Once again, the government is getting between patients and their doctors to ration care—and it’s endangering my own family.
Due to rare a lung disease that runs in the McPherson side of my family, two of my siblings have had lung transplants. Further, my sister-in-law has had a liver transplant. When my brother Randy received his transplant four years ago at our local hospital, INOVA, he stayed at our house for months while he recovered. I have personally witnessed the physical and emotional journey of a loved one who needs a transplant—and the relief and joy of being given a second chance through the gift of a donated organ.
Randy’s lung transplant was successful, but we quickly learned it was just the beginning of his journey as a transplant recipient. The complexity and precision needed to keep his newly transplanted organ healthy was intense. Estimates indicate that more than 40 percent of lung transplants will fail within five years. This is most often due to organ rejection by the recipient’s immune system. Doctors must find a precise balance of immunosuppressive drugs to keep the body from attacking itself.
Fortunately, there are advances in molecular diagnostics that give doctors the ability to monitor the health of organs more effectively. This largely replaced the previous surveillance method, which includes costly, painful biopsies. Biopsies are invasive procedures that require recovery time and have complication risks. Before the non-invasive molecular tests were available, Randy might have had to endure eight to 16 invasive biopsies in his first year post-transplant. Now, he just has his blood drawn. Access to these non-invasive surveillance tests is vital for identifying organ injury or rejection. Rejection can occur without signs or symptoms, and detecting it early can help prevent irreversible damage. So, when I heard that coverage for these tests was being dramatically curtailed, I suspected a faceless, unaccountable bureaucracy was the culprit. I was right.
Doctors were given 30 days’ notice that they would be left without this critical surveillance tool to help manage organ rejection. Patients, such as my brother Randy, are left wondering if they will be able to protect their transplanted organ.
CMS’s private contractor is gaslighting Medicare transplant patients, their loved ones, and the physicians who care for them. It is using its private contractors and sub-regulatory policymaking to do so. Despite claiming that there was no change, now MolDX is attempting to promulgate these changes in coverage through a new proposed “Local Coverage Determination” (LCD). It is doing so while it continues to claim that substantial coverage changes are mere “clarifications.” CMS is also inappropriately limiting the comments it will consider to those related to clarity, not the decision itself. This is pure bureaucratic doublespeak and misdirection.
The change in Medicare coverage puts patients’ health in jeopardy. It goes against medical evidence. And it is irrational economics. The surveillance blood test costs an estimated $3,000 each time, but lung and heart biopsies—which are invasive, painful, and damage the transplanted organ each time—can be triple the cost (if there are not complications).
As we await the final decision from CMS, we will soon discover if government-led health care that dictates and rations medical care has been the president’s real agenda all along.