Skip to main content
Log in

Insurance Authorization Barriers in Patients Undergoing Cytoreductive Surgery and HIPEC

  • Peritoneal Surface Malignancy
  • Published:
Annals of Surgical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Indications for cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) exist across multiple histologies, but little data exist on the impact of insurance authorization on access to these therapies. Given the evolving role of CRS/HIPEC, we sought to characterize insurance approval and delays in patients undergoing these therapies.

Patients and Methods

A retrospective review was performed at a high-volume tertiary center of patients who received CRS/HIPEC from 2017 to 2021. Collected data included patient demographics, tumor histologic characteristics, insurance type, approval/denial history, and time to prior authorization approval. Descriptive statistics were performed.

Results

In total, 367 patients received CRS/HIPEC during the study period. They had a median age of 59 (IQR 49–67) years, 35% were male, and 76% were white. Of the patients requiring prior authorization, 14 of 104 (13%) patients were denied prior authorization and required appeal. Median time between authorization request and approval was 33 (IQR 28–36) days. These cases generated 410 insurance authorization requests, 94 (23%) of which were not initially approved and required appeal. The rate of upfront denial was 21.1% in patients with public insurance compared with 23.4% in patients with private insurance. Gastric cancer was the most common histology among denied cases (55%), followed by colorectal, appendiceal, and gynecologic malignancies.

Conclusions

Despite the broadening indications for and data supporting CRS/HIPEC, a significant proportion of patients still face hurdles in attaining insurance approval and coverage for these therapies. Addressing barriers to insurance approval is imperative to decrease therapeutic delay and improve access to data-driven care.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Xue L, et al. Peritoneal metastases in colorectal cancer: biology and barriers. J Gastrointest Surg. 2020;24(3):720–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Berek JS, et al. Cancer of the ovary, fallopian tube, and peritoneum. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2018;143(Suppl 2):59–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Kindler, H.L. (2013) Peritoneal mesothelioma: the site of origin matters. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book. p. 182–8.

  4. Franko J, et al. Prognosis of patients with peritoneal metastatic colorectal cancer given systemic therapy: an analysis of individual patient data from prospective randomised trials from the Analysis and Research in Cancers of the Digestive System (ARCAD) database. Lancet Oncol. 2016;17(12):1709–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Helm JH, et al. Cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for malignant peritoneal mesothelioma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22(5):1686–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. van Driel WJ, et al. Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in ovarian cancer. N Engl J Med. 2018;378(3):230–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Chicago Consensus Working G. The Chicago Consensus on peritoneal surface malignancies: management of appendiceal neoplasms. Ann Surg Oncol. 2020;27(6):1753–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Chicago Consensus Working G. The Chicago Consensus on peritoneal surface malignancies: management of colorectal metastases. Cancer. 2020;126(11):2534–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Verwaal VJ, et al. Randomized trial of cytoreduction and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy versus systemic chemotherapy and palliative surgery in patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis of colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21(20):3737–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Ahmad TR, et al. Medicaid and medicare payer status are associated with worse surgical outcomes in gynecologic oncology. Gynecol Oncol. 2019;155(1):93–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Farkas DT, et al. Effect of insurance status on the stage of breast and colorectal cancers in a safety-net hospital. J Oncol Pract. 2012;8(3 Suppl):16s–21s.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Kwok J, et al. The impact of health insurance status on the survival of patients with head and neck cancer. Cancer. 2010;116(2):476–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Markt SC, et al. Insurance status and cancer treatment mediate the association between race/ethnicity and cervical cancer survival. PLoS One. 2018;13(2):e0193047.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Chokshi RJ, et al. Impact of insurance status on overall survival after cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC). Pleura Peritoneum. 2020;5(3):20200105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Nabi J, et al. Access denied: the relationship between patient insurance status and access to high-volume hospitals. Cancer. 2021;127(4):577–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Raoof M, Jacobson G, Fong Y. Medicare advantage networks and access to high-volume cancer surgery hospitals. Ann Surg. 2021;274(4):e315–9.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Dotson P. CPT((R)) codes: what are they, why are they necessary, and how are they developed? Adv Wound Care. 2013;2(10):583–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Menger RP, et al. Impact of insurance precertification on neurosurgery practice and health care delivery. J Neurosurg. 2017;127(2):332–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Parikh AA, et al. The effect of health insurance status on the treatment and outcomes of patients with colorectal cancer. J Surg Oncol. 2014;110(3):227–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Martin S, et al. Delays in cancer diagnosis in underinsured young adults and older adolescents. Oncologist. 2007;12(7):816–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Neuwirth MG, Alexander HR, Karakousis GC. Then and now: cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), a historical perspective. J Gastrointest Oncol. 2016;7(1):18–28.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Group C.C.W. The Chicago consensus on peritoneal surface malignancies: standards. Ann Surg Oncol. 2020;27(6):1743–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. McNally ME, Senkowski CK. Surgical Oncology Coding. In: M Savarise, C Senkowski, editors. Principles of Coding and Reimbursement for Surgeons. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2017. p. 279–87.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Leslie-Mazwi TM, et al. Current procedural terminology: history, structure, and relationship to valuation for the neuroradiologist. Am J Neuroradiol. 2016;37(11):1972–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Madara, J. (2022) Constituent society delegate apportionment. 2022.

  26. Seligson MT, et al. Improving clinical documentation of evaluation and management care and patient acuity improves reimbursement as well as quality metrics. J Vasc Surg. 2021;74(6):2055–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Squires MH 3rd, et al. Association between hospital finances, payer mix, and complications after hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy: deficiencies in the current healthcare reimbursement system and future implications. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22(5):1739–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Shankaran V, et al. Pilot feasibility study of an oncology financial navigation program. J Oncol Pract. 2018;14(2):e122–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Raghavan D, et al. Levine cancer institute financial toxicity tumor board: a potential solution to an emerging problem. JCO Oncol Pract. 2021;17(10):e1433–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Oliver S. Eng MD.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ong, C.T., Dhiman, A., Smith, A. et al. Insurance Authorization Barriers in Patients Undergoing Cytoreductive Surgery and HIPEC. Ann Surg Oncol 30, 417–422 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-022-12437-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-022-12437-9

Navigation