Therapeutic strategies and reduced drug spending as a signal of early impact of the Enhancing Oncology Model.

1578 Background: Building on lessons learned from the predecessor Oncology Care Model, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services designed the Enhancing Oncology Model (EOM), a voluntary, two-sided risk, episode-based payment model, to incentivize participating practices to provide high-quality, patient-centered oncology care while targeting Medicare spending reductions. At the start of the model, 44 oncology practices voluntarily joined EOM. Practices are held financially accountable for 6-month episodes of care for Medicare Fee-for-Service beneficiaries with 7 high-risk cancers. The objective of this study is to evaluate how practices implemented EOM and whether they were able to reduce Medicare spending during its first six months of implementation. Methods: To identify strategies practices used to meet model goals, we interviewed 93 key informants during site visits at 6 EOM practices from November 2024 through February 2025. We analyzed claims-based impacts on spending using a difference-in-differences approach using a sample of episodes of care from EOM practices and propensity score matched comparison practices during a baseline period (July 1, 2018 – June 30, 2022) and the first performance period of the model (July 1–December 31, 2023). Results: EOM practices reported focusing on reducing drug expenditure. Strategies included (1) substitution to value-based treatment alternatives, such as biosimilars, while mitigating the impact of drug shortages; (2) dose rounding and weight-based dosing to minimize waste and improve efficiency; and (3) avoiding drugs with limited clinical benefit, such as white blood cell growth factors for metastatic tumors. While not statistically significant, we found the model reduced total Medicare spending by $646 per episode (1.1%; 90% confidence interval [CI]: –$1,724, $433), likely driven by reductions in Part B systemic cancer therapy payments of $645 per episode (90% CI: –$1,622, $332). This is consistent with practice reports of implementing value-based prescribing strategies. Conclusions: Early EOM implementation results show emerging evidence of systemic cancer therapy payment reductions. These findings may reflect expanded biosimilar availability and practices' strategic focus on value-based drug substitution and dosing.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2026-05-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2026.44.16_suppl.1578
Primary Topic
Economic and Financial Impacts of Cancer
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Therapeutic strategies and reduced drug spending as a signal of early impact of the Enhancing Oncology Model.

L Pagan, Mary Beth Schaefer, Eli Cutler, Anissa Chan et al.
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Economic and Financial Impacts of Cancer
article

Therapeutic strategies and reduced drug spending as a signal of early impact of the Enhancing Oncology Model.

L Pagan, Mary Beth Schaefer, Eli Cutler, Anissa Chan, Rachel Mosher Henke, Shannon Reefer, A.B. Benson, Colin Doyle, Annalise Maillet, Jia Pu, Caroline Ly, Courtney Hall, Cody Hopewell, Sophia Tsakraklides, Mikayla Davis, Jessica Nelson, Michael Bentz, Ashe Peters, Jessica Richards, Lauren Mercincavage
article en

Abstract

1578 Background: Building on lessons learned from the predecessor Oncology Care Model, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services designed the Enhancing Oncology Model (EOM), a voluntary, two-sided risk, episode-based payment model, to incentivize participating practices to provide high-quality, patient-centered oncology care while targeting Medicare spending reductions. At the start of the model, 44 oncology practices voluntarily joined EOM. Practices are held financially accountable for 6-month episodes of care for Medicare Fee-for-Service beneficiaries with 7 high-risk cancers. The objective of this study is to evaluate how practices implemented EOM and whether they were able to reduce Medicare spending during its first six months of implementation. Methods: To identify strategies practices used to meet model goals, we interviewed 93 key informants during site visits at 6 EOM practices from November 2024 through February 2025. We analyzed claims-based impacts on spending using a difference-in-differences approach using a sample of episodes of care from EOM practices and propensity score matched comparison practices during a baseline period (July 1, 2018 – June 30, 2022) and the first performance period of the model (July 1–December 31, 2023). Results: EOM practices reported focusing on reducing drug expenditure. Strategies included (1) substitution to value-based treatment alternatives, such as biosimilars, while mitigating the impact of drug shortages; (2) dose rounding and weight-based dosing to minimize waste and improve efficiency; and (3) avoiding drugs with limited clinical benefit, such as white blood cell growth factors for metastatic tumors. While not statistically significant, we found the model reduced total Medicare spending by $646 per episode (1.1%; 90% confidence interval [CI]: –$1,724, $433), likely driven by reductions in Part B systemic cancer therapy payments of $645 per episode (90% CI: –$1,622, $332). This is consistent with practice reports of implementing value-based prescribing strategies. Conclusions: Early EOM implementation results show emerging evidence of systemic cancer therapy payment reductions. These findings may reflect expanded biosimilar availability and practices' strategic focus on value-based drug substitution and dosing.

Journal of Clinical OncologyVol. 44(16_suppl)
Northwestern University (US), Westat (United States) (US), Lewin Group (United States) (US), Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (US)
Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
Economic and Financial Impacts of Cancer
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.