The payer has modeled your contract.
For hospitals and cancer centers evaluating payer contracts, single-case agreements or outcome-linked terms for advanced therapies.
What you receive: an assessment of the proposed terms, applicable payment rules, program costs and financial exposure, with assumptions and unresolved terms made explicit.
Supporting analysis: FY2027 CAR-T per-case economics.
How these figures are calculated
Illustrative national operating-plus-capital base payment for MS-DRG 018, calculated using the FY2027 final MS-DRG relative weight of 45.1272, national operating standardized amount of $6,848.98, capital federal rate of $540.03, and assumed wage index and capital geographic adjustment factor of 1.000. Assumes submission of quality data and meaningful EHR use. Excludes hospital-specific wage and geographic adjustments, IME, DSH and uncompensated-care payments, NTAPs, transfer adjustments, quality-program adjustments, and outlier payments.
What gets tested first.
Whether an agreement was in place before the first infusion, and on what terms.
Where the outlier threshold sits relative to this program's actual per-case cost.
How the drug cost is reported on the institutional claim, examined as evidence of whether payment follows the contract and the Medicare rule.
These are mechanisms HealthPulse tests for where they apply. None of them is asserted to be present in any specific program.
Advanced Therapy Reimbursement Architecture
CAR-T, TIL and HSC transplant payer-contract structures analyzed against current CMS baselines.
Read the capabilityAnalytical approach
How the firm's analysis is done, including H4, its internal analysis system.
The analytical approachA payer, a product and a per-case number.
That is enough to start. If the gap is smaller than it looks, we will say so on the first call.
Discuss a decision