add more agents to the pilot are in the works, including Rituximab and Pemrbrolizumab
In contrast, the Community Oncology Alliance stated on April 9 the group:
“…fundamentally opposes home infusion of chemotherapy, cancer immunotherapy, and cancer treatment supportive drugs because of patient safety concerns.”
This comes at a time where community cancer centers are challenged by reducing the risk of COVID-19 exposure for both patients and staff through social distancing at infusion centers. Social distancing hinders caregiving and requires significant distancing between chemotherapy chairs, limiting the ability to provide hands-on medical services.
Manufacturers will need to navigate both provider treatment preferences, appreciating that 1 path is less traveled. Supporting customers down each road without alienating one over the other will prove challenging and require expert segmentation. Payers will need to see a clear plan that accounts for safety measure for in-home infusion and need reassurance that providers with the proper credentials are appropriately managing patients at home. The opportunity for home infusion is not universal and provider-supervised infusion must continue as standard of care in many communities.
Plans for pursuing both at-home and clinic-based approaches is necessary, but navigating them simultaneously can be risky. Manufacturers must be thoughtful about how to best move forward with customers in a way that underscores the importance of provider preference. Keeping the patients at the center of the process ensures patients receive the best care for their individual situations in a collaborative, supportive manner.
How can we help find your way in to connect with customers across the continuum of cancer care delivery options?
