Abstract Purpose The American Society of Clinical Oncology Cancer Survivorship Committee established a task force to determine which survivorship care services were being denied by public and private payers for coverage and reimbursement. Methods A quantitative survey instrument was developed to determine the clinical practice-reported rates of coverage denials for evidence-based cancer survivorship care services. Additionally, qualitative interviews were conducted to understand whether coverage denials were based on payer policies, cost-sharing, or prior authorization. Results Of 122 respondents from 50 states, respondents reported that coverage denials were common (“always”, “most of the time,” or “some of the time”) for maintenance therapies, screening for new primary cancers or cancer recurrence. Respondents reported that denials in coverage for maintenance therapies were highest for immunotherapy (41.74%) and maintenance chemotherapy (40.17%). Coverage denials for new primary cancer screenings were highest for Hodgkin lymphoma survivors needing a PET/CT scan (49.04%) and breast cancer survivors at a high-risk of recurrence who needed an MRI (63.46%), respectively. More than half of survey respondents reported denials for symptom management and supportive care services. Fertility services, dental services when indicated, and mental health services were denied “always” or “most of the time” 23.1%, 22.5%, and 12.8%, respectively. Respondents reported they often had a process in place to automatically appeal denials for evidence-based services. The denial process, however, resulted in greater stress for the patient and provider. Conclusion Our study demonstrates that additional advocacy with payers is needed to ensure that reimbursement policies are consistent with evidence-based survivorship care services.

Abstract Background: The American Society of Clinical Oncology Cancer Survivorship Committee established a task force to determine which survivorship care services were being denied by public and private payers for coverage and reimbursement. Methods: A quantitative survey instrument was developed to determine the clinical practice-reported rates of coverage denials for evidence-based cancer survivorship care services. Additionally, qualitative interviews were conducted to understand whether coverage denials were based on payer policies, cost-sharing, or prior authorization. Results: Of 122 respondents from 50 states, respondents reported that coverage denials were common (“always”, “most of the time,” or “some of the time”) for maintenance therapies, screening for new primary cancers or cancer recurrence. Respondents reported that denials in coverage for maintenance therapies were highest for immunotherapy (51.29%) and maintenance chemotherapy (48.72%). Coverage denials for new primary cancer screenings were highest for Hodgkin lymphoma survivors needing a PET/CT scan (57.69%) and breast cancer survivors at a high-risk of recurrence who needed an MRI (61.61%), respectively. More than half of survey respondents reported denials for symptom management and supportive care services. Fertility services, dental services when indicated, and mental health services were denied “always” or “most of the time” 23.1%, 22.5%, and 12.8%, respectively. Respondents reported they often had a process in place to automatically appeal denials for evidence-based services. The denial process, however, resulted in greater stress for the patient and provider. Conclusion: Our study demonstrates that additional advocacy with payers is needed to ensure that reimbursement policies are consistent with evidence-based survivorship care services.

Young adult (YA) cancer survivors who received gonadotoxic therapy are at risk for impaired fertility and/or childbearing difficulties. This study explored the experiences and financial concerns of survivors pursuing family building through assisted reproductive technology (ART) and adoption. Retrospective study of data collected from grant applications for financial assistance with family building. Grounded theory methodology using an inductive data-driven approach guided qualitative data analysis. Participants (N=46) averaged 32years old (SD=3.4) were primarily female (81%) and married/partnered (83%). Four main themes were identified representing the (1) emotional experiences and (2) financial barriers to family building after cancer, (3) perceived impact on partners, and (4) disrupted life trajectory. Negative emotions were pervasive but were balanced with hope and optimism that parenthood would be achieved. Still, the combination of high ART/adoption costs, the financial impact of cancer, and limited sources for support caused extreme financial stress. Further, in the face of these high costs, many survivors reported worry and guilt about burdening partners, particularly as couples failed to meet personal and societal expectations for parenthood timelines. After cancer, YAs face numerous psychosocial and financial difficulties in their pursuits of family building when ART/adoption is needed to achieve parenthood. Survivors interested in future children may benefit from follow-up fertility counseling post-treatment including discussion of ART options, surrogacy, and adoption, as appropriate, and potential barriers. Planning for the financial cost and burden in particular may help to avoid or mitigate financial stress later on.

Young adult cancer survivors (YAs) are confronted with immense financial challenges in the wake of their treatment. Medical bills and loss of savings may cause YAs to forgo recommended medications or follow‐up appointments. Young survivors with financial concerns also report depression, stress and anxiety. The Samfund is a national nonprofit organization that provides financial support to YAs post‐treatment. To quantify the financial burden of cancer in YAs, a retrospective analysis was performed of data collected from Samfund grant applications of 334 YA cancer survivors. Grants were awarded between 2007 and 2013 and grant recipients were consented electronically in 2014 for retrospective data analysis. Recipients ranged from 19 to 39 years of age at the time of their grant applications. Descriptive statistics were calculated and compared to the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) and U.S. census data on age‐matched peers. Financial indicators of YA cancer survivors are worse in many domains than those of age‐matched controls. Furthermore, YA survivors in their 30s report more perilous prefunding financial situations than younger grant recipients. Cancer has a devastating and age‐specific impact on the finances of YAs. Philanthropic grants from the cancer support community, in conjunction with healthcare policy reforms, have the potential to break the cycle of financial need and help YAs move forward with their lives after cancer treatment.