Skip directly to search Skip directly to A to Z list Skip directly to navigation Skip directly to page options Skip directly to site content

GAO Report on Adding Cancers to WTC Covered Conditions

Posted on by Paul J. Middendorf, PhD, CIH

wtc

The World Trade Center (WTC) Health Program was established by the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act of 2010 (Act), and is administered by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). The Program provides medical monitoring and treatment at no cost for enrolled responders at the WTC and related sites in New York City, Pentagon, and Shanksville, PA. It also provides services for enrolled survivors who were in the New York City disaster area. Health conditions, such as types of cancer, can be added to the list of WTC-related covered conditions after a valid petition has been received and the scientific evidence for causation by exposures at the attack sites is analyzed.

In September of 2011, the Administrator of the WTC Health Program, Dr. John Howard, received a petition from nine New York members of Congress asking him to consider adding cancer to the List. The Administrator reviewed the petition and requested the advice of the WTC Scientific/Technical Advisory Committee (STAC), which provided recommendations to add specific types of cancer. After reviewing the STAC’s recommendation, evaluating the available science, and considering public comment on a proposed rule, in 2012 the Administrator published a final rule which added certain types of cancer to the List and explained the approach used to add the types of cancer.

Recently, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) evaluated the World Trade Center Health Program’s approach to adding cancers to the List [see: http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-14-606]. The GAO found that the Administrator used a hazard-based, multiple-method approach to determine whether to add cancers to the WTCHP list of covered conditions for which treatment may be provided. Experts who participated in a meeting held by GAO indicated that the Administrator’s approach was reasonable but could be improved. The GAO reports:

  • According to these experts, a hazard-based approach focuses on identifying whether particular “hazards”—sources of potential harm—are associated with certain health conditions, and does not attempt to quantify the risks of developing those health conditions. The Administrator’s approach used four methods to determine whether there was an association between a September 11 exposure and a specific cancer, and thus, whether to add that cancer to the list.
  • The experts considered the approach reasonable given the WTCHP certification process for enrollees to obtain coverage for treatment for a condition on the list, the lack of data related to exposure levels and risks, and the use of similar approaches by previous federal compensation programs.
  • The experts indicated the approach could have been communicated more clearly. For example, the description of the approach in rulemaking did not clearly articulate how decisions would be made when evidence under one method supported adding a cancer type to the list, and evidence under a different method did not. The Administrator noted that this omission was an oversight. Since the Administrator plans to use the same approach in future cancer-related decision making, the absence of a clear description can lead to questions about the credibility and equity of the program.
  • According to the experts, an independent peer review process similar to that used in other federal compensation programs could improve the approach. According to the Administrator, this was not feasible due to time constraints imposed by law. A process through which an independent party assesses the validity of the information upon which decisions are being made and that rationales for decisions are clearly described could help ensure the credibility of the Administrator’s approach.

The GAO has recommended that, to help ensure future decisions are equitable and credible, the WTCHP Administrator should communicate clearly the approach used for determining whether to add conditions to its list, and include an independent peer review in the approach, seeking authority to extend time frames if necessary.

The Administrator addressed the issue of clearly communicating the approach used for determining whether to add conditions to its list when he published in May 2014 a policy and procedures for adding types of cancer to the List. The policy and procedures lays out the types of evidence to be considered, and the process for deciding whether to add a type of cancer, including when evidence under one method supports adding a cancer type to the List, and evidence under a different method does not. The Administrator also published a policy and procedures for adding non-cancer conditions to the List.

The Administrator agrees that independent peer review is important and will explore methods to obtain it within the time constraints imposed by the Act. A possible method to obtain the independent peer review recommended by the GAO would be to conduct peer review in parallel to the public comment period when a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to add a health condition to the List is published in the Federal Register.

The Administrator appreciates the recommendations made by the GAO and will continue to use their findings to improve the WTCHP.

 

Paul J. Middendorf, PhD, CIH

Dr. Middendorf is a Senior Advisor in the NIOSH Office of the Director.

Posted on by Paul J. Middendorf, PhD, CIH

7 comments on “GAO Report on Adding Cancers to WTC Covered Conditions”

Comments listed below are posted by individuals not associated with CDC, unless otherwise stated. These comments do not represent the official views of CDC, and CDC does not guarantee that any information posted by individuals on this site is correct, and disclaims any liability for any loss or damage resulting from reliance on any such information. Read more about our comment policy ».

    Its good that Cancer has been added to the list of WTC-related covered conditions. It will be a sigh of relief for many people.

    Cdc failed to help first responders They are a disgrace & injustice to. This great city of newyork I was a first. Responder denied certification may. God bless the cdc & noish forgive Them for they do not know what They do

    The WTC Health Program is a limited healthcare program that can only certify and treat health conditions on the List of WTC-Related Health Conditions (List) or health conditions medically associated with a health condition on the List. In order for the WTC Health Program to certify a health condition, the member’s WTC Health Program physician must first make a determination that the member’s 9/11 exposures were substantially likely to have been a significant factor in aggravating, contributing to, or causing the health condition. After receipt of the physician’s determination, the WTC Health Program makes a certification decision according to the criteria outlined or referenced in the Policy and Procedures for Certification of Physician Determinations for Aerodigestive and Cancer Health Conditions. This document is publicly available at: http://www.cdc.gov/wtc/policies.html

    The wtc health program & CDC made terrible. Mistakes in certification. If the press. Or any news channel
    Wants to interview me Michael Banahan. First responder I am avaibile to expose this. Respectfully submitted

    The wtc health program nurses & doctors. Are very caring & concern the administrator. Noish @ cdc are not concern about the first. Michael Banahan first responder I
    Been going to wtc health program many years Thank god I am alive

Post a Comment

Leave a Reply to shobha girri Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published.

All comments posted become a part of the public domain, and users are responsible for their comments. This is a moderated site and your comments will be reviewed before they are posted. Read more about our comment policy »

TOP