BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                  SB 161
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:   August 19, 2009

                        ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
                                Kevin De Leon, Chair

                   SB 161 (Wright) - As Amended:  August 17, 2009  

          Policy Committee:                              HealthVote:13-6

          Urgency:     No                   State Mandated Local Program:  
          Yes    Reimbursable:              No

           SUMMARY  

          This bill requires health plans and insurers who provide  
          coverage for cancer chemotherapy treatment to provide coverage  
          for prescribed orally administered chemotherapy. In order to  
          comply with the requirements of this bill, health plans and  
          insurers are prohibited from imposing cost sharing for oral  
          chemotherapy medications to any greater extent than other  
          medications. Health coverage administered by CalPERS is excluded  
          from the requirements of this bill. 

           FISCAL EFFECT  

          1)According to the California Health Benefits Review Program  
            (CHBRP), no fiscal impact to Medi-Cal or the Healthy Families  
            Program. Amendments adopted since the initial CHBRP analysis  
            remove CalPERS coverage and costs identified in an earlier  
            version of this bill.  

          2)Increased premium costs in the employer-based and individual  
            insurance markets of $18 million, largely offset by a  
            reduction in out-of-pocket costs paid under current law by  
            individuals for oral chemotherapy treatments that are not a  
            covered benefit or with less favorable cost sharing  
            requirements.  

          3)According to CHRBP, 100% of Californians with health insurance  
            have some coverage for inpatient anticancer medications and  
            some outpatient coverage for intravenous (IV) and injected  
            cancer medications. In addition, 98% of Californians with  
            health insurance have coverage for some outpatient oral  
            chemotherapy. Therefore, the main group of patients, almost  
            500,000 statewide, who reap the greatest benefit from this  








                                                                  SB 161
                                                                  Page  2

            legislation are those either with no coverage for medications  
            generally or no coverage for oral chemotherapy, specifically. 

           COMMENTS  

           1)Rationale  . This bill is co-sponsored by the American Cancer  
            Society and Carrie's Touch, a Sacramento non-profit addressing  
            issues of concern to African American breast cancer survivors.  
            Three of the most commonly prescribed oral chemotherapy  
            medications are used to treat breast cancer. Recent amendments  
            address a concern discussed in the Assembly Health Committee  
            with regard to the cost sharing language and unintended  
            consequences that may emerge. According to the author and  
            sponsors, the recent emergence of a number of effective orally  
            administered chemotherapy medications increases treatment  
            options for patients. This means patients are able to take  
            chemotherapy in the form of capsules or tablets at home,  
            rather than requiring injections or IV administration of  
            treatment that may be painful, time-consuming, inconvenient,  
            or may increase the risk of infection. This bill attempts to  
            reduce and eliminate barriers patients may face in acquiring  
            coverage for oral chemotherapy by requiring health insurance  
            to provide coverage in a favorable cost sharing arrangement  
            relative to other medications.  

           2)Recent Amendments  clarify "A health care service plan contract  
            shall not provide for an increase in enrollee cost sharing for  
            cancer patients to any greater extent than the contract  
            provides for an increase in enrollee cost sharing for other  
            covered medications." 
           
          3)Background  . There are three main ways to treat cancer:  
            surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy. Chemotherapy is often  
            utilized for patients with more advanced cancers. The type of  
            chemotherapy used depends on the type of cancer, the state of  
            the disease and various patient-specific considerations. Aside  
            from oral chemotherapy, anticancer medications are  
            administered either intravenously through a vein or injected  
            into a muscle. Although a few medications are available in  
            more than one format, most cancer drugs are only administered  
            by one route. 

           4)Industry Cost Concerns  . Opponents of this bill indicate  
            legislatively mandated health benefits increase costs and  
            limit insurer, employer, and individual choices with respect  








                                                                  SB 161
                                                                  Page  3

            to a variety of health benefits. Opponents indicate health  
            mandates can hinder compliance with evidence-based medical  
            standards that reflect new medical technology or other  
            advances in knowledge.  When considered together, mandates may  
            also hinder the ability of insurers and employers to offer a  
            wide range of affordable products to consumers with a variety  
            of health care needs. Specific concerns about this mandate  
            include increased administrative costs and the bill's  
            disregard for health plan processes for placing drugs on their  
            respective formularies.  

           5)Related Legislation  . There are more than two dozen current law  
            health mandates, established over the last two decades, to  
            provide coverage for specified services such as cancer  
            screenings and treatment. There are another handful of  
            mandates to offer coverage for a number of other health  
            services. Several current law mandates address both cancer  
            treatment and prescription drug coverage.  
           
          6)Other Health Mandates in the Current Session  . There are nine  
            health mandates under legislative consideration this year,  
            including SB 161. Other proposed health mandates include: 

             a)   SB 630 (Steinberg): cleft palate coverage- also being  
               heard in this committee today
             b)   AB 56 (Portantino): mammography notification- pending in  
               the Senate
             c)   AB 98 (De La Torre): maternity coverage- pending in the  
               Senate
             d)   AB 163 (Emmerson): amino acid-based elemental formulas-  
               held on the Suspense File of this Committee
             e)   AB 214 (Chesbro): durable medical equipment coverage-  
               held on the Suspense File of this Committee
             f)   AB 244 (Beall): mental health parity- pending in the  
               Senate
             g)   AB 259 (Skinner): access to nurse midwives- pending in  
               the Assembly Health Committee
             h)   AB 513 (De Leon): lactation consultant coverage- pending  
               in the Senate

            Two other bills address specification of current law mandates  
            with respect to minimum coverage or loosening of current law  
            mandates. These two bills are: 

             a)   AB 786 (Jones): standardization of individual market  








                                                                  SB 161
                                                                  Page  4

               products- pending in the Senate 
             b)   SB 92 (Aanestad): out-of-state carrier coverage- failed  
               passage in the Senate Health Committee. 


           Analysis Prepared by  :    Mary Ader / APPR. / (916) 319-2081