Cancer Treatment Drugs Criticized By Insurance Companies

If you have been recently diagnosed with cancer or you are currently undergoing treatment, you may already be aware of the latest news concerning criticisms of new cancer drugs by U.S. insurance companies.

There is a growing disparity between the insurance industry and the developments in new medical treatments. Specifically, it is a question of what motives on the part of insurance providers in providing coverage of new cancer treatment drugs rather than traditional chemotherapy.

It seems that many cancer patients who could receive better treatment using pills instead of chemo are being denied insurance coverage because the treatment is new. Some advocacy groups have suggested that there is a baser motive behind the refusal of companies to pay for the drugs.

For the patients, this form of treatment offers a cheaper and easier alternative to chemotherapy. Doctors, on the other hand, are missing out on commissions that are made whenever someone undergoes chemotherapy. It appears that there may be a conflict of interest. Worse, the patient loses out on a better health care option.

As a result of such policies, patients wishing to use cancer treatment drugs like Temodar must pay hefty amounts, somewhere within the range of $5,500 to $1,700 a month. Very few can afford such high costs. The reason coverage was denied came down to the fact that it was a pill or capsule rather than chemo or radiation treatment.

There are plenty of reasons to think that the problem is systemic. Advocates for total health care coverage in the U.S. are quick to point out the serious oversights and gross mismanagement of the present health care system in the United States. Opposition to universal health care is hasty to voice their own complaints and criticism of similar systems around the world. (Britain, Canada, and France come up most often.)

The difficulty is finding a compromise that sufficiently deals with the problems of the existing system while providing opportunity for more people get quality coverage. In the case of the issue of cancer treatment drugs and the criticisms of the health care industry, a more fundamental reassessment of the doctor/insurer relationship and the breakdown of incentives must be required. This may be the only way for the system to operate without unnecessary restrictions on treatment options.