Access to Non‐reimbursed Expensive Cancer Treatments: A Justice Perspective

Abstract

When the cost‐effectiveness of newly approved cancer treatments is insufficient or unclear, they may not (immediately) be eligible for reimbursement through basic health insurance in publicly funded healthcare systems. Patients may seek access to non‐reimbursed treatment through other channels, including individual funding requests made to hospitals, health insurers, or pharmaceutical companies. Alternatively, they may try to pay out of pocket for non‐reimbursed treatments. While currently little is known of these practices, they run counter to a deeply held egalitarian ethos that is prevalent in many publicly funded healthcare systems. In this article, we investigate to what extent this ethos can be grounded in theories of justice, notably egalitarianism and prioritarianism. We argue that allowing out‐of‐pocket payments by patients themselves, in principle, is not unjust from the perspective of either of these theories, provided that it does not raise in‐practice justice‐based concerns, for instance by displacing more cost‐effective care, to the detriment of other patients, or by failing to treat patients equally. In contrast, we conclude that the practice of making exceptions for individual patients by health insurers or healthcare providers does run counter to the justice‐based requirements of equal treatment.