Thursday, May 31, 2018

Judge weighs ordering Maine governor to implement Medicaid expansion

By Harris Meyer  | May 24, 2018
A Maine state judge said Thursday that Gov. Paul LePage's administration has a "duty to enforce" a voter-passed law to expand Medicaid to low-income adults.

Kennebec County Superior Court Justice Michaela Murphy's comment came during oral arguments in a lawsuit brought by advocacy groups to force the LePage administration to implement the Medicaid expansion overwhelmingly passed by Maine voters last November.

The judge did not indicate when she would issue a ruling, though it's expected she will rule within a week or so. The losing side is almost certain to appeal.

LePage, a Republican, has balked at implementing the expansion under the Affordable Care Act. The Maine ballot initiative was strongly backed by the Maine Hospital Association and the Maine Medical Association, which say it will improve access to healthcare and reduce uncompensated care.

Under the voter-passed law, Medicaid expansion enrollment should start on July 2. An estimated 70,000 Mainers could receive coverage under the expansion.

Maine would become the 32nd state plus the District of Columbia to extend Medicaid coverage for all adults up to 138% of the federal poverty level. It would be a boost to expansion supporters, even as the Trump administration and GOP state leaders push to impose new Medicaid work requirements on beneficiaries, which are projected to cause coverage losses.

LePage, who previously vetoed five bipartisan expansion bills, has refused to send the CMS a state plan amendment to carry out the expansion, which the ballot initiative mandated him to do by April 3. His administration argued in court that it can't act until the state Legislature passes an appropriation to fund the expansion.

The not-for-profit advocacy group Maine Equal Justice Partners brought the suit on behalf of consumer advocacy groups and the state association for community health centers. They are asking the court to require the LePage administration to comply with the law and submit the state plan amendment.

At the hearing Thursday, the judge told the LePage administration's attorney, Patrick Strawbridge, that "the law is in effect. It's not a suggestion… The executive branch has a duty to enforce the law."

Strawbridge, who was representing the state Department of Health and Human Services, responded by arguing that a law cannot be executed without the necessary funding, which is the legislature's sole responsibility.

"The referendum could have included a funding mechanism but it didn't," he said in an interview after the hearing. "It was thus left to the legislature, which has not enacted any appropriation that all sides understood was necessary."

But James Kilbreth, the attorney for the groups pushing for expansion, said in an interview that he doesn't think Justice Murphy will buy that argument. "She was focused on what the statute says. It doesn't cost money to submit a state plan amendment, and it's not the court's role to interpret the statute, which is unambiguous."

Robyn Merrill, executive director of Maine Equal Justice Partners, said the state has more than enough money in its Medicaid budget account to cover the cost of the expansion until at least next May. Plus, it has a budget surplus of nearly $140 million.

The state Legislative Office of Fiscal and Policy Analysis projected the cost of the expansion for the first year at $39 million.

LePage, who is in his final year in office, has insisted it will cost $60 million, and has demanded that lawmakers find the money to pay for expansion without increasing state taxes, diverting money from the Budget Stabilization Fund or using any other "one-time funding mechanisms or budget gimmicks."

The state Legislature adjourned last month without making an appropriation, after Republicans and Democrats hit an impasse on a broader spending package. Lawmakers are expected to go back into session later this year to resolve these issues.

"The court doesn't even need to get into the funding question," Merrill said. "That's for the Legislature to sort out. The law is the law and (the administration) has to implement it."

There are 18 states, including Texas and Florida, where opposition from Republican governors or legislators has blocked Medicaid expansion. They argue that expansion is not affordable for their states, even though the ACA requires the federal government to pick up no less than 90% of the cost. It's estimated that 4.5 million people would gain coverage if all those states approved expansions.

But pressure is mounting in some of those states to pass Medicaid expansion. Virginia's Republican-controlled legislature is on the verge of passing an expansion bill. In addition, supporters in Idaho, Nebraska, and Utah hope to have initiatives on the ballot in November to expand Medicaid in their states.

Polls in many of the hold-out states show strong public support for expansion.

Harris Meyer is a senior reporter providing news and analysis on a broad range of healthcare topics. He served as managing editor of Modern Healthcare from 2013 to 2015. His more than three decades of journalism experience includes freelance reporting for Health Affairs, Kaiser Health News and other publications; law editor at the Daily Business Review in Miami; staff writer at the New Times alternative weekly in Fort Lauderdale, Fla.; senior writer at Hospitals & Health Networks; national correspondent at American Medical News; and health unit researcher at WMAQ-TV News in Chicago. A graduate of Northwestern University, Meyer won the 2000 Gerald Loeb Award for Distinguished Business and Financial Journalism.

http://www.modernhealthcare.com/article/20180524/NEWS/180529961?utm_source=modernhealthcare&utm_medium=email&utm_content=20180524-NEWS-180529961&utm_campaign=dose

Red states find there’s no free pass on Medicaid changes from Trump


BY NATHANIEL WEIXEL - 05/22/18 06:03 AM EDT 534
Red states are getting a reality check from the Trump administration in just how conservative they can remake their Medicaid programs.
Earlier this month, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) rejected a request from Kansas to limit Medicaid eligibility to just three years.
CMS Administrator Seema Verma followed up on the Kansas decision by saying the administration will not allow any states to impose lifetime limits on Medicaid.
“We’ve indicated that we would not approve lifetime limits and I think we’ve made that pretty clear to states,” Verma said last week at a Washington Post event on health care.
The Trump administration has made state innovation a priority and has promised to fast-track Medicaid waivers, especially those that will impose work requirements on beneficiaries.
Four states have been granted permission to do so — Arkansas, Kentucky, Indiana and New Hampshire — and six others have pending waivers.
States have also been allowed to impose lockout periods if beneficiaries can’t meet the work requirements and to charge higher premiums than the Obama administration allowed.
But the decision on lifetime limits marks the first time the administration completely rejected a policy favored by conservatives and shows there is no blank check for red states.
Verma never promised automatic approvals of conservative ideas, though some might have interpreted it that way, according to Jeff Myers, president and CEO of the Medicaid Health Plans of America.
He said it’s becoming clear that what the Trump administration wants is to construct policies that will make Medicaid beneficiaries self-sufficient, but that will not take away their benefits entirely.
Verma has long argued that promoting self-sufficiency is key to any changes states make to Medicaid. In explaining the decision to reject lifetime limits, Verma noted that states only temporarily suspend benefits if work requirements aren’t met.
“An individual may not comply with a requirement around cost-sharing and they could potentially lose coverage. But we want to make sure that there’s a pathway back into the program ... if they’re compliant with the requirements,” Verma said last week.
Medicaid experts said officials in Kansas and other red states were mistaken if they thought they could get the Trump administration to approve changes just because they happen to be conservative.
“Contrary to some states’ expectations, there really is a waiver approval process,” said Joe Antos, a health policy expert at the American Enterprise Forum, a conservative think tank.
“Decisions will move more rapidly than they were ... [but] that doesn’t mean approvals,” he said.
Matt Salo, executive director of the National Association of Medicaid Directors, said any time there’s a change in administration, states jockey to see what policies they can get approved.
“There’s a lot of pent-up interest in pursuing flexibility and changes that the Obama administration would not entertain, [but] I don’t think anyone thought it was a blank check, do whatever you want,” Salo said.
The administration has yet to make a decision on other conservative wish list policies, such as Wisconsin’s proposal for drug testing Medicaid recipients, and partial Medicaid expansion, which would let states expand coverage for only a fraction of the population and still receive full federal funding under ObamaCare.
Salo said federal officials want to make sure that any waivers they approve will survive the inevitable lawsuits that follow.
“People are pretty savvy ... if you’re just going to approve something that gets torn down in the courts, you’re wasting everyone’s time,” Salo said. “The granting of a wish list that gets trounced doesn’t do any good, and even sets the agenda back somewhat. Everyone’s better off if there’s a real rationale.”
CMS recently declined to issue a decision on a request by Arkansas to roll back the eligibility levels for Medicaid beneficiaries. The agency also declined to rule on Kansas’s request to impose work requirements, which experts have speculated could be an implicit rejection of the proposals.
Unlike the other four states that have been approved, Kansas is not a Medicaid expansion state, and the administration has not approved work requirements in any nonexpansion states.
Kansas officials indicated they were still working with federal officials.
“While we will not be moving forward with lifetime caps, we are pleased that the Administration has been supportive of our efforts to include a work requirement in the 1115 waiver. This important provision will help improve outcomes and ensure that Kansans are empowered to achieve self-sufficiency,” Gov. Jeff Colyer (R) said in a statement.

New Cancer Treatments Lie Hidden Under Mountains of Paperwork

May 21, 2018
Dr. Nikhil Wagle thought he had a brilliant idea to advance research and patient care.

Dr. Wagle, an oncologist at the Dana Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, and his colleagues would build a huge database that linked cancer patients’ medical records, treatments and outcomes with their genetic backgrounds and the genetics of their tumors.

The database would also include patients’ own experiences. How ill did they feel with the treatments?

What was their quality of life? The database would find patterns that would tell doctors what treatment was best for each patient and what patients might expect.

The holdup, he thought, would be finding patients. Instead, the real impediment turned out to be gathering their medical records.

In the United States, there is no single format used by all providers, and hospitals have no incentive to make it easy to transfer records from one place to another. The medical records mess is hobbling research and impeding attempts to improve patient care.

“Data are trapped,” said Dr. Ned Sharpless, director of the National Cancer Institute. “This is a huge problem. It is phenomenally important.”

The cancer institute has invested millions of dollars into determining the genetic sequences of patients’ tumors, and researchers have found thousands of genes that seem to drive tumor growth.

But until patients’ medical records are linked to the genetic data, life-or-death questions cannot be answered.

“What drug did they get? Did they respond? Did they survive? Were they cured?” Dr. Sharpless asked.

The federal government has mandated uniform standards for electronic health records. “At this point, they are not to a level that helps with the detailed clinical data that we need for the scientific questions we want to ask,” Dr. Wagle said.

A few private companies are trying to tackle the problem. Flatiron Health, just bought by Roche, has obtained about 2.2 million records of cancer patients from medical centers and made them available for research after stripping them of identifiable information.

But Flatiron must employ 900 nurses and certified tumor registrars, people with master’s degrees in coding data, to put it all into a usable form.

“About 50 percent, if not more, of the critical details we need for research are trapped in unstructured documents,” said Dr. Amy Abernethy, the company’s chief medical officer.

“They are in PDFs. Maybe a doctor put in a note by hand, maybe a doctor typed it. That note became a narrative. It is not something that can easily be put into a spreadsheet.”

Dr. Sharpless worries that the data acquired by companies like Flatiron will not be readily available to researchers. But if the companies manage to solve the medical records problem cheaply, he said, “we’d like to work with them to figure out how to liberate the data.”

Dr. Wagle is making data from medical records and patients’ experiences public as he gets them. After 2 1/2 years, though, he is disappointed by how little there is to share.

The patient who inspired his project had a lethal form of thyroid cancer. She was expected to die in a few months. In desperation, doctors gave her a drug that by all accounts should not have helped.

To everyone’s surprise, her tumors shrank to almost nothing, and she survived. She was an “extraordinary responder.”

Why? It turned out that her tumor had an unusual mutation that made it vulnerable to the drug.

And that got Dr. Wagle thinking. What if researchers had a database that would allow them to find these lucky patients, examine their tumors, and discover genetic mutations that predict which drugs will work?

And what about those who were not helped by standard treatments? Could they be identified and spared treatments that will not work?

What researchers needed was a huge database that collected clinical and genetic data, along with patients’ descriptions of their experiences. Those narratives are crucial, Dr. Wagle said, but they are absent from the commercial databases like Flatiron’s. Those comprise anonymous patient data, making it impossible to ask the patients themselves how they fared.

Dr. Wagle decided to build a database, starting with metastatic breast cancer, his specialty. There are about 155,000 metastatic breast cancer patients in the United States. He would use social media, online forums and advocacy groups to reach out to patients for their records.

The Metastatic Breast Cancer Project began in October 2015. Patients have been eager to join, and advocacy groups enthusiastically signed on. So far, the project includes 4,400 women.

Determining the genetic sequences of their tumors and of their healthy cells was straightforward — “the easy part,” Dr. Wagle said.

Gathering their medical records was another story. The data exist in all sorts of formats, and crucial information may be missing altogether.

Simply getting the records delivered, in whatever format, has been a nightmare. Records usually arrive as faxes or via snail mail.

“Even though the patients are saying, ‘I have consented for you to obtain my medical records,’ there is no good way to get them,” Dr. Wagle said.

He hired half a dozen people to work full-time on the project, and corralled doctors and other experts to help part-time. It can take hours to go through a single medical record.

Mary McGillicuddy, who works full-time on the project, explained the system. When patients enroll, they tell the investigators where they were treated, where they had biopsies, where they had scans, and where they had medical procedures.

They give Ms. McGillicuddy and her colleagues permission to request their records. Ms. McGillicuddy faxes requests for records to each medical institution that treated a patient, or diagnosed or sequenced her cancer.

Startlingly, faxing “is the standard,” Ms. McGillicuddy said, for medical records requests.

The process can be frustrating. Fax numbers can be out of date. Some medical centers will not accept electronic patient signatures on the permission forms.

Sometimes, the medical centers just ignore the request — and the second request. In the end, Ms. McGillicuddy said, the project gets fewer than half the records it requests.

Then comes the laborious task of extracting medical information from the records and entering it into the database. A faxed medical record may be 100 or 200 pages long.

So far, the breast cancer project has received 450 records for 375 patients. (Each patient tends to have more than one record, because the women typically are seen at more than one medical center.)

“Patients are incredibly engaged and excited,” Dr. Wagle said. But for the records problem, “right now there isn’t a good solution.”
Correction: May 20, 2018
An earlier version of this article described incorrectly Dr. Amy Abernethy’s role at Flatiron Health. She is its chief medical officer, not its founder. In addition, the article misstated the number of medical records obtained by the company. The figure is 2.2 million, not 1 million.
A version of this article appears in print on May 21, 2018, on Page D4 of the New York edition with the headline: Concealing New Cancer TreatmentsOrder Reprints | Today’s Paper | Subscribe
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/21/health/medical-records-cancer.html?utm_campaign=AIS%20Health%20Daily&utm_source=hs_email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=63197688&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-_m9JC1gwizZLcSX9Muis9fn43tPN2kfxxr136Fs82t8QMClrrlZ61u9UWHiavQJftRXRXtgDuKHx3_vkQlTx5WrxSzoQ&_hsmi=63197688

Despite Attacks on Obamacare, the Uninsured Rate Held Steady Last Year

The numbers suggest a surprising resilience of the health law.
May 22, 2018

Last year, Trump administration officials declared Obamacare “dead,” pulled enrollment ads offline, distributed social media videos critical of the law and sent signals that the law’s requirement to buy health insurance was no longer in effect.
But the number of Americans with health insurance stayed largely unchanged. The results of a big, government survey on health insurance status were published Tuesday, and they show that the uninsured rate remained basically flat at 9.1 percent in the first year of the Trump presidency.
The numbers suggest a surprising resilience of the health law, and its expansion of insurance coverage, even in the face of efforts that the law’s defenders call “sabotage.”
The new statistics come from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which monitors the number of Americans with and without health insurance every quarter. A smaller survey from Gallup had shown the uninsured rate rising last year. And a survey from the Commonwealth Fund showed a small rise, though it was statistically insignificant. But the C.D.C. research includes a larger sample size, and is generally regarded as a more definitive study. Tuesday’s study contains data from the entire calendar year of 2017.
Among states that expanded their Medicaid programs under the Affordable Care Act, the uninsured rate actually fell last year. Among states that didn’t expand, it rose a little.
Over all, Obamacare has substantially reduced the number of Americans without insurance. According to the report, 19.3 million fewer people were living without health insurance in 2017 compared with 2010, when the Affordable Care Act passed Congress.
New health insurance options aren’t the only thing that has changed since the passage of the Affordable Care Act. A strengthening economy has nudged more Americans into the work force, increasing people’s access to health insurance at work.
Obamacare has shown other signs of hardiness. This year, the Trump administration slashed the program’s advertising budget by 90 percent, and withdrew key subsidies from insurance companies, leading to premium increases for some customers. But every market had at least one insurer that continued to offer plans on the Obamacare marketplaces, and sign-ups dipped only slightly.
That does not mean that the insurance trends will hold forever. There are several reasons the uninsured rate may rise in the future:
·         In the face of rising premiums, it is likely that some who do not qualify for federal subsidies have dropped coverage this year.
·         Several states are trying to set up work or other “community engagement” requirements for some Medicaid beneficiaries. A few will impose such rules this year. States requesting such changes estimate they will result in a declining number of residents covered by Medicaid.
·         The Trump administration is working on regulations to allow more loosely regulated insurance plans into the market. These plans could prove appealing to some people who are currently uninsured. But they could cause prices to rise for insurance plans with all of the Obamacare consumer protections, prompting other people to drop their coverage. According to an estimate from the Urban Institute, about 2.6 million fewer people may have comprehensive coverage next year.
·         The tax penalty for people who decline to obtain insurance will disappear entirely next year. That change alone is likely to cause several million fewer Americans to have insurance. Early filings by insurance carriers suggest the change will cause another round of big price increases. And economists at the Congressional Budget Office estimate that the policy’s disappearance will also cause fewer people eligible for government help from even investigating such options.
The combination of those changes is likely to mean some backsliding. But last year’s data suggest that Obamacare’s policies have helped create options that are appealing to many Americans who would have gone without insurance in the years before its passage.

Margot Sanger-Katz is a domestic correspondent and writes about health care for The Upshot. She was previously a reporter at National Journal and The Concord Monitor and an editor at Legal Affairs and the Yale Alumni Magazine. @sangerkatz  Facebook

A version of this article appears in print on May 22, 2018, on Page A16 of the New York edition with the headline: Number of Uninsured Isn’t Going Up, or DownOrder Reprints | Today’s Paper | Subscribe

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/22/upshot/despite-attacks-on-obamacare-the-uninsured-rate-held-steady-last-year.html?utm_campaign=AIS%20Health%20Daily&utm_source=hs_email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=63197688&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-_m9JC1gwizZLcSX9Muis9fn43tPN2kfxxr136Fs82t8QMClrrlZ61u9UWHiavQJftRXRXtgDuKHx3_vkQlTx5WrxSzoQ&_hsmi=63197688

Update: Medicare Supplement Market Premium Grows 6.6% to $31.0 Billion

Last month CSG Actuarial shared information from the NAIC and other sources and reported that total earned premiums in 2017 for the Medicare Supplement market totaled $31.0 billion, a 6.6% increase over 2016.
A few other data points of interest:
There are only eight carriers with more than 100,000 Medicare Supplement lives in 2017 and 5% growth in Medicare Supplement lives for each of 2015, 2016, and 2017:
  • Aetna
  • Cigna
  • Humana
  • American Enterprise
  • USAA
  • Torchmark
  • Physicians Mutual
  • Manhattan Life Group
There are only six carriers (including mergers & acquisitions) with more than 50,000 Medicare Supplement lives in 2006 and average annual growth in Medicare Supplement lives greater than 7.5% for years 2006 to 2017:
  • Mutual of Omaha
  • Aetna & Genworth
  • Cigna & Great American
  • Blue Shield of CA
  • Transamerica
  • USAA
% of Policies by Plan for Incurred Years 2013-2017 for Policies Issued Within 3 Years of Each Incurred Year
Med Supp Market Premium Growth
States with the highest percentage of Medicare Supplement policies relative to total Medicare lives:
  • Nebraska
  • Iowa
  • Wyoming
  • Kansas
  • North Dakota
States with the lowest percentage of Medicare Supplement policies relative to total Medicare lives:
  • Hawaii
  • Minnesota
  • New York
  • New Mexico
  • Alaska

https://www.csgactuarial.com/2018/05/medicare-supplement-market-premium-grows-6-6-to-31-0-billion-2/?utm_term=Read%20the%20full%20update%20here%20%2526gt%3B%2526gt%3B%2526gt%3B&utm_campaign=Update%3A%20Medicare%20Supplement%20Market%20Premium%20Grows%206.6%2525%20to%20%2431.0%20Billion&utm_content=email&utm_source=Act-On+Software&utm_medium=email

Changes You Can Make to Manage High Blood Pressure

Make Changes That Matter
Fighting back against the “silent killer”
High blood pressure (HBP or hypertension) is a symptomless “silent killer” that quietly damages blood vessels and leads to serious health threats.
While there is no cure, using medications as prescribed and making positive lifestyle changes can help enhance your quality of life and reduce your risk of heart disease, stroke, kidney disease and more.
Make changes that matter:
Know your numbers
The best way to know if your blood pressure is in a healthy or unhealthy range is to get it checked. If high blood pressure is diagnosed, regular monitoring can help confirm if you have high blood pressure, detect patterns and alert you to any changes. It will also show you if the changes you’ve made are working. 
BLOOD PRESSURE CATEGORYSYSTOLIC mm Hg
(upper number)
DIASTOLIC mm Hg
(lower number)
NORMALLESS THAN 120andLESS THAN 80
ELEVATED120 – 129andLESS THAN 80
HIGH BLOOD PRESSURE
(HYPERTENSION) STAGE 1
130 – 139or80 – 89
HIGH BLOOD PRESSURE
(HYPERTENSION) STAGE 2
140 OR HIGHERor90 OR HIGHER
HYPERTENSIVE CRISIS
(consult your doctor immediately)
HIGHER THAN 180and/orHIGHER THAN 120
Note: A diagnosis of high blood pressure must be confirmed with a medical professional. A doctor should also evaluate any unusually low blood pressure readings.
Download this chart: English | Spanish | Traditional Chinese
Managing blood pressure is a lifelong commitment
Listen to and partner with your doctor, read sound information on your condition, learn how to monitor your blood pressure at home and act on this information to live a heart-healthy life.
By adopting a heart-healthy lifestyle, you can:
You can fight high blood pressure 
While heart disease is still the number-one killer in the United States and around the world, death rates have decreased significantly, thanks in part to earlier and better treatment of high blood pressure.
This content was last reviewed November 2017.

http://www.heart.org/HEARTORG/Conditions/HighBloodPressure/MakeChangesThatMatter/Changes-You-Can-Make-to-Manage-High-Blood-Pressure_UCM_002054_Article.jsp#.WxCAPCX4-JA