Gertruud Haitsma1,2, Himanshu Patel1, Parthasarathi Gurumurthy1, Maarten J Postma2,3,4. 1. a Department of Pharmacy Practice, JSS College of Pharmacy , Mysore, JSS University , Mysore , India. 2. b Department of Pharmacy, Unit of PharmacoTherapy, -Epidemiology & -Economics (PTE2) , University of Groningen , Groningen , The Netherlands. 3. c Institute of Science in Healthy Aging & healthcaRE (SHARE) , University Medical Center Groningen (UMCG), University of Groningen , Groningen , The Netherlands. 4. d Department of Epidemiology , University Medical Center Groningen (UMCG), University of Groningen , Groningen , The Netherlands.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to examine the access of Indian cancer patients to optimum cancer care under selected government schemes by reviewing reimbursement schemes for cancer care in India. METHODS: All cancer care reimbursement schemes in India were identified and three highly utilized schemes (VAS, RAS, CMCHS) were selected. Quality of breast, colorectal, lung, head & neck, and gastric cancer care was reviewed with respect to NCCN guidelines. Direct medical costs and shortage of budget in reimbursed amounts were calculated for each listed chemotherapy regimen. RESULTS: Medical oncology practice following the schemes' formularies is inferior to recommendations by the NCCN guidelines. Innovative treatment (targeted therapies) like trastuzumab, pertuzumab (breast), bevacizumab, cetuximab, panitumumab (colorectal), erlotinib, gefitinib, crizotinib, and nivolumab (lung) are either not reimbursed (VAS, CMCHS) or partially reimbursed (RAS). Average shortage of budget was found to be 43% (breast), 55% (colorectal), 74% (lung), 7% (head & neck), and 51% (gastric cancer). CONCLUSIONS: Policy makers should consider addition of newer treatments, exclusion of sub-optimal treatments, increments in per patient budget and optimization of supportive care, which may contribute to improvements in survival and quality of life for Indian cancer patients.
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to examine the access of Indian cancerpatients to optimum cancer care under selected government schemes by reviewing reimbursement schemes for cancer care in India. METHODS: All cancer care reimbursement schemes in India were identified and three highly utilized schemes (VAS, RAS, CMCHS) were selected. Quality of breast, colorectal, lung, head & neck, and gastric cancer care was reviewed with respect to NCCN guidelines. Direct medical costs and shortage of budget in reimbursed amounts were calculated for each listed chemotherapy regimen. RESULTS: Medical oncology practice following the schemes' formularies is inferior to recommendations by the NCCN guidelines. Innovative treatment (targeted therapies) like trastuzumab, pertuzumab (breast), bevacizumab, cetuximab, panitumumab (colorectal), erlotinib, gefitinib, crizotinib, and nivolumab (lung) are either not reimbursed (VAS, CMCHS) or partially reimbursed (RAS). Average shortage of budget was found to be 43% (breast), 55% (colorectal), 74% (lung), 7% (head & neck), and 51% (gastric cancer). CONCLUSIONS: Policy makers should consider addition of newer treatments, exclusion of sub-optimal treatments, increments in per patient budget and optimization of supportive care, which may contribute to improvements in survival and quality of life for Indian cancerpatients.