evidence-based medicine – key trends and lessons learned from cms
DESCRIPTION
Evidence-Based Medicine – Key Trends and Lessons Learned from CMS. Mass MEDIC Brian Carey April 20, 2006. Overview. Medicare coverage basics When is evidence adequate for coverage and reimbursement Coverage with evidence development Lessons learned from case studies. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Evidence-Based Medicine – Key Trends and Lessons Learned from CMS
Mass MEDICBrian CareyApril 20, 2006
Overview
Medicare coverage basics When is evidence adequate for coverage and
reimbursement Coverage with evidence development Lessons learned from case studies
CMS Quality Initiative
Administrator Mark McClellan wants to transform CMS from a payer into a public health agency
Promising new technologies may have insufficient evidence for informing clinical practice
Premarket randomized clinical trials may be too limited to represent outcomes in real practice
Health system seeks better outcomes at lowest possible costs
Health IT will allow for great advances in data management, utility for research
Statutory Basis for Coverage
Sect. 1862 (a)(1)(A), Title 18, SSA “Notwithstanding any other provisions of law
. . .no payment may be made…for items or services . . [which] are not reasonable and necessary for the diagnosis or treatment of illness or injury.”
Reasonable and Necessary
CMS has been developing evidence based framework for coverage decisions
“case law” derived from NCDs since 2000 Safe and effective FDA Adequate evidence to conclude that the item or
service improves net health outcomes- generalizable to the Medicare population
- as good or better than current covered alternatives
CMS Follows General Principles of EBM Published and non-published studies, expert opinion,
technology assessments, professional societies, recommendations from the Medicare Coverage Advisory Committee (MCAC)
Key areas of focus include:- Methodological considerations, including study design,
implementation, and analysis- Relevance of chosen outcomes; preference for those experienced
by the patient- Generalizable to the Medicare population- Qualitative assessment of net risks and benefits based on
individual studies
Ladder of Evidential Strength
________Meta-analysis of individual patient data ___________ Large, multi-center RCTs ______________ Meta-analysis of grouped data ______________ Smaller, single site RCTs ______________ Prospective cohort studies ____________ retrospective cohort
____________ Poorly controlled studies
_______________Uncontrolled studies (case-series or reports)
STRENGTH OF EVIDENCE
Higher Lower
CMS Does Not Consider Cost Effectiveness
CMS released Guidance document on April 11, 2006 on NCD Process
“Cost effectiveness is not a factor CMS considers in making NCDs. In other words, the cost of a particular technology is not relevant in the determination of whether the technology improves health outcomes or should be covered for the Medicare population through an NCD.”
Frequently Unanswered Questions
Adverse events in broad use Off-label uses or new combinations of approved uses Risks and benefits in subgroups Outcomes for patient and provider types excluded
from trials Comparative effectiveness Outcomes not measured in trials Clinical utility of diagnostic tests Surgery, some devices and other technologies with
limited regulatory review
Practical Clinical Trials CMS encourages use of data from Practical Clinical
Trials (JAMA article by Dr. Tunis) Greater emphasis on health outcomes actually
experienced by patients, such as quality of life, functional status, duration of disability, morbidity and mortality
less emphasis on outcomes that patients do not directly experience, such as changes in laboratory values, radiographic response, sensitivity/specificity, physiologic parameters and other intermediate or surrogate outcomes
Case Study – Coverage of MTWA
Microvolt T-Wave Alternans is a non-diagnostic test for stratification of patients who may be at risk of sudden cardiac death
MTWA had limited Medicare coverage that varied by local carrier
Cambridge Heart requested NCD in 2005 and met with CMS numerous times
MTWA Coverage
CMS reviewed peer reviewed article and existing technology assessment
Out of 1028 citations in support of MTWA CMS focused on 12 peer reviewed articles
CMS performed systematic review of literature Final NCD issued in March, 2006 expanding
coverage of MTWA using spectral analytic method.
Observations
BCBS TA had concluded that MTWA did not meet criteria for coverage. CMS focused on Medicare eligible population
CMS found there was not sufficient evidence to cover modified moving average (MMA) technique for determining MTWA
Aetna followed CMS’s policy
CMS Coverage with Evidence Development (CED)
Support creation of better evidence Links Medicare coverage with requirement for
prospective data collection Builds on existing Evidence Based Medicine
coverage framework
CMS Evidence Objectives
Provide more and better information for health care decision makers
Expand capacity of clinical research enterprise to produce information oriented to decision makers
Support innovation while addressing frequently unanswered questions
Move toward system in which care delivery and evaluation are more integrated
Use of “CED” by CMS
Lung volume reduction surgery PET for suspected dementia ICD for primary prevention of SCD PET for non-covered oncology uses
Case Study – National Oncologic PET Registry What is a CMS approved “Coverage with Evidence
Development” Program In 2000, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
(CMS) expanded its coverage of positron emission tomography (PET) with F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) to a wide variety of indications for several common cancers – but not all cancers.
In November 2004, CMS proposed expanding PET coverage to most other cancers, if providers collect relevant data in a CMS-approved clinical registry.
National Oncologic PET Registry (Cont.)
NOPR is rune by American College of Radiology and Academy of Molecular Imaging
All PET facilities can participate (for a fee) Requires Pre-PET and Post-PET
- Case report forms completed timely Will assess change in intended management
Lessons Learned
CED policy can result in significant expansion
Registries are very complicated; numerous logistic issues such as IRB, informed consent and Privacy Act
CMS likely to issue new guidance on CED
Section 1013 – Clinical Effectiveness Studies MMA included specific provision on the
comparative clinical effectiveness and appropriateness of health care items
HHS developed 10 priority areas Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
(AHRQ) is conducting studies through EPCs Systematic reviews and syntheses of the scientific
literature
Section 1013 AHRQ Studies Management strategies for gastroesophageal reflux disease Benefits and safety of analgesics for osteoarthritis New diagnostic technologies for evaluation of abnormal breast cancer
screening Epoetin and Darbepoetin for managing anemia in patients undergoing
cancer treatment Off-label use of atypical anti-psychotic medications Renal artery stenting compared to aggressive anti-hypertensive medical
therapy for mild renal artery stenosis Therapies for localized prostate cancer Oral medications for diabetes management Medications for depression management Drug therapies and behavioral interventions for osteoporosis and osteopenia
EBM at State Level
States have been further ahead of CMS Center for Evidence-based Policy at Oregon
Health and Science University Performed systematic reviews for 10 to 15
states on drug effectiveness Starting to look at devices such as imaging
and diagnostic tests
Conclusion – Recent Trends
Increased transparency of coverage process
Focus on evidence and data generation beyond what has traditionally been required for FDA approval
Initiative to increase data collection to use for future coverage decisions or refinements
Increased collaboration between CMS and other government agencies such as FDA and NCI
