Implications of the initial Braidwood v. Becerra ruling for colorectal cancer outcomes: a modeling study

Rosita van den Puttelaar*, Kewei Sylvia Shi, Robert Smith, Jingxuan Zhao, Margaret Katana Ogongo, Matthias Harlass, Anne Hahn, Ann G. Zauber, K. Robin Yabroff, Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

1 Citation (Scopus)
6 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) eliminated patient cost-sharing for United States Preventive Service Task Force (USPSTF) recommended services. However, if the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit fully upheld a US District Court ruling in Braidwood Management v. Becerra, 666 F. Supp. 3d 613 (N.D. Tex 2023), cost-sharing for USPSTF recommendations made after ACA passage would have been reinstated for more than 150 million people. The case would have reinstated cost-sharing for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening for ages 45-49 years and for polyp removal during (diagnostic) colonoscopy across all ages. Using the MISCAN-Colon model, we simulated the potential impact on CRC outcomes, assuming early-onset CRC trends and lower screening participation. An 8-percentage-point decline in screening participation could increase CRC incidence by 5.1% and CRC mortality by 9.1%, with slightly lower costs due to increased cost-sharing. Larger decreases in screening participation can result in higher costs from increased incidence and delayed diagnoses.
Original languageEnglish
Article numberdjae244
Pages (from-to)790-794
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of the National Cancer Institute
Volume117
Issue number4
Early online date3 Nov 2024
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Apr 2025

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press.

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Implications of the initial Braidwood v. Becerra ruling for colorectal cancer outcomes: a modeling study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this