Analysis of the First Round of Public Comments for the National Coverage Determination for Monoclonal Antibodies in the Treatment of Alzheimer's Disease.
{"title":"Analysis of the First Round of Public Comments for the National Coverage Determination for Monoclonal Antibodies in the Treatment of Alzheimer's Disease.","authors":"Jenna Wahl, Emily A Gadbois","doi":"10.1080/08959420.2023.2238534","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Following the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) controversial approval of aducanumab for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease, the Centers of Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) used its National Coverage Determination process to determine its coverage for Medicare beneficiaries. A public comment period was available for 30 days between July 12, 2021 and August 11, 2021. This study analyzed the 132 comments submitted in the first public comment period. The comments were downloaded from CMS' publicly-available website and analyzed to identify key themes across stakeholders. Three major themes were identified. Those supporting CMS approving aducanumab argued FDA's approval was appropriate and the final decision for treatment should be left to patients and their doctors. Those against or uncertain of CMS approving aducanumab stated concerns about its clinical benefits, risks, burdens, and costs; many of these stakeholders instead argued CMS institute Coverage with Evidence Development. Lastly, regardless of perspective, stakeholders encouraged CMS to cover diagnostic tools to support Alzheimer's disease research and treatments. Our analysis identifies key themes and policy implications of CMS' decision, including acknowledgment of comments and subsequent changes to CMS' determination, highlighting the value of public comments as a resource to understand stakeholder perspectives on policy decisions.</p>","PeriodicalId":47121,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Aging & Social Policy","volume":" ","pages":"984-1003"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10805961/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Aging & Social Policy","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08959420.2023.2238534","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/7/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Following the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) controversial approval of aducanumab for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease, the Centers of Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) used its National Coverage Determination process to determine its coverage for Medicare beneficiaries. A public comment period was available for 30 days between July 12, 2021 and August 11, 2021. This study analyzed the 132 comments submitted in the first public comment period. The comments were downloaded from CMS' publicly-available website and analyzed to identify key themes across stakeholders. Three major themes were identified. Those supporting CMS approving aducanumab argued FDA's approval was appropriate and the final decision for treatment should be left to patients and their doctors. Those against or uncertain of CMS approving aducanumab stated concerns about its clinical benefits, risks, burdens, and costs; many of these stakeholders instead argued CMS institute Coverage with Evidence Development. Lastly, regardless of perspective, stakeholders encouraged CMS to cover diagnostic tools to support Alzheimer's disease research and treatments. Our analysis identifies key themes and policy implications of CMS' decision, including acknowledgment of comments and subsequent changes to CMS' determination, highlighting the value of public comments as a resource to understand stakeholder perspectives on policy decisions.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Aging & Social Policy offers a platform for insightful contributions from an international and interdisciplinary group of policy analysts and scholars. It provides an in-depth examination and analysis of critical phenomena that impact aging and the development and implementation of programs for the elderly from a global perspective, with a broad scope that encompasses not only the United States but also regions including Europe, the Middle East, Australia, Latin America, Asia, and the Asia-Pacific rim.
The journal regularly addresses a wide array of issues such as long-term services and supports, home- and community-based care, nursing-home care, assisted living, long-term care financing, financial security, employment and training, public and private pension coverage, housing, transportation, health care access, financing, and quality, family dynamics, and retirement. These topics are of significant importance to the field of aging and social policy, reflecting the journal's commitment to presenting a comprehensive view of the challenges and solutions related to aging populations around the world.