Brexit & EconomyPoliticsInflationary cost of cancer care

Inflationary cost of cancer care

Advances in the treatment of cancer are resulting in improvements to the health status of sufferers and life expectancy

This has in part been due to the recent licensing of a range of ‘monoclonal
antibody’ based drug therapies.

Such developments are clearly welcomed – but there are significant financial
and employee benefit design implications for companies to consider.

From a claims cost perspective, it would not be uncommon to see patients in
receipt of the new therapies costing tens of thousands of pounds over a year; in
addition to the existing notable costs of chemotherapy or radiotherapy. Indeed,
it is anticipated that treatment using such drugs will be commonplace over a
number of years with some patients, in order to control or stem the recurrence
of a particular cancer episode. It would not be uncommon for treatments
involving the new drug therapies to run into six figures.

As such, and given the existing cost pressures employers already find
themselves in relation to health benefits, quite how an employer should, or
might wish, to react to the potential for further significant plan cost
inflation is open to some debate and speculation.

Suggested initial revisions to plan designs might include the payment of
cancer-related diagnostic costs only, or to restrict cancer benefits to a
defined monetary and/or time based approach.

An alternative to limiting the potential liability on the part of the
employer might be to cease covering cancer altogether as part of the medical
plan. That said, such an approach is likely to be unpopular with employees, and
might only prove to be achievable if, say, an option to buy back/buy up cancer
benefits exists.

Whatever decision an employer makes, for larger medical benefit programmes,
any such decision-making process should be supported by an appropriate level of
formal governance and financial review.

Relevant factors include the financial modelling of the likely claims costs
of any given benefit design. An employer should also consider what clinical
factors might be relevant if applying a defined cancer benefit design to
real-life situations.

Whichever design an employer decides upon, due consideration of such factors
will be required for the programme to remain not only meaningful to and valued
by patients when treatment is most required, but also to ensure some form of
sustainable plan design and financial control from an employer’s perspective.

Elliott Hurst is a senior consultant in Watson Wyatt’s
risk and healthcare benefits group

Related Articles

Financial Secretary to the Treasury on cryptocurrency, Brexit and taxing the digital economy

Brexit Financial Secretary to the Treasury on cryptocurrency, Brexit and taxing the digital economy

1m Alia Shoaib, Reporter
HMRC’s refusal to raid top Tory donor Lycamobile to be investigated by MPs

Big Four HMRC’s refusal to raid top Tory donor Lycamobile to be investigated by MPs

1m Alia Shoaib, Reporter
Spring Statement 2018: Spring has sprung as chancellor finds his inner Tigger

Budget Spring Statement 2018: Spring has sprung as chancellor finds his inner Tigger

2m Emma Smith, Managing Editor
Spring Statement live feed

Budget Spring Statement live feed

3m Emma Smith, Managing Editor
Spring Statement 2018: 5 things to look out for

Brexit & Economy Spring Statement 2018: 5 things to look out for

3m Alia Shoaib, Reporter
Financial Secretary to the Treasury on Brexit, Spring Statement, Making Tax Digital and Carillion

Politics Financial Secretary to the Treasury on Brexit, Spring Statement, Making Tax Digital and Carillion

4m Emma Smith, Managing Editor
David Davis, Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union

Brexit & Economy David Davis, Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union

4m Alia Shoaib, Reporter
Philip Hammond, Chancellor of the Exchequer

Brexit & Economy Philip Hammond, Chancellor of the Exchequer

4m Alia Shoaib, Reporter