Category: Health Tech

  • STAT+: Anthropic joins ARPA-H clinical AI moonshot, will hold closed-door health care event

    STAT+: Anthropic joins ARPA-H clinical AI moonshot, will hold closed-door health care event

    You’re reading the web edition of STAT’s health tech newsletter

    Nicolas TUCAT / AFP via Getty Images

    Mario covers technology in health care, including FDA regulation of artificial intelligence; how Medicare pays for health tech; the use of AI in clinical care; mental health chatbots; and consumer wearables. He’s also the co-author of the free, twice weekly STAT Health Tech newsletter. You can reach Mario on Signal at mariojoze.13.

    You’re reading the web edition of STAT’s Health Tech newsletter, our guide to how technology is transforming the life sciences. Sign up to get it delivered in your inbox every Tuesday and Thursday.

    Good morning health tech readers!

    Anthropic has been loudly warning that AI might one day lead to catastrophe. And yet, the company is moving aggressively into health care, even as AI regulation is in a state of flux.

    STAT+ Exclusive Story

    Already have an account? Log in

    STAT+

    STAT+

    This article is exclusive to STAT+ subscribers

    Unlock this article — plus in-depth analysis, newsletters, premium events, and news alerts.

    Already have an account? Log in

    View All Plans

    To read the rest of this story subscribe to STAT+.

    Subscribe

    1. Health Tech Correspondent

      Mario covers technology in health care, including FDA regulation of artificial intelligence; how Medicare pays for health tech; the use of AI in clinical care; mental health chatbots; and consumer wearables. He’s also the co-author of the free, twice weekly STAT Health Tech newsletter. You can reach Mario on Signal at mariojoze.13.

  • Why MAHA wants to make health data much more accessible

    Why MAHA wants to make health data much more accessible

    WASHINGTON — The Make America Healthy Again movement wants your health data.

    The MAHA Institute, a think tank formed by allies of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. after his appointment as health secretary, held an event on Monday that emphasized the benefits of opening up health data sharing in the United States. In particular, the event highlighted how sharing patients’ health records with federal researchers could benefit the study of the origins of chronic diseases.

    In a speech at the event, Kennedy said that user agreements restrict access to data, giving “institutions that control important health data the power to decide who can study it and what questions they’re allowed to ask, and that creates protectionism in science and it leads to the politicization of science.”

    “A qualified researcher with legitimate hypotheses should not need permission from a gatekeeper to test it, particularly from an industry gatekeeper,” he said in his remarks, which began and ended with a standing ovation.

    The idea of using data from health information exchanges for research is controversial because of privacy concerns.

    Speakers throughout the day brought up the state of Nebraska’s partnership with the federal government. As reported earlier this year by KFF Health News, Nebraska’s health information exchange network, called CyncHealth, is sharing patient data with the federal government to enable studies on vaccines and autism. 

    Kennedy said Monday he wants to aggregate “immunization records, clinical data, laboratory results, pharmacy information, and claims to create a more complete picture of a patient’s health over a long period of time.” That data would come from state health information exchanges, EHRs, laboratories, Medicare, Medicaid, and commercial health data platforms like HealthVerity. 

    “We’re already using all these data to answer some of our most important questions. Too much remains fragmented, vulcanized, difficult to link, and inaccessible to researchers,” he said, citing a desire to aggregate the data and make it available to all researchers.

    While KFF reported Nebraska’s partnership was with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and focused on vaccines and autism, MAHA Institute President Mark Gorton said a partnership between Nebraska and the National Institutes of Health “has successfully produced data for the study of chronic disease and serves as a proof of concept for the state-federal hybrid model.” Neither partnership seems to have been publicly announced, though the NIH has already stood up an effort to build Medicare and Medicaid databases within the NIH in an effort to better understand autism.

    Nebraska’s CyncHealth was, until the end of last year, led by Jamie Bland, who became chief data strategist of the MAHA Institute in April.

    At the time of KFF’s reporting, leaders of other state health information exchanges decided not to share information with the government. Using such data for research could run into patient privacy, ethics, and legal issues.

    For example, Jonathan Ketcham, who was chief health care economist at the White House until earlier this year, when he moved back to his economics professorship at Arizona State University, said on Monday that Arizona’s health information exchange data “cannot be used, even de-identified, for researcher grants without individual consent” from providers.

    “The issue is not a technical limitation,” Andrew Kress, CEO and founder of data company HealthVerity, told STAT last year. “It’s really been more around data governance, data ownership, data privacy. Those are the reasons that these things have not worked, more so than you can’t find the right data to do it.” Hospitals, for example, sometimes sell their patients’ de-identified data, or carefully grant access under data use agreements that spell out what purpose the data can be used for. Patients also normally have to consent to their information being used for research.

    Gorton said that the partnership with Nebraska has only worked “because of the investments that Nebraska has made in data governance.” “If this model is going to expand, we will need to see other states make similar investments in the mundane yet crucial function of data governance,” he said.

    The administration has sought to give patients more control over their own data through initiatives like the CMS Health Tech Ecosystem. “Liberate patient records,” said top HHS official Chris Klomp at a STAT event in March. “Let us be very clear on CMS’ official position on this: The record belongs to the patient. It goes everywhere the patient needs to go. We’re serious about this.” 

    But the improved health data infrastructure from these and other Trump administration efforts would help standardize health data, making it ripe for helping answer research questions.

    “We’ve had a lot of public controversy about vaccine safety,” said Donald Rucker, chief strategy officer at 1upHealth and national coordinator for health IT during the first Trump administration. “Many of the [health information exchanges] could answer these questions right now if the immunization registries weren’t actually unlinked to the HIEs,” he said.

    Gorton said at the event that the partnership with Nebraska is a model for state-federal cooperation on health data, and that all 50 states will try different approaches to “growing America’s health data infrastructure.”

    “With these successes, residents will experience health data record portability and a better healthcare experience. Once citizens experience what is possible in one state, other states will rush to follow,” said Gorton. “This pilot is just one small step on a long journey, and we are excited to be part of this adventure.”

  • STAT+: The last ‘breakthrough’ devices to get special treatment from Medicare

    STAT+: The last ‘breakthrough’ devices to get special treatment from Medicare

    Katie covers the impact of health technology on patients, clinicians, and businesses. Her stories explore the price tag of clinical AI, digital health at the FDA, and the boom in direct-to-consumer telehealth. Confidential tips can be sent on Signal at palmer.01.

    In the last month, manufacturers have announced “breakthrough” status from the Food and Drug Administration for a menagerie of devices: triage algorithms for abdominal CT scans, diagnostic panels for urinary tract infections, and thrombectomy robots, to name a few.

    They’re coming in just under the wire: As of October, new breakthrough-designated devices will no longer be eligible for special treatment when it comes to qualifying for extra Medicare payments. These devices, and more than a dozen others, are included in the latest update of STAT’s Breakthrough Device Tracker, which since 2022 has captured nearly 800 devices reported to have FDA breakthrough status. 

    In August, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services finalized the removal of pathways that have made it easier for breakthrough devices to qualify for supplementary Medicare payments for both inpatient and outpatient use. Since 2020, devices that received the designation from the FDA have been able to qualify for new technology add-on payments and transitional pass-through payments without proving they provide a substantial clinical improvement over alternatives, or that they are new. 

    STAT+ Exclusive Story

    Already have an account? Log in

    STAT+

    STAT+

    This article is exclusive to STAT+ subscribers

    Unlock this article — and get additional analysis of the technologies disrupting health care — by subscribing to STAT+.

    Already have an account? Log in

    View All Plans

    To read the rest of this story subscribe to STAT+.

    Subscribe

  • STAT+: The rise of the AI-native radiology practice

    STAT+: The rise of the AI-native radiology practice

    Mario covers technology in health care, including FDA regulation of artificial intelligence; how Medicare pays for health tech; the use of AI in clinical care; mental health chatbots; and consumer wearables. He’s also the co-author of the free, twice weekly STAT Health Tech newsletter. You can reach Mario on Signal at mariojoze.13.

    Good morning health tech readers!

    It’s gonna be a great day. 

    Reach me: [email protected]

    The Medicare RPM backlash

    Medicare’s plan to rein in spending on remote patient monitoring has prompted surprising pushback from insurers. Under these billing codes, Medicare pays health care providers to track and manage the health of their patients using connected devices like blood pressure cuffs.

    As I report in a new story, UnitedHealth Group, CVS Health, and Kaiser Permanente all wrote letters opposing a medicare proposal that such remote-monitoring services be rendered directly by employees of the provider billing for it. Currently much of RPM is delivered by vendors working under the supervision of the billing providers.

    STAT+ Exclusive Story

    Already have an account? Log in

    STAT+

    STAT+

    This article is exclusive to STAT+ subscribers

    Unlock this article — plus in-depth analysis, newsletters, premium events, and news alerts.

    Already have an account? Log in

    View All Plans

    To read the rest of this story subscribe to STAT+.

    Subscribe

  • STAT+: In radiology, AI is blurring the line between technology development and clinical practice

    STAT+: In radiology, AI is blurring the line between technology development and clinical practice

    Katie covers the impact of health technology on patients, clinicians, and businesses. Her stories explore the price tag of clinical AI, digital health at the FDA, and the boom in direct-to-consumer telehealth. Confidential tips can be sent on Signal at palmer.01.

    A decade ago, machine learning scientist and Nobel laureate Geoffrey Hinton made a proclamation that still puts radiologists on edge.

    “If you work as a radiologist,” the so-called godfather of artificial intelligence said at a conference, “you’re like a coyote that’s already over the edge of the cliff, but hasn’t yet looked down.” Deep learning was getting so good, so fast, said Hinton, that “people should stop training radiologists now.” In five years — ten, max — AI would do better than radiologists, he predicted. 

    The clock has run out on that prediction. But the field of radiology isn’t just staring at its shoes, waiting to see how technology upends the profession. Instead, a growing number of radiology practices, in particular outpatient and teleradiology groups, are aggressively embracing AI: developing and acquiring their own tech, deploying it in-house, and marketing their “AI-native” capabilities to radiologist employees and hospital customers alike. 

    STAT+ Exclusive Story

    Already have an account? Log in

    STAT+

    STAT+

    This article is exclusive to STAT+ subscribers

    Unlock this article — and get additional analysis of the technologies disrupting health care — by subscribing to STAT+.

    Already have an account? Log in

    View All Plans

    To read the rest of this story subscribe to STAT+.

    Subscribe

  • STAT+: AI doomerism: Here’s how to make sense of it

    STAT+: AI doomerism: Here’s how to make sense of it

    This is the web edition of STAT’s AI Prognosis newsletter, our guide to artificial intelligence in health care and medicine. Sign up to get it delivered in your inbox every Wednesday. 

    *Bernie Sanders voice* I am once again asking you to … forward this email to a friend! Non-subscribers can now sign up to get (a truncated version of) AI Prognosis. Tell ya buddies and coworkers!

    Also, tell your buddies about this essay from our new trust-in-science reporter, Nick Florko. Faced with health problems, he’s tried diets, supplements, and peptides — he understands the allure of non-scientifically backed treatments, and wants to listen to skeptics as he writes about doubt, misinformation, and distrust.

    Making sense of AI doomerism

    Over the last couple weeks, the fervor about whether AI will kill us all and needs to be slowed has continued on at a rolling boil.

    At STAT, we’ve discussed whether we need to write about it. But I have qualms: Firstly, the kind of nefarious AI that could potentially lead to human extinction is so far removed from still-error-prone health care AI that it’s almost impossible to talk about both at the same time.

    Then: Is this all marketing, as Anthropic and OpenAI prepare to go public? Are all of the recently disclosed AI safety incidents actually just examples of AI companies’ basic incompetence at cybersecurity and infrastructure skills, packaged to make the AI look impossibly smart?

    And then there’s the matter of finding someone who knows enough about AI to talk about it knowledgeably, but who also doesn’t have any incentive to frame it one way or another. (More on that in the next section.)

    In today’s issue, I’ll refer you to a few good reads in a few different areas (general AI, health care, and biology) to help make sense of this.

    STAT+ Exclusive Story

    Already have an account? Log in

    STAT+

    STAT+

    This article is exclusive to STAT+ subscribers

    Unlock this article — plus in-depth analysis, newsletters, premium events, and news alerts.

    Already have an account? Log in

    View All Plans

    To read the rest of this story subscribe to STAT+.

    Subscribe

  • STAT+: UnitedHealth, CVS push back on Medicare plan to curb remote patient monitoring

    STAT+: UnitedHealth, CVS push back on Medicare plan to curb remote patient monitoring

    Mario covers technology in health care, including FDA regulation of artificial intelligence; how Medicare pays for health tech; the use of AI in clinical care; mental health chatbots; and consumer wearables. He’s also the co-author of the free, twice weekly STAT Health Tech newsletter. You can reach Mario on Signal at mariojoze.13.

    Major insurers are pushing back on a Medicare proposal that would significantly disrupt how many doctors bill for tracking the health of patients using devices like connected blood pressure cuffs, scales, and blood glucose meters. These remote monitoring services help patients manage a range of medical conditions, including hypertension, diabetes, and heart failure.

    UnitedHealth Group, CVS Health, and Kaiser Permanente all wrote letters to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services opposing a proposal that would require that remote patient monitoring care be delivered by direct employees of the practice that is billing for them — effectively banning providers from using contractors for the care. All of these groups operate both insurers and care organizations.

    The opposition from UnitedHealth Group is notable in particular because the company’s insurance subsidiary, UnitedHealthcare, recently attempted to stop paying for most remote patient monitoring “due to insufficient evidence of efficacy.”

    STAT+ Exclusive Story

    Already have an account? Log in

    STAT+

    STAT+

    This article is exclusive to STAT+ subscribers

    Unlock this article — and get additional analysis of the technologies disrupting health care — by subscribing to STAT+.

    Already have an account? Log in

    View All Plans

    To read the rest of this story subscribe to STAT+.

    Subscribe