Bill Overview
Title: Diane Powis Ovarian Cancer Testing Access Act
Description: This bill provides for Medicare coverage of multimarker tests related to ovarian cancer (i.e., tests that evaluate more than one tumor marker with respect to ovarian cancer).
Sponsors: Rep. Dean, Madeleine [D-PA-4]
Target Audience
Population: People with or at risk of ovarian cancer
Estimated Size: 5000000
- Globally, ovarian cancer affects a significant number of women, primarily older women.
- The bill focuses on ovarian cancer, which is a major health concern for women worldwide.
- In developing countries, access to testing and coverage may be limited, impacting the global estimation of affected individuals.
Reasoning
- The Diane Powis Ovarian Cancer Testing Access Act is a policy aimed at a relatively specific demographic—primarily older women who are at risk of or have been diagnosed with ovarian cancer in the US. The population commonly affected by this policy will be Medicare recipients, as the policy provides coverage for ovarian cancer tests.
- The target demographic includes women 65 and older on Medicare, who are more likely to be screened or affected by ovarian cancer. Given the prevalence data, a significant portion of this group could be eligible for such tests if they have health indications. However, the funding for the policy suggests that not every individual at potential risk will immediately benefit from coverage, implying some limitations or prioritization in the rollout.
- Simulations must include a range of experiences, such as those highly impacted by the policy who may experience improved health outcomes as a result of early detection of ovarian cancer, as well as those who might not be directly affected but form a significant part of the Medicare demographic.
- Testing under this policy could lead to early detection, which is known to improve survival rates and overall wellbeing. Therefore, the policy's success largely hinges on its ability to effectively target those most at risk and facilitate greater early-stage detection.
- Given financial constraints, the policy will likely prioritize people with specific risk factors over the general population within the target demographic, affecting the magnitude and duration of impact on different individuals.
Simulated Interviews
Retired (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 72 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy would definitely help me feel more secure. With my family history, I've always worried about ovarian cancer, so knowing that I can get tested through Medicare gives me peace of mind.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Part-time Librarian (Denver, CO)
Age: 67 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think it's good to have more tests covered. I might not need it now, but it's reassuring to have it just in case.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Retired Nurse (Miami, FL)
Age: 75 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- More testing would have helped me catch my cancer earlier. I'm in remission now, but constant testing means I can live without the anxiety of it coming back unnoticed.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Retired Teacher (Boston, MA)
Age: 82 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don’t think this policy affects me directly. However, it is important for those who might be at risk, and I support the initiative.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Retired Banker (Seattle, WA)
Age: 70 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Having more tests available is always a good thing. It might help me be more proactive about my health.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Administrative Assistant (Chicago, IL)
Age: 64 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Soon, I will be eligible for Medicare. Knowing I'll have access to tests that assess ovarian cancer risks is a relief.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Retired Engineer (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 85 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 3
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I lost my wife to ovarian cancer. It's good to know that others might have better resources to catch it early.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 3 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 3 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 3 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 3 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 3 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 3 |
Homemaker (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 68 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This type of coverage is crucial for people like me who are at higher risk. It allows for more frequent monitoring.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Retired Accountant (New York, NY)
Age: 77 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I haven't been directly affected by ovarian cancer, but having better test coverage keeps everyone's wellbeing in check.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Retired School Principal (Houston, TX)
Age: 80 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 3
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If I had access to this kind of testing earlier, my cancer might have been caught in a more manageable stage. It's invaluable coverage.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $120000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $150000000)
Year 2: $123600000 (Low: $103000000, High: $154500000)
Year 3: $127308000 (Low: $106090000, High: $159135000)
Year 5: $134477280 (Low: $112630000, High: $168743700)
Year 10: $150000000 (Low: $125600000, High: $187434000)
Year 100: $300000000 (Low: $251200000, High: $374868000)
Key Considerations
- Ovarian cancer is frequently diagnosed at an advanced stage, making early testing crucial for survival rates.
- The effectiveness of multimarker tests in reducing mortality and subsequent healthcare costs is a significant consideration.
- Coordination with existing cancer treatment and screening programs to maximize outreach and efficiency.
- Potential future technological advancements that could improve test accuracy or cost efficiency.