Texas health systems aim to eliminate cervical cancer statewide by 2032

 A coalition of Texas health systems, professional organizations and community groups has launched a five-year plan to eliminate cervical cancer in the state.

The Texas Lone Star Cervical Cancer Elimination Plan 2027-2032 was developed by the Cancer Alliance of Texas Cervical Cancer Elimination Priority Area Workgroup, according to an Oct. 7 news release from Houston-based University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center.

Cervical cancer elimination is defined as fewer than four new cases per 100,000 women a year. Texas’ current cervical cancer rate is 9.5 cases per 100,000, with rates in some counties reaching 15 to 21 per 100,000. Uninsured, rural, border and minority communities carry the heaviest share of cases, the release said.

The plan is built on three pillars: vaccination, screening, and timely follow-up, diagnosis and treatment. Read the full plan here. 

The Texas health systems, hospitals and academic centers that have pledged commitment to the plan are:

• Houston Methodist
• Parkland Health (Dallas)
• Rice University (Houston)
• Texas Children’s (Houston)
• Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center (Lubbock)
• Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center El Paso
• University Medical Center of El Paso and the El Paso County Hospital District
• The University of Texas at Austin Dell Medical School
• The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (Houston)
• The University of Texas Rio Grande Valley School of Medicine and UT Health RGV (Edinburg)
• University of Texas System (Austin)
• UTHealth Houston
• The UTRGV South Texas Center of Excellence in Cancer Research (McAllen)

Other groups that have pledged commitment to the plan include federally qualified and community health centers, health departments, private sector organizations, community-based organizations and coalitions, advocacy and education groups and professional associations. 

https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/quality/patient-safety-outcomes/texas-health-systems-aim-to-eliminate-cervical-cancer-statewide-by-2032/

HHS agency launches $7.95M healthcare ‘super intelligence’ challenge

 The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality launched a $7.95 million prize initiative Oct. 7 aimed at using AI to speed medical evidence reviews and expand the use of federal healthcare data.

The agency, part of HHS, is calling the effort the Super Intelligence for Healthcare Improvement Initiative. It includes two competitions focused on clinical evidence synthesis and healthcare research, quality and safety.

The larger component, the Clinical Evidence Synthesis Transformation Challenge, offers up to $5.85 million in prizes, including a $5.35 million grand prize, for tools that could reduce the time required to evaluate medical evidence from a year or more to hours.

Finalists will be evaluated on factors including accuracy, throughput, reproducibility, usability and ease of operation.

“Reliable clinical evidence is critical for doctors, patients, payers and policymakers,” AHRQ Director Roger Klein, MD, said in the release. “We now have technologies that will allow us to accomplish the essential core function of evidence synthesis with previously unimaginable speed, consistency and reproducibility.”

A second competition, the SI Tech Sprint for Healthcare Research and Implementation Quality and Safety, will focus on using AHRQ’s cost, utilization and quality databases to develop applications for research, quality improvement, patient safety and public use.

The initiative follows President Donald Trump’s Sept. 29 executive order directing federal agencies to use “super intelligence” in place of “artificial intelligence” in official communications.

AHRQ said individuals, teams and for-profit and nonprofit organizations are eligible to participate. Phase 1 submissions for the evidence synthesis challenge are due March 12, 2027, and submissions for the tech sprint are due Sept. 9, 2027.

https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/healthcare-information-technology/ai/hhs-agency-launches-7-95m-healthcare-super-intelligence-challenge/

HCA hospitals escalate payment fight with insurers

 Hospitals affiliated with Nashville, Tenn.-based HCA Healthcare have sued multiple insurers over alleged claim denials and reimbursement issues in 2025 and 2026. These cases contribute to a broader landscape of legal battles between providers and insurers.

Most recently, seven hospitals filed a lawsuit Oct. 5 against Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield Georgia, part of Elevance Health. The complaint argued the insurer is on the hook for more than $501,213 in reimbursement, alleging underpaid or denied claims. 

The lawsuit cites eight Anthem members, some with denied authorizations due to a purported lack of medical necessity. The complaint included cases involving emergency and post-stabilization care services, claiming Anthem would be responsible for payment under state and federal laws. According to the lawsuit, some claims and appeals were also denied as duplicates or for missing information.

The geographic reach of these hospitals is wide, spanning Utah, Tennessee, Missouri, North Carolina, Kansas and Texas.

HCA-affiliated hospitals in Texas filed a similar lawsuit against another out-of-state payer, Pennsylvania’s Independence Blue Cross, in September. The lawsuit targeting IBX alleged the insurer owed the Texas hospitals at least $345,319.

Not only is HCA Houston Healthcare North Cypress listed as a plaintiff in both the Anthem and IBX actions, but the plaintiffs are also working with the same law firm. 

The legal actions against Anthem and IBX center on the insurers’ obligations as Blues plans. The BlueCard Program allows members of one Blue Cross Blue Shield Association licensee plan to access covered care in another licensee’s service area. Both lawsuits point to the insurers listing online that the hospitals are in network. The lawsuits also bring a breach-of-contract count as the primary claim, while surfacing alternative legal arguments. These lawsuits remain ongoing. 

A previous lawsuit focused on a separate issue. In February 2025, 17 HCA-affiliated hospitals in Florida filed a lawsuit against UnitedHealthcare in the state’s 9th Judicial Circuit Court. The complaint alleged the insurer paid for emergency care provided to ACA members at rates that were too low, claiming the insurer underpaid by more than $145 million since 2022.

The plaintiffs argued that, despite being out of network, they provided emergency services to more than 5,000 UnitedHealthcare members. Citing state law, the hospitals alleged UnitedHealthcare needed to pay the lesser of provider’s charges, the usual or customary charges for similar services in the community, or a mutually agreed upon charge.

But, just months after the initial complaint, both the hospitals and UnitedHealthcare agreed to dismiss the case without prejudice, closing the case without designating which parties won based on merits. The hospitals could refile the same claims at another point in time.

While the more recent cases involve smaller amounts and hinge on how Blues plans operate out of state, the three lawsuits show how HCA hospitals across the country are turning to the courts to recover reimbursement from insurers.

HCA hospitals are not the only ones escalating disputes with insurers. Philadelphia-based Jefferson Health also filed a lawsuit against IBX this year over nearly $100 million in disputed payments, as well as another lawsuit targeting Aetna’s Medicare Advantage inpatient reimbursement policy. The California Hospital Association brought a lawsuit against Anthem Blue Cross, focusing on a policy that would penalize hospitals when patients get care from out-of-network physicians, despite the hospital’s in-network status.

Becker’s has reached out to HCA for comment and will update this story if more information becomes available.

https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/finance/hca-hospitals-escalate-payment-fight-with-insurers/

CMS penalizes 2,334 hospitals for high readmissions

 CMS is penalizing 2,334 hospitals, about 80% of those evaluated, under the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program in fiscal 2027, according to new CMS data. The penalties took effect on Oct. 1.

Here are six things to know:

1. On Oct. 1, 244 hospitals (8.4%) began facing penalties of 1% or more under the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program, up from 240 hospitals (8.1%) in fiscal 2026.
2. Ten hospitals will face the maximum 3% penalty, with 34 facing penalties of 2% or more.
3. The share of hospitals receiving no penalty will drop to 19.8% (578 hospitals) from 21.8% (641) in 2026. The bulk of hospitals, 71.8% in fiscal 2027 compared with 70.1% in 2026, will see penalties below 1%.
4. Fiscal 2027 is the first time CMS calculated hospitals’ performance using both Medicare Advantage and fee-for-service data. Penalties continue to apply only to traditional Medicare payments.
5. Hospitals with the highest proportion of patients dually eligible for Medicare and Medicaid will see an average penalty of 0.33%, the same compared to fiscal 2026. Hospitals with the lowest proportion will see an average penalty of 0.32%, down from 0.35%.
6. The performance period includes discharges from July 1, 2023, to June 30, 2025. CMS reduced the period from three years to two starting in fiscal 2027.

The Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program was developed under the ACA to reduce avoidable hospital readmissions by applying payment reductions to hospitals that have higher-than-expected rates for specific conditions and procedures.

https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/finance/cms-penalizes-2334-hospitals-for-high-readmissions-6-things-to-know/

Hospitals Warned To Avoid Deceptive Pricing Or Wind Up In Federal Court

 by Lawrence Wilson via The Epoch Times,

Hospitals must provide complete and accurate price information to patients before they agree to an elective procedure, or they may find themselves in federal court, Andrew Ferguson, director of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), said at a healthcare transparency forum on Oct. 5.

Ferguson said he'd written to the CEOs of 24 of the nation's largest healthcare companies, reminding them that the FTC has the power to enforce federal laws on unfair and deceptive pricing.

"Let me be clear: these letters are a warning. Healthcare providers must disclose their prices to consumers and must do so starting today," Ferguson told forum attendees.

Hospitals have been required to publicly post price information since 2020, although only about half fully comply with that regulation, according to a recent report.

Even when posted, however, many of the online files are extremely large and may be difficult for consumers to navigate.

Lack of clarity will no longer be tolerated, Ferguson said.

"Hospitals cannot conceal the true cost of a procedure to prevent patients from shopping for better deals at competing facilities, and hospital price disclosures must be complete, accurate, and offered in advance of scheduled services," he said.

A price can be deceptive if it either discloses or conceals information that might reasonably mislead a consumer, according to the FTC. That means prices must be clear and easily found by the shopper.

A price can also be deceptive when it omits critical information, like physician or facility fees, or it covers only part of the expense for services that would be provided for the patient's care.

Inaccurate prices are deceptive, according to the FTC. When a reasonable person would conclude they've been told the entire cost of the service but they have not, the price is misleading.

Just 18 percent of hospitals that post their fees online list dollars-and-cents prices for at least half of their services, according to a September report from the group Patient Rights Advocate.

"Too many patients are still being denied the real, upfront prices they need to shop for affordable care and protect themselves from overcharges," Cynthia Fisher, the group's founder and chair, said in a statement.

Trent England, executive director of the conservative policy research group Save Our States, hailed the Oct. 5 announcement.

"Healthcare price transparency is one of the most obvious policies in American politics. That it has taken this long to guarantee patients and employers actual prices is absurd," England said in a statement.

The warning letters were not based on a specific assessment of each of the 24 healthcare company's practices, Ferguson said, but aimed to encourage the businesses to conduct an internal review to be sure they are not violating federal law.

Enforcement investigations into some hospitals are already underway though, Ferguson said, and the FTC is especially focused on what it deems vulnerable populations, which include rural Americans, seniors, and veterans.

"We will not rest until pricing transparency in healthcare is the universal norm," Ferguson said.

https://www.zerohedge.com/medical/hospitals-warned-avoid-deceptive-pricing-or-wind-federal-court

Pfizer approval for combo as frontline maintenance in unresectable or metastatic HER2-positive breast cancer

 

Pfizer wins U.S. FDA approval for TUKYSA combo as frontline maintenance in unresectable or metastatic HER2-positive breast cancer

• Approval covers adults with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic HER2-positive breast cancer after induction therapy.
• Regimen combines TUKYSA (tucatinib) with trastuzumab and pertuzumab as frontline maintenance treatment.

https://finviz.com/stock?t=PFE&ty=c&ta=1&p=d

Glaukos positive Phase 3 extension data for Epioxa epi-on corneal cross-linking in keratoconus

 

Glaukos reports positive three-year Phase 3 extension data for Epioxa epi-on corneal cross-linking in keratoconus

• Data show durable efficacy improvements over three years after a single treatment with Epioxa epi-on therapy
• Phase 3 extension results demonstrate a favorable long-term safety profile for Epioxa epi-on corneal cross-linking in keratoconus

https://finviz.com/stock?t=GKOS&p=d