National Policy Resources—Local Advocacy Results

As cancer care professionals who experience the challenges of providing quality cancer care first-hand, MSCO members are well positioned to educate decision-makers on how coverage and reimbursement issues affect community oncology. State and federal legislation can have a significant impact on the financial viability of local cancer programs, which is why it's so important that our members make their voices heard.

In an effort to provide resources needed to effectively advocate on the issues that are important to them, our redesigned advocacy webpage features activity from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), national healthcare coverage through the Association of Community Cancer Centers (ACCC), local news articles and webinars, and more.

We want to hear from you! If there is a specific piece of legislation you want to know more about, an important resource we're missing, or if you want to get more involved, please contact us!

State Advocacy

MSCO and ASCO Together Support Efforts to Control PBMs Influence Over Patient’s Pharmacy Services

MSCO and ASCO jointly support a pair of bills (HF 544 and SF 482) that target anti-competitive pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) business practices. The bills would prohibit PBMs and payers from requiring oncologists to administer chemotherapy agents that have been prepared outside the physician’s office by an entity under contract with the payer. Both bills have passed their first committee hearings and are now in their second committees.

Read Letter (HF 544) Read Letter (SF 482)

MSCO and ASCO Submit Letter of Concern Over Upper Payment Language in SF 168

The Minnesota Society Clinical Oncology Society (MSCO) and the Association for Clinical Oncology (ASCO) have issued a letter to Minnesota legislature showing concerns that Section 9 of SF 168 – Prescription Drug Affordability Board, if passed, would jeopardize access to necessary care for Minnesota patients with cancer.

Read Letter

MSCO Joins in Support Letter for HF 3717 and Its Provisions to Address Out-of-Pocket Costs for Patients

The Minnesota Society of Clinical Oncology (MSCO) joined national organizations in a support letter for copy-only bill language in HF 3717 inspired by HF 633 (Bierman) and SF 365 (Nelson). This language would give consumers who purchase coverage on the individual and small-group markets the option of buying a plan that restructures the out-of-pocket costs for prescription drugs.

Read Letter

Federal Advocacy

MSCO Joins Coalition Letter Urging Addition of the Cures 2.0 Concept Paper Title IV Provisions in the Next COVID-19 Relief Package

The Minnesota Society of Clinical Oncology (MSCO) joined in a coalition letter to congressional leadership urging that Congress include the 21st Century Cures 2.0 concept paper, recently released by Representatives Diana DeGette and Fred Upton in upcoming legislation to further address the COVID-19 public health crisis. Specifically the letter urges leadership to include policy to provide Medicaid coverage of the routine care costs of clinical trials participation for patients with life-threatening conditions in every state. This critical protection is championed by Representatives Ben Ray Luján and Gus Bilirakis in the Clinical Treatment Act (H.R. 913).

COVID-19 Clinical Trials Coalition Letter

FROM THE ACCCBUZZ BLOG

An Update on Healthcare Legislation at the State Level
By Christian G. Downs, MHA, JD
March 22, 2023
If you are looking for legislative action, look no further than your state's legislatures. Most—if not all—states have had issues relating to oncology care and healthcare in general come up during their 2023 sessions.
ACCC Announces its 2023 Advocacy Agenda
March 07, 2023
For 2023, ACCC members have identified four core areas of focus (e.g., reimbursement, utilization management, provider-patient choice), among a larger set of issues and concerns, that the association will be supporting this year.
ACCC Recognizes National Caregivers Day: Analyzing a Mental Health Crisis
February 17, 2023
Today is National Caregivers Day, and ACCCBuzz analyzes the current mental health crisis that is affecting the caregivers of loved ones everywhere.

Advocacy In the News

ACCC Comments to CMS on Proposed RO Model

On September 16, the Association of Community Cancer Centers (ACCC) submitted comments to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) on the agency's proposed Radiation Oncology (RO) Model rule.

In its comment letter, ACCC expresses committed support for the movement toward value-based care, noting that ACCC members have long been leaders in developing and participating in value-based payment systems.

As CMS looks to finalize a model for radiation oncology, ACCC urges the agency to:

Make significant changes to the proposed episode payment methodology to ensure that the RO Model incentivizes innovation and cost-efficient care while allowing for equitable treatment of model participants.
Phase in mandatory participation in the RO Model to ensure equitable opportunity for success and ensure accurate and useful results from the model.
Delay the start of the RO Model until July 1, 2020 at a minimum.
Finalize the proposed exclusion of radiopharmaceuticals and certain brachytherapy surgical procedures from services covered by bundled payment.
Begin a new RT episode when a new course of treatment begins before a pending 90-day RT episode is complete.
Clarify certain aspects of the proposed quality reporting requirements.
Reconsider the uncompensated burden that would be required to comply with proposed monitoring and peer review requirements, which are not tied to pay for reporting.
Apply the 5 percent Advanced Alternative Payment Model (APM) incentive payment to the technical component of the RO Model payments as well as the professional component.
Structure the final RO Model so that all participants will be qualifying participants in an Advanced APM for purposes of the QPP, assuming minimum participation requirements are met.
Open the RO Model to voluntary participation by the Medicare Advantage plans and other payers.
Clarify how the RO Model will overlap with the Oncology Care Model (OCM) in a manner that allows for full and fair participation in both models.