Welcome to HCV Advocate’s hepatitis blog. The intent of this blog is to keep our website audience up-to-date on information about hepatitis and to answer some of our web site and training audience questions. People are encouraged to submit questions and post comments.

For more information on how to use this blog, the HCV drug pipeline, and for more information on HCV clinical trials
click here

Be sure to check out our other blogs: The HBV Advocate Blog and Hepatitis & Tattoos.


Alan Franciscus

Editor-in-Chief

HCV Advocate



Thursday, March 19, 2015

Disability & Benefits: COBRA Continuation Coverage and Obamacare —Jacques Chambers, CLU

COBRA (Consolidated Omnibus Budget and Reconciliation Act) Continuation Coverage has been a very helpful federal law that allows persons covered under a group health insurance plan to continue on the coverage after regular eligibility for the coverage is lost, e.g., an employee ceasing to be employed; a spouse who divorces the employee; a child reaches the age when she is no longer eligible for dependent coverage. It was an important law when passed, as health coverage was otherwise lost when employment stopped, and to buy individual health insurance before Obamacare, a person had to prove they were in good health with no medical problems or serious medical history.

Now, with the implementation of the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare), COBRA may still be beneficial although it is no longer the only way for a person with a medical condition to continue to have health insurance coverage.

However, COBRA Continuation Coverage has serious drawbacks:
  • Coverage only lasts a brief period of time, and before Obamacare the choices of coverage after COBRA were greatly restricted.
  • Coverage is expensive. Although the benefits were often broad, the COBRA Continuee is expected to pay the full premium including the portion the prior employer paid plus a 2% “administrative” charge. If a disabled COBRA Continuee qualifies for the disability extension, the premium becomes 50% more than the employer pays.
  • The Continuee’s coverage remains at the mercy of the former employer. If the employer changes carriers or drops health insurance altogether, the coverage and cost may change or be lost completely.
Now, however, Obamacare offers a choice for people being moved to COBRA coverage. Loss of the regular employer based coverage creates a Special Enrollment Period which allows a person to purchase a plan on the health exchange as long as they do it within 60 days of the coverage ending, according to the termination date given in the COBRA Notice letter from the employer or its administrator.

Under Obamacare, based on your income, tax credits may be available to assist with the premium payments, which would not happen if you remain with COBRA. Also, there is a wide variety of plans, coverages, and prices to choose from.
 
NOTE: Federal law gives you 60 days from the date your coverage terminates to accept COBRA coverage, and it must be reinstated back to the date the regular coverage stops. It may also take 30 to 60 days after applying for an Obamacare policy to go into effect, depending on the exchange used in your state. To be safe, many people accept COBRA coverage, then drop it once the Obamacare policy is in force.

Be aware, also, that once the 60 days of the Special Enrollment Period for Obamacare has passed, you will not be able to enroll in an Obamacare plan until the next open enrollment or at the expiration of the COBRA coverage. 

COBRA as an Alternative
For those who may want to consider COBRA, below is a brief summary of the law. Since Obamacare is an excellent, as well as a usually less costly, alternative for many, this will focus on those undergoing treatment who have a special need or desire to maintain their current coverage and medical team.

COBRA coverage is limited, usually to 18 months for terminating employees, and to 36 months for dependents losing eligibility, either through divorce, dependent child aging out of coverage, or death of the employee.

In 1989 COBRA was amended under a law called OBRA (Omnibus Budget and Reconciliation Act) to allow people who had to stop work due to disability to extend the time they could keep COBRA Continuation. Under this law, someone who qualifies may stay on their employer’s COBRA Continuation until they become eligible for Medicare, which is normally 29 months after they leave work due to disability. This is because Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) benefits are not payable until you have been disabled for five full calendar months. Those five months plus the twenty-four months of SSDI benefits required to become eligible for Medicare add up to 29 months.
However, to qualify for this disability extension of COBRA you must meet several requirements:
  • You must apply for Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) benefits.
  • Social Security must approve your claim for disability benefits AND notify you during your initial 18 month COBRA period.
  • The Onset Date of your disability must be no later than 60 days after the start of your COBRA coverage.
  • Finally, you must provide a copy of your Social Security Notice of Award letter to your COBRA administrator within 60 days of receiving it AND within the 18 month COBRA period.
Now, for a practical look at each of these requirements:
  1. COBRA is letting Social Security decide who was disabled when they stopped working. If you didn’t pay into Social Security because you were a public school teacher or government employee and are therefore not “financially eligible,” Social Security will still review your medical records to see if you are disabled enough to have qualified for benefits if you had been eligible. Such persons will need to tell Social Security that they are applying to extend COBRA to have such a claim reviewed.

  2. The SSDI claim must be approved during the original 18 months of COBRA. If there is a denial and you have to wait to appeal before an Administrative Law Judge, and it goes beyond 18 months, you lose your chance to extend COBRA even if your claim is later approved.

  3. Social Security will determine the onset date of your disability. That is the date they believe you became disabled and the first of the following month is the date they start counting the five calendar months waiting period. Even if the approval letter comes in the last few months of your COBRA Continuation, you can still qualify for the extension if the Onset Date given in your approval letter is within 60 days of the COBRA Qualifying Event, usually the last day of the month in which you stopped working.

  4. The COBRA administrator MUST be informed of your approval for Social Security within 60 days of the receipt of the Notice of Award letter. It is assumed that the letter was received by you within five days of the date of the letter.

    Unfortunately, ignorance or misunderstanding of this rule has cost many people their right to stay on COBRA. Too many people don’t think about extending their COBRA until it is almost over, and that can be too late to get the extension.

    The COBRA administrator is usually your old employer or they may have contracted with an outside firm to administer their COBRA people. A good rule of thumb is that the copy of the Social Security Notice of Award letter should go to the same place that you send your COBRA premiums. Follow up to confirm the notice was received and ask for written confirmation of eligibility for the extension.
COBRA can be a good way to stay insured since it allows you to stay on your employer’s health insurance plan until you become eligible for Medicare. The primary drawback is that during the months after the first 18 months of COBRA, the employer can (and will) charge you the actual premium PLUS 50%. If you were paying $500 per month on COBRA, the extended months will cost $750 per month.
 
Thanks to the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare), there is now a good alternative to the high cost of continuing the employer’s coverage through COBRA for persons dealing with HCV who lose their employer coverage.


http://hcvadvocate.org/news/newsLetter/2015/advocate0315_mid.html#4

Wednesday, March 18, 2015

State health officials see spike in Hepatitis C cases

The Wisconsin Department of Health Services is seeing new cases of Hepatitis C among people under 30, a trend that mirrors a similar rise in heroin use among that age group.

The number of Hepatitis C cases reported for people under 30 is almost five times higher than it was roughly a decade ago, rising from 160 cases to 710 during that timespan.

"The trends of hepatitis C in young people and heroin overdoses and deaths are rising," said Sheila Guilfoyle, the viral hepatitis prevention coordinator with the state DHS.

Read more...

Federal judge lets NY prison hepatitis policy claim proceed

A lawsuit that says New York state officials, including former Gov. George Pataki, supported a policy to trim medical costs that led to the denial of hepatitis treatment for some inmates can proceed to trial, a judge has ruled.

In the decision entered in the public record Monday, U.S. District Judge Raymond J. Dearie in Brooklyn ruled that a former prisoner identified only as "K. Doe" had adequately asserted his $250 million claim that Pataki and other government officials created and implemented a policy to withhold from state prisoners their positive hepatitis status and deny treatment as a cost-saving measure.

Melissa Grace, a spokeswoman for the state attorney general's office, which is representing the defendants, including Pataki, said the office had no comment.

Read more...

Fight on against Hepatitis C in Wisconsin and Minnesota

Superior, WI (NNCNOW.com) -- It's often referred to as a silent killer so Northland health care professionals have come together to learn more about Chronic Hepatitis C.

According to the Wisconsin Department of Health Services an estimated 74,000 people in Wisconsin are infected with Hepatitis C.

On Tuesday in Duluth and Superior, health care professionals learned how to identify patients at risk of Hepatitis C, and how to make appropriate referrals for diagnosis and treatment.

Read more...

Charity attacks Gilead over hepatitis C drug restrictions

(Reuters) - Charity Medecins Sans Frontieres has accused U.S. drugmaker Gilead Sciences Inc GILD.O of restricting access to its breakthrough hepatitis C drug Sovaldi in developing countries as it tries to protect profit margin in wealthier nations.

MSF, also known as Doctors Without Borders, said Gilead's restrictions aimed to stop discounted supplies of Sovaldi being diverted to patients from rich countries, but that the effort had resulted in "multiple restrictions and demands" on people receiving treatment in poor countries.

It said Gilead was excluding people without national identity documents, a move that hurts migrants, refugees and marginalized patients.

Read more...

The Five: Diabetes —Alan Franciscus, Editor-in-Chief

If you notice, I did not title this article HCV and diabetes.  That is because new studies have not found a direct link between hepatitis C and diabetes—that is type 2 Diabetes mellitus.  However, it is still being studied, and it keeps coming up so the complete story may not be over.   Regardless, it is an important health issue facing people living with hepatitis C especially those who are considered part of the ‘Baby Boomer’ generation.  This month’s Five is about diabetes and how it relates to people with hepatitis C and why it is important to be tested for it, how to treat it and how it may improve the chances of being approved for HCV treatment. 

Diabetes affects approximately 40 million Americans. 

1. At-Risk Populations:  People who are more likely to develop diabetes include people 45 years old or older, being overweight or obese, having a parent, brother or sister with diabetes, having a genetic disposition to developing diabetes.  Certain races and ethnicities such as African Americans, Hispanics, Alaskan Natives, American Indians, Asian Americans, Native Hawaiians or Pacific Islanders are more prone to having diabetes.

2. Symptoms:  The most common symptoms of diabetes include increased thirst and hunger or appetite, dry mouth, frequent urination (peeing), fatigue (feeling tired), unexplained weight loss—even when eating more food.  In extreme cases, people may experience loss of consciousness.

3. Complications:  Over time, left untreated or uncontrolled diabetes can lead to very serious complications including mental confusion, blurred vision, sores or wounds that are slow to heal or don’t heal, sexual problems, heart and kidney disease, blindness, peripheral neuropathy, amputation, and death.

4. Treatment:  Diabetes can be treated and controlled with diet, exercise, and medications.  It is important to be monitored regularly.

5. HCV Treatment:  Many insurance companies and state Medicaid programs are restricting HCV treatment to those with severe fibrosis and cirrhosis.   There are other conditions that may increase the chances of being approved for HCV treatment—Type 2 Diabetes mellitus is one of the conditions that may increase the likelihood of being approved for treatment.  (See: AASLD-ISDA Recommendations for Testing, Managing, and Treating Hepatitis C 2014: When and in Whom to Initiate Treatment).  Talk to your medical provider to find out if you should be tested for diabetes.  If you have diabetes—check with you medical provider about HCV treatment.

The Bottom Line:  Diabetes is a serious disease that has many consequences.  The United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) now recommends testing adults for diabetes who have high blood pressure (greater than 135/80 mm Hg).  The USPSTF is currently in the process of updating their guidelines to include screening adults:
“Having factors that increase the chances of developing high blood sugar or diabetes, such as being 45 or older, being overweight or obese, or having a close relative with diabetes.”
The updated guidelines should be released in the coming months.


http://hcvadvocate.org/news/newsLetter/2015/advocate0315_mid.html#3

India, Pharmacy to the Developing World, Must Honor IP Rights

The United States and India are locked in a vitriolic debate over intellectual property rights in the pharmaceutical sector. The tension between pharmaceutical patents and access to affordable medicines took center stage during President Obama’s three-day visit to India in January. For several years the United States has been increasing the pressure on India to adopt intellectual property protections similar to those of the U.S. and the European Union, without avail. According to the 2015 U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s Intellectual Property Index, India ranks 29th among 30 nations in their protection for intellectual property rights. The report scores nations in several IP dimensions, out of a maximum of 30 points. India scored 7.23 points, only Thailand was ranked lower, while the U.S., the highest-ranked country, scored 28.53 points.[1]

Claiming to be the “Pharmacy to the Developing World”, India argues that their lax intellectual property rights regime is critical to their ability to provide low-cost, quality generic drugs. They are wrong on two counts. First, India needs to honor IP rights, because without effective intellectual property rights, new pharmaceuticals will not be developed and the “Pharmacy to the Developing World” won’t have anything to provide to the developing world, or to anyone. Second, given the quality crisis in the Indian pharmaceutical industry, they shouldn’t be the pharmacy to anyone.

In early January 2015, the Indian government rejected Gilead Sciences Inc’s patent application for its Hepatitis C drug Sovaldi. This comes on the heels of numerous other attacks on pharmaceutical patents. As of mid-2014, India had “denied, revoked or otherwise attacked” the patents of 15 of the approximate 45 patented medicines on the Indian market.[2] The result is a regime of protectionism that coddles Indian industry at the cost of U.S. jobs. The pharmaceutical industry is but one of many industries experiencing such treatment. While the United States has welcomed Indian firms, India has shunned innovative U.S. firms. As described in his Pre-Hearing Statement to the U.S. International Trade Commission, Rod Hunter notes that Indian pharmaceutical firms have enjoyed unfettered access to the sizeable U.S. market.

Read more...