Clinical Sequalae of Initial Insurance Denials in a Large Academic Radiation Oncology Center

Abstract

The objective of this study is to investigate the clinical sequalae of initial radiation oncology insurance denials. The hypothesis is that while the majority of initial insurance case denials are ultimately overturned, there are potential clinical implications to these initial denials. Data were extracted from an institutional registry of patient cases initially denied authorization by their insurers from January 2022 to December 2022. Chi-Square tests using statistical software were employed. Two hundred six cases from November 2021 to December 2022 were identified. The majority (n = 199 [96.6%]) of insurers were commercial payers, while 7 (3.4%) were Medicare/Medicare Advantage. 161 (78.1%) patients were <65 years of age, and 45 (21.8%) 65 or older. One hundred forty-one (68.4%) cases were metastatic, 60 (29.1%) definitive, and 5 (2.4%) were recurrent. Of the 206 cases, 127 (61.6%) cases were ultimately successful in authorization of the ordered treatment without any change to the requested treatment technique or prescription dose after P2P (Peer to Peer review), second-level appeal, comparison plan submission, employer request, insurance carrier change, and/or external appeal, and 56 (27.2%) cases were authorized though with insurer-requested modification to radiation treatment technique and/or prescription dose. Of 21 cases with a requested change in prescription dose, the median decrease in biologically effective dose (BED) was 24 Gy (range: 2.3-51). Of 58 cases with requested change in RT technique, 20 (34.5%) changed from IMRT to 3D-CRT, 16 (27.6%) SBRT to 3D, 15 (25.9%) SBRT to IMRT, 6 (10.3%) SBRT to 2D, and 1 (1.7%) 3D-CRT to 2D. 19 (9.2%) cases remained unauthorized by the insurer but proceeded with treatment via departmental administrative clearance. Of 196 cases which went on to treatment, 72 (36.7%) cases were delayed for a mean of 7.8 days and median of 5 days (range: 1-49). P2P was performed by the treating radiation oncologist in 169 (82.0%) cases, of which 78 (46.1%) were successful in authorization of the ordered treatment. Of the 91 unsuccessful cases, 62 (68.1%) second-level appeals were performed, of which 39 (62.9%) were successful in overturning denied authorization. Of the 23 cases not authorized either through P2P or second-level appeal, 3 (13.0%) cases were successful in authorization of the requested treatment via employer request, external appeal through an independent review organization, or insurance carrier change. Our institutional analysis suggests that while the majority of initial insurance case denials are ultimately overturned without any change to the requested treatment technique or prescription dose through a number of requests made by the insurer to the radiation oncologist, there are clinical implications with a significant percentage of case denials leading to treatment delays, decrease in prescription BED, and less conformal treatment technique.