1. PIPC Executive Director Attends the Tenth Annual State of Personalized Medicine Luncheon, click here to view the slide presentation.
2. MedPAC Weighs Factoring CER into Part B Drugs, Services Payments, see details below.
3. PCORI: Tracking Progress Toward Our Strategic Goals, click here to view the blog post.
4. JAMA Viewpoint: Ethics, Regulation, and Comparative Effectiveness Research: Time for a Change, click here to view the article.
5. Blog: New Research Institute Seeking a Patient Perspective, click here to view the blog post.
6. National Review Online: Pushing Experimentation without Consent, click here to view the article.
7. National Post: Patients Who Question Their Doctors Are Changing the Face of Medicine – and Physicians Are Embracing the Shift, click here to view the article.
On March 13, 2014, PIPC Executive Director, Sara van Geertruyden, attended the Tenth Annual State of Personalized Medicine Luncheon at the National Press Club. CMS Chief Medical Officer Patrick Conway shared his perspective on personalized medicine. In discussing the CMS framework for measurement, and mapping them to the six national priorities, he noted that measures should be patient-centered and outcome-oriented whenever possible. He ended the presentation by discussing what we can do together to promote personalized health care, including a call to “remove barriers to personalized medicine and catalyze transformation focused on patient-centered care.” PIPC looks forward to the application of patient-centered principles both in the generation of research, and in the use of that research to ensure appropriate access to treatment options. Click here to view the slide presentation.
2. MedPAC Weighs Factoring CER into Part B Drugs, Services Payments
Last week, Lisa Gillespie of Inside Health Policy reported on the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission’s (MedPAC) of utilizing CER in determining Medicare payment policy. She commented, “Congressional Medicare advisers are weighing the contentious idea of factoring comparative effectiveness research into reimbursement for Part B drugs and services...‘Evidence should influence payment policy, and this isn't just about affordability and expense trends, this is about savings people's lives. We do worry about push back, but I welcome it. I think this is what our responsibly is: to do what we think is the right thing,’ said MedPAC Vice Chair Michael Chernew.” Click here to view the article (paid subscription required).
Mindy Yochelson of Bloomberg also reported on the meeting: “In terms of comparative effectiveness, staff said MedPAC has limited information on which to base its payment policies. Medicare would need legislative authority, as well as public input, to implement a process that links payment to evidence of ‘comparative clinical effectiveness,’ [Nancy Ray, a principal policy analyst] said.” Click here to view the article (paid subscription required).
In response to this discussion, PIPC Chairman Tony Coelho recently stated, “Clinical evidence, and comparative effectiveness research (CER) in particular, can play a valuable role in empowering patients to make good decisions about the range of treatment options based on their unique circumstances and characteristics. PIPC is concerned that expanded CMS authority to use CER in Medicare would result in one-size-fits-all policies that create patient access barriers. The discussion today highlights the importance of advancing principles of patient-centeredness in Medicare payment policy.” Click here to view the statement.
3. PCORI Director Joe Selby: Tracking Progress Toward Our Strategic Goals
Dr. Joe Selby, Executive Director of PCORI, discussed PCORI’s mission via the implementation of the organization’s strategic plan on The PCORI Blog this past week. He wrote, “Like many large organizations with challenging and complex missions, we at PCORI are guided in our work by a strategic plan, a roadmap to fulfilling our mandate to fund and disseminate comparative effectiveness research that results in better-informed health and healthcare decisions, improved care, and better outcomes... Now, I'd like to tell you about a new tool we have to help us gauge and report to our Board of Governors-and to you-how well we're doing against our goals. This tool is the PCORI Dashboard, which is updated quarterly and shows our concrete objectives, current and planned initiatives, and specific budget allocations.” Click here to view the blog post.
4. JAMA Viewpoint: Ethics, Regulation, and Comparative Effectiveness Research: Time for a Change
A new opinion piece published in The Journal of American Medical Association (JAMA) discusses the need for evolving thought leadership for CER. Dr. Richard Platt of Harvard Medical School, Nancy E. Kass of Johns Hopkins, and Deven McGraw of Center for Democracy and Technology commented, “The US health care system is poised to learn more about preventing, diagnosing, and treating illness than has ever been possible. This change is powered by the increasing commitment to comparative effectiveness research, increases in practice-based research, and the increasing availability of data arising from electronic health information systems to help patients, clinicians, and others understand who benefits from which treatments. Much can be learned by observing the outcomes of the varied decisions that clinicians and hospitals make.” Click here to view the article.
5. Blog: New Research Institute Seeking a Patient Perspective
Last week, the American Academy of CPR and First Aid posted a blog regarding PCORI. “Detractors and supporters now have an opportunity of influencing the direction taken by PCORI. The Institute has been gearing up recently for consideration of its first major research funding round of $13 million pilot project grant program. This program will be looking at the best comparative effectiveness research practices and will be touching on how the research will be performed and also how others, including the patients are going to be involved.” Click here to view the blog post.
6. National Review Online: Pushing Experimentation without Consent
Wesley J. Smith, of the National Review Online, took exception to the recent discussion regarding informed consent for research trials. “The New England Journal of Medicine–ever more radically utilitarian, in my view–has an article by prominent bioethicists urging that some less dangerous (comparative effectiveness research) medical experimentation be conducted on patients without our consent. The call arises in the context of Obamacare and medical technocrats seeking to transform our hospitals, clinics, and medical offices into ‘learning health care systems,’ in which doctors not only treat us but are part of a burgeoning nation-wide information-gathering quality control project.” Click here to view the article.
7. National Post: Patients Who Question Their Doctors Are Changing the Face of Medicine – and Physicians Are Embracing the Shift
Last week, Dr. James Aw of the National Post weighed in on how collaborative medicine is impacting comparative effectiveness research. “Before I get to what I think is so interesting about Choosing Wisely, I should mention that certain aspects of the campaign concern me. I worry that it's motivated by cost-containment strategies that could bias the public against preventive medicine. The campaign is a manifestation of an ongoing trend in the profession toward something called evidence-based medicine, which requires most every step in a patient's care to be supported by science and academic research. I like most aspects of evidence-based medicine, but it can be tricky when applied to preventive techniques.” Click here to view the article.