Lori Boyce, CHS AVP, Underwriting, Risk Management & Research/Development Manulife Financial.
-
Upload
ahmad-share -
Category
Documents
-
view
216 -
download
2
Transcript of Lori Boyce, CHS AVP, Underwriting, Risk Management & Research/Development Manulife Financial.
Lori Boyce, CHSAVP, Underwriting, Risk Management & Research/DevelopmentManulife Financial
CI Underwriting Agenda
• Risk of anti-selection• Manulife CI Claims experience• Preferred Life clients get cancer too!• Diagnosis is the key to CI• Unique CI Underwriting focus• Routine investigations at age 50: Increased risk
of diagnosis: lumps, bumps, lesions… • Points to ponder
CI: Risk of anti-selection
Typically….
• Beneficiary = insured
• Insured is not dead
Manulife in 2012
$36,000,000 paid to our clients
Average payment: $125,000 per claimant
Manulife: 1997 to 2012
$223,000,000 paid
1,900 policies
On average, $117,000 per claim
Manulife CI Claims
1 4 12 2137 47
79
125142
177189
255247
290311
343
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
'97 '98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 '12
Manulife: CI claims
13%6%
3% 3%
11%
64%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Cancer Heart Attack Stroke CoronaryBypass
MultipleSclerosis
Other
Manulife: CI face amounts
Under $100K39%
$100-$250K55%
Over $500K1%$251-$500K
5%
Critical Illness: diagnosis
NO requirement for:– Premature death– Disability– Proof of incurred expenses
ONLY require the definition be satisfied: typically a diagnosis + survive 30 days from diagnosis
Incidence – not mortality
More clients are:• Being diagnosed early• Living longer
Which supports the need for this contract…but offers CI underwriters unique challenges
33 year old female teacher
• June 2009: Both she and husband applied for $750,000 Life
• Approved on preferred basis• Accepted $25,000 of CI• 2nd trimester pregnancy – second child
33 year old female
• 10/10: she noticed a new lump which felt different from prior clogged duct detected while breast feeding
• Ultrasound, mammogram and core biopsy completed:
• Invasive ductal carcinoma: T3N2 Mx• ( mammogram: general increased density of
breast but no lesion noted )
33 year old female
November 2009: $25,000 CI benefit paid
33 year old female
February 2012: $750,000 Life benefit paid
50 year old male MD
• 12/08: approved preferred for $750,000 Life
• Accepted $187,500 of CI
50 year old male MD
• Within two years: symptoms of a urinary tract infection
• 10/11 Post investigation: bladder cancer
CI Claim paid
Canadian Cancer Statistics 2012
2012: Newly diagnosed cancers - 53% will be:– Lung– Colorectal– Prostate– Breast
CCS 2012
Every hour, an average of 21 Canadians will be diagnosed with some type of cancer
Men: # 1 PROSTATE CANCERWomen: # 1 BREAST CANCER
Breast cancer: moderately high risk factors*
• Getting older• First degree relative with breast cancer
(especially if prior to menopause)• Genetics: BRCA 1 or BRCA2 carriers• Prior dx of atypical hyperplasia
* WebMD.com
Slightly higher risk factors
• Distant family history: aunt, grandmother, cousin
• Previous abnormal biopsy• No children or first child > age 35• Overweight• Early menstruation < age 12• Late menopause > age 55…
BUT…………..
75% of women diagnosed with breast cancer…
NO identifiable risk factors*
*WebMD.com
Mammogram challenges
• Screening mammograms miss about 20% of breast cancers that are present at time of screening ( high breast density a key factor )
• False positives lead to anxiety and additional testing ( ie: ultrasound/biopsy)
• Over diagnosis and over treatment
Colon cancer
• 3rd most common cancer in Canada
• 2nd most common cause of death from a cancer in Canada ( behind lung cancer)
Colon cancer risk factors
• Age >50• Colon polyp ( adenoma): size and # • Family history ( especially at younger age )• Genetic alterations
– HNPCC and FAP• Personal history of cancer (especially ovary,
uterus, or breast)• Ulcerative colitis or Crohn’s disease
Colonoscopy screening
• Tubular adenoma: depending on # and size: – every 3-5 years
• Family hx , age 60: – every 5 yrs, starting age 40 or 10 yrs prior to age of
diagnosis
Thyroid cancer
• 1998- 2007 for males• 2002 -2007 for females
Thyroid cancer incidence rates rose on average almost 7% per year
Thyroid cancer risk factors
• Increasing age• Female• Exposure to high levels of radiation• Family history of thyroid cancer
Points to ponder
• Know your CI definitions• Identify risk factors for cancer• Be alert to anti-selection risk• Focus on diagnosis/incidence: NOT mortality
Dr. Tim MeagherMedical DirectorMunich Re
The Underwriter’s Concern
• How do I avoid a claim?– An early claim– An unexpected claim– Any claim at all
• How do I accurately assess risk, i.e. be fair to the applicant?
CI is all about Incidence
• Is a covered condition likely to develop in this applicant?– Cancer– Myocardial Infarction– Stroke
• What are the tip-offs that I can detect at time of application?– “Predictors” of future events
The big 3
Predictors
• Family History– Particularly important in CI underwriting
• Medical History– Increased use of APS– Lower threshold for laboratory testing
• Traditional predictors– Build
Family History- Breast Cancer
• Risk varies with – Number of first degree relatives affected
• One affected: RR 1.8• Two affected: RR 2.93
– Age at diagnosis of relative• RR 2.9 if relative < 30• RR 1.5 if relative > 60
• Risk increased if– Breast and/or ovarian cancer in at least 2 first degree
relatives – or 1 first and at least 1 second degree relative ,
especially if:• family history of bilateral breast cancer• history of male breast cancer• history of both breast and ovarian cancer• history of early onset breast or ovarian cancer
(before age 50)
Family History- Breast Cancer
Underwriting Challenges in CI
• The challenge of benign lesions• The challenge of changing incidence• The challenge of non-specific symptoms
Underwriting Challenges in CI
• The challenge of benign lesions• The challenge of changing incidence• The challenge of non-specific symptoms
Risk factors for Breast Cancer
• Age• Gender• Race • Ethnicity• Family history• Genetic factors• Benign breast disease
• Personal history of cancer• Lifestyle, dietary factors• Reproductive history• Hormonal factors• Radiation exposure• Environmental factors
F45, $100,000 CI – Underwritten March 2003
• Family Hx: Mother diagnosed with breast cancer @ 67
• Para: Did not disclose breast lump.
• APS:
• June 02 Lump noted on BSE. Smooth mass L breast. Mammogram: “moderate amount dense glandular tissue which decreases exam sensitivity.”
• U/S: “several simple cysts bilaterally. Largest cyst on R measures 1.5 cm. Largest cyst on L measures 1.5cm. No solid lesions but one cyst has a septation and some echogenic debris within it.”
• Dx: simple bilateral breast cysts.(U/S report did not recommend f/up)
• CPX Feb 03 – on exam notes no new masses or cysts.
F 45, $100,000 CI – Underwritten March 2003
• Case approved STD March 20, 2003
• Claimed for breast cancer in 2004
• June 2004 noted swelling in her L axilla.
• Mammogram showed a “spiculated mass at 12 o’clock L breast and multiple
pathologic appearing nodes in the axilla”
• Bx: 3.5cm well differentiated tumour with negative resection margins.
Positive lymph node involvement.
• Dr states: “This patient has no prior history of breast cancer, although in
retrospect it is felt that this may have been present on a mammogram of
2002 that was read as benign breast disease.”
Underwriting Challenges in CI
• The challenge of benign lesions• The challenge of changing incidence• The challenge of non-specific symptoms
The Challenge of Changing Incidence: Thyroid Cancer
• F34 CI $100,000• Healthy• Policy issued at standard rates 2009• Carotid bruit detected Jan 2010
– Ultrasound of carotid: 1 cm thyroid nodule• Thyroid biopsy
papillary cancer of thyroid
The Challenge of Changing Incidence: Thyroid Cancer
• Thyroid Cancer• Incidence increasing
– 1973: 3.6/100,000– 2002: 8.7/100,000
• Majority are very small papillary cancers
• Mortality has not changed!
Underwriting Challenges in CI
• The challenge of benign lesions• The challenge of changing incidence• The challenge of non-specific symptoms
The Challenge of
“Non-Specific” Symptoms
• F35 $150K CI 2008– MS in maternal GF– ?MS maternal aunt
• Since 2000:– Intermittent pains x 2-3d in different areas of body– Decreased concentration– MRI 2002 N
• 2010: – Constant pain; worsening fatigue
The Challenge of
“Non-Specific” Symptoms
• PX: decreased sensation in both feet• MRI 2 focal areas of demyelination C2 and C4
suggestive of MS or transverse myelitis• CSF: + oligoclonal bands• Diagnosis: MS
Underwriting Challenges in CI
• The challenge of benign lesions• The challenge of changing incidence• The challenge of non-specific symptoms• The challenge of anti-selection
CI: Risk Selection
• Approach is more conservative than with life
• APS more frequently requested
• Blood profiles more frequently requested
Judy Beamish, MD, FRCPCVP & Chief Medical Director
Sun Life Financial
Critical Illness Claims Challenges
Cancer moratorium wording
• No benefit will be payable for cancer and the Insured Person's coverage for cancer will terminate if within the first 90 days following the later of:
• the effective date of the policy (coverage), or • the effective date of last reinstatement of the policy (coverage),
• the insured person has any of the following:• signs, symptoms or investigations, that lead to a diagnosis of cancer
(covered or excluded under the policy), regardless of when the diagnosis is made,
• a diagnosis of cancer (covered or excluded under the policy).• While the Insured Person's insurance for cancer terminates, insurance for
all other covered conditions remains inforce.
Case A: PSA and cancer moratorium
• Effective date of coverage January 1, 2011• PSA ordered January 31: 4.97 (0-4)• Result repeated, still abnormal and free/total
PSA 11% (intermediate risk of cancer)• Referred to urologist on March 10 due to high
PSA with low free/total PSA• July 16, 2011 – biopsy diagnosis of prostate
cancer
Case B: PSA and cancer moratorium
• Effective date of coverage January 1, 2009• PSA March 1, 2009: 5.2 (0-4)• Previous PSA’s had been elevated at this level or
higher for 3-4 years• Seen by a urologist in 2006 with PSA of 5.4 – normal
biopsy in 2007• October 2012 – PSA 9.1 -> referred back to urologist• December 16, 2012 – biopsy diagnosis of prostate
cancer
Is case A different from case B ?
• In case A there was a new finding during the moratorium period which led directly to referral and diagnosis of cancer
• In case B there was nothing new about the elevated PSA during the moratorium period and this did not trigger an investigation leading to a diagnosis of cancerIt was the bump in PSA in 2012 that led to the diagnosis
Case C
• Male 40• $50,000. Group CI policy (Guaranteed Issue)
effective 2005 and 2009 • Advanced Polycystic Kidney Disease
Definition major organ failure
• Major organ failure on waiting list which is: major organ failure on waiting list-means a definite Diagnosis of the irreversible failure of the heart, both lungs, liver, both kidneys or bone marrow, and transplantation must be medically necessary. To qualify under major organ failure on waiting list, the Insured must become enrolled as the recipient in a recognized transplant centre in Canada or the United States that performs the required form of transplant Surgery. The date of Diagnosis is the date of the Insured's enrollment in the transplant centre. The Diagnosis of the major organ failure must be made by a Specialist Physician.
Case C APS
In view of the continued deterioration, I thought it was appropriate for Mr. __________ to plan, along with his sister for a transplant during the
summer. It seems that this will suit both him and his sister well.
He was not placed on a waiting list becausehis sister is going to be the donor
Case C
In view of the continued deterioration, I thought it was appropriate for Mr. __________ to plan, along with his sister for a transplant during the summer. It seems that this will suit both him and his sister well.
Kidney failure is defined as chronic kidney disease stage 5, with the GFR below 15. He reached this point in March 2011 and at that visit his nephrologist recommended that he and his sister plan for renal transplantation during the summer.
• Does he meet the definition ?
Case D heart attack
• Claimant submitted claim for heart attack
Case D APS
Medical Consultant’s Review
Hospital Discharge Report
Definition of heart attack• Heart Attack is defined as “a definite diagnosis of the death of heart muscle due to obstruction of
blood flow, that results in: • Rise and fall of biochemical cardiac markers to levels considered diagnostic of myocardial
infarction, with at least one of the following:• heart attack symptoms• new electrocardiogram (ECG) changes consistent with a heart attack• development of new Q waves during or immediately following an intra-arterial cardiac procedure
including, but not limited to, coronary angiography and coronary angioplasty.• The diagnosis of Heart Attack must be made by a Specialist. • Exclusion: No benefit will be payable under this condition for:• elevated biochemical cardiac markers as a result of an intra-arterial cardiac procedure including,
but not limited to, coronary angiography and coronary angioplasty, in the absence of new Q waves, or
• ECG changes suggesting a prior myocardial infarction, which do not meet the Heart Attack definition as described above.”
Case E
• ECG – classic findings of acute inferior wall MI
Presented with chest pain and bradycardia
Case E Hospital #1
Treated with thrombolysis at hospital #1, then transferred to hospital #2
Hospital #2
• Admitted with diagnosis of acute inferior MI, post-thrombolysis
• Taken to cath lab for angioplasty• No troponin done
Is this claim payable ?
Timing of Release of Various Biomarkers After Acute Myocardial Infarction.
Anderson J L et al. Circulation 2011;123:e426-e579
Copyright © American Heart Association
Case F - hospital records
• STEMI • Smoker• Took cocaine 03/01/2011
What does the contract say ?
• No benefit is payable if the covered condition is caused directly or indirectly by……voluntary or involuntary consumption of drugs or participation in any criminal act
Triggers for Acute MI
Lancet 2011;377:732-40
What can we conclude ?
• Claims come in for a variety of events many of which don’t fit the letter of the definition
• Hospital records are essential• Medical expertise required for cases that
don’t quite fit• What is the intent of the definition ?
Questions?