Princess Health and Study finds that one dose of HPV vaccine that targets only cervical cancer is as effective as three doses, now recommended.Princessiccia

Princess Health and Study finds that one dose of HPV vaccine that targets only cervical cancer is as effective as three doses, now recommended.Princessiccia

cancer cervical cancer HPV human papillomavirus immunizations research sexually transmitted diseases vaccinations

Gusty 13:53 Add Comment

By Melissa Patrick
Kentucky Health News

A study has found that one dose of the human papillomavirus vaccine Cervarix appears to be as effective in preventing HPV infections that lead to cervical cancer as do three doses, the recommended course of vaccination. Only 25 percent of Kentucky adolescent women initiate the vaccination, and fewer than one in nine of those who do get three does, according to the Kentucky Cancer Consortium.

"Many women around the world and in the U.S. don't get the full three doses that are recommended, so this is promising news," said Elisia Cohen, an associate professor of communication at the University of Kentucky, who does extensive research on community strategies to improve adolescent and adult vaccinations. However, she cautioned that the drug Cervarix is "only 1 percent of the U.S. market" and that the findings from this study do not apply to Gardasil, the drug most commonly used in the U.S.

Dr. Diane Harper of the University of Louisville, one of the researchers, said in a news release, �Kentucky is one of the states that has not had a program in place to make Cervarix available to all of its citizens, and has very low three-dose completion rates of Gardasil.�

Most health departments and physicians choose Gardasil over Cervarix because it protects against four strains of HPV: two strains that cause 70 percent of all cervical cancers and two strains that cause genital warts and oral and anal cancers, concerns for males as well as females. Cervarix only protects against the two strains that cause cervical cancer. "Generally, the thinking is that protection against four strains is better that two," Cohen said.

She said Gardasil 9, which will protect against 90 percent of HPV strains that cause cervical cancer as well as pre-invasive cervical cancer lesions, has just been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and is going through its labeling process, and will be recommended for both boys and girls.

HPV is the most common sexually transmitted infection in the U.S., affecting an estimated 79 million individuals, according to the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The study, published in The Lancet Oncology, analyzed data from two large trials of Cervarix. In the trials, women were randomly chosen to receive three doses of Cervarix or a control vaccine. All of the women were evaluated, regardless of how many doses of the vaccine they received, for the effectiveness of the vaccine for a period of four years. The analysis found that the protection from one dose was similar to that achieved by three doses of the vaccine.

�Knowing that Cervarix offers protection in one dose reassures public health agencies that they are not wasting money when most of their vaccines are given to those who never complete the three-dose series,� the researchers wrote.

The CDC recommends HPV vaccination for girls 11 and 12 years old, and catch-up vaccination for females from 13 to 26. The second dose should be given one to two months after the first injection; the third dose should be administered six months after the first dose.

Princess Health and How Institutional Conflicts of Interest Exacerbate the Anechoic Effect - the Example of ASCO Fearing "Biting the Hand that Feeds You". Princessiccia

Princess Health and How Institutional Conflicts of Interest Exacerbate the Anechoic Effect - the Example of ASCO Fearing "Biting the Hand that Feeds You". Princessiccia

American Society of Clinical Oncology anechoic effect conflicts of interest health care prices institutional conflicts of interest medical societies You heard it here first

Gusty 12:42 Add Comment

As we recently discussed (here, here, here and here), in May, 2015, the New England Journal of Medicine, arguably the world's foremost medical journal, published an editorial and a three-part commentary arguing that current concerns about the effects of financial conflicts of interest (COI) on health care are overblown(1-4).  On June 1, the Wall Street Journal published a report on the 2015 meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) that provided a vivid example of why these concerns should not be dismissed.

Questioning Drug Prices at the ASCO Meeting

The main issue in the article was:

In a sign of growing frustration with rising drug prices, a prominent cancer specialist on Sunday sharply criticized the costs of new cancer treatments in a high-profile speech at one of the largest annual medical meetings in the U.S.

'These drugs cost too much,' Leonard Saltz, chief of gastrointestinal oncology at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, said in a speech heard by thousands of doctors here for the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

The notion that health care prices are high and are rising continuously in the US should hardly be novel for regular Health Care Renewal readers.  We have been writing about it for a while, starting in 2005.

We first posted about high drug prices in July, 2005, with the example of BilDil.  This was a brand-name combination drug that included two compounds that were already cheaply available in generic form, advertised as a uniquely convenient therapy for congestive heart failure.  We were aghast that the price of the combination drug might be $5.40 - $10.80 a day (in 2005 dollars), over three times the cost of the two drugs in generic form.

But only a few days later we noted that three cancer costs had yearly costs in the five figures, and one, Erbitux, cost as much as $100,000.  Most amazingly we noted that Thalidomid was priced at $25,000  a year.  Yet it was just the infamous thalidomide, the drug initially marketed as a tranquilizer that caused severe birth defects after it was initially sold in Europe.  The drug was still available in generic form in South America for about seven cents a pill.

Since then, the ridiculously high prices of many tests and treatments, but most notably new drugs and devices, has been so widely covered our discussion has been limited to special cases.   For example, consider just a few headlines from April to May, 2015.

How Much Would You Pay for an Old Drug? If You Have MS, a Fortune (Bloomberg)

Pharmaceutical Companies Buy Rivals' Drugs, Then Jack Up the Prices (WSJ)

How Marketing Exclusivity Led to Higher Drug Costs and Questionable Benefits (WSJ)

Runaway Drug Prices (NY Times)


Drug Prices as a Taboo Topic

However, despite this wide attention to the problem, the speech at ASCO was notable.  Back to the WSJ...

Dr. Saltz�s speech was unusual because it was made at the meeting�s plenary session, where the field�s most significant scientific research is presented and which all meeting participants are expected to attend. An estimated 25,000 doctors and scientists attended this year�s meeting.

One would think that the high price of drugs, especially cancer drugs, would be a fit subject for discussion at a plenary session of ASCO, however,

It is unprecedented for plenary speeches, which typically address scientific and medical issues, to substantially take on the topic of drug costs, said Alan Venook, a professor of medicine at the University of California San Francisco who planned the meeting�s scientific session and invited Dr. Saltz to speak.

The prominent venue for the speech was also unusual because, like many medical meetings, ASCO is sponsored by pharmaceutical companies and often focuses on highlighting advancements in drug development, said Dr. Venook. He said discussing drug prices there is 'uncomfortable' because it could be seen as 'biting the hand that feeds you.'

Doctors are also reluctant to antagonize the drug industry because they need pharmaceutical firms to invest in developing new medicines for patients, he said.

'It�s a tough balancing act for ASCO where the meeting is largely funded by pharma,' Dr. Venook said in an interview. 'You can�t have a [plenary] talk trashing pharma, but you can have a talk by a respected person questioning it.'

So because pharma gives ASCO a lot of money, at best, only the most distinguished ASCO members can gently question pharma, but cannot criticize, much less "trash" the source of their mammon.


This is thus a succinct example of why financial conflicts of interest in medicine and health care can be bad.  The incredibly high prices of cancer drugs should be a fit topic for discussion at a meeting run by a society of medical oncologists.  But those in charge of the meeting and the society are afraid to initiate such a discussion, and even more afraid of appearing to criticize the companies that charge these prices, because the society has become dependent on money from these very same companies.  So this is further an example of how conflicts of interest can create the anechoic effect - the notion that certain topics in medicine and health care are taboo, because discussing them might trouble the powers that be, and particularly the moneyed interests that now dominate medicine and health care. 

In a succinct response to the NEJM series (1-4) soft pedaling concerns about conflicts of interest, the British Medical Journal ran a commentary by a former NEJM national correspondent, and two former NEJM editors.(5)  It stated,

The NEJM has now sought to reinterpret and downplay the importance of conflicts of interest in medicine by publishing articles that show little understanding of the meaning of the term. The concern is not whether physicians and researchers who receive industry money have been bought by the drug companies, as Drazen writes, or whether members of guideline panels or advisory committees to the US Food and Drug Administration with ties to industry make recommendations that are motivated by a desire for financial gain, as Rosenbaum writes. The essential issue is that it is impossible for editors and readers to know one way or the other.

In this case, we seem not to be talking about the possibility that health care professionals "have been bought by the drug companies,"  but how drug companies essentially "buying" a professional organization has apparently heretofore prevented medical professionals from discussing a vital issue that could have major effects on patients.

Following the Money

In case there is any question about the money involved and its sources, one only needs to go to some publicly available in formation supplied by ASCO (mostly because of reporting requirements imposed on all US non-profit organizations of a certain size).  

The latest (2014) annual report from ASCO reveals that the organization only gets 16.1% of its revenue from member dues.  Thus a ostensible membership organization gets only about a sixth of its funding from members' dues.

Yet the organization has become quite wealthy.  Its most recent (2013) US Internal Revenue Service 990 Form reveals that it owns over $55 million in real estate, and has over $104 million in investments (presumably as an endowment.)  The organizations' leaders are also doing very well. Its CEO, Allen Lichter MD, got $804,775 in total compensation in 2012.  Eleven other managers, of which three are health care professionals (one MD, one RN, one PharmD), got at least $220,000 in total compensation.  Five of them got more than $300,000. 

The source of all that money seems mainly to be pharmaceutical and other health care corporations that sell goods and services for cancer care.  US non-profit organizations are not forced by law to reveal the details of their financial support.  However, the ASCO annual report does list 23 pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, and one for-profit cancer hospital chain as contributing at least $1 million each in total to the non-profit over time.  The report lists 37 pharmaceutical, biotechnology, and medical device companies as current corporate donors, and also 10 other for-profit health care related corporations as current corporate donors.

In addition to these apparently marked institutional conflicts of interest, ASCO leaders may have their own individual conflicts of interest.  I do not have the resources to search all relationships affecting meeting organizers and ASCO officers and trustees, and the organization does not post conflicts of interest affecting its leadership and governance in a prominent place. However, Dr Alan Venook, who confessed to his discomfort about inviting a talk that might be perceived as biting the hand that feeds the finances of ASCO, is or has been on advisory boards for Thershold Pharmaceuticals,  Mirna Therapeutics, and GlobeImmune.  For a 2014 presentation, he gave the following disclosures: "Research support from Genentech/Roche, BMS, Lilly, Novartis; H. Lenz: Consulting, advisory boards and research support from Genentech/Roche, BMS and Merck."  Furthermore, the current chair of the ASCO Board of Directors, Julie M Vose, MD, is also on the Medical Advisory Board of EmergingMed Inc, and the Clinical Advisory Board of Bullet Biotechnology.

Summary

The New England Journal of Medicine recently launched a counter-attack against the "pharmascolds" who are allegedly slowing the pace of medical progress by their excessive and puritanical concerns about financial conflicts of interest.  Yet the arguments that COIs could be bad for health care are logical, and based on at least some reasonably good evidence.  (See the article by Steinbrook et al in the BMJ mentioned above[4], the accompanying BMJ editorial[5] just to start and then the 2009 Institute of Medicine report.)

Moreover, we have encountered a lot of vivid cases suggesting that conflicts of interest can have adverse influences on health care.  In this most recent one, we see at least one prominent if conflicted organizational insider admitting that institutional, and perhaps individual conflicts of interest have made discussion of at least one big health care and health care policy topic taboo.  This seems to corroborate our previous discussion that the anechoic effect - that certain topics in health care are taboo - may be generated by conflicts of interest of the people who ought to discuss them, or of those to whom those people may have to answer.

True health care reform requires full disclosure of conflicts of interest for honesty's sake, and marked reduction of conflicts affecting those who make health care decisions on behalf of individual patients, and health care policy decisions that affect patients' and the public's health.  If we allow conflicts of interest to continue, we will have difficulty even discussing the most severe problems affecting health care, because those generating the topics are benefiting from the circumstances that enable such problems.

ADDENDUM (1 July, 2015) - This post was republished on 28 June, 2015, on the Naked Capitalism blog. 

ADDENDUM (20 July, 2015 ) - This post was republished on July 12, 2015 in OpenHealth News.

References

  1.Drazen JM.  Revisiting the commercial-academic interface.  N Eng J Med 2015; ; 372:1853-1854. Link here.
2. Rosenbaum L.  Reconnecting the dots - reinterpreting industry-physician relations.  N Eng J Med 2015; 372:1860-1864.  Link here.
3. Rosenbaum L. Understanding bias - the case for careful study.  N Engl J Med 2015;  372:1959-1963.  Link here.
4.  Rosenbaum L.  Beyond moral outrage - weighing the trade-offs of COI regulation. N Engl J Med 2015; 372: 2064-2068.  Link here.
5. Steinbrook R, Kassirer JP, Angell M.  Justifying conflicts of interest in medical journals: a very bad idea.  Brit Med J 2015; 350: h2942.  Link here. 
6. Loder E. Revisiting the commercial-academic interface in medical journals.  Brit Med J 2015; 350: h2957.  Link here.

Princess Health and Study outlines historical barriers to tobacco prevention in Kentucky and other tobacco-growing states.Princessiccia

Princess Health and Study outlines historical barriers to tobacco prevention in Kentucky and other tobacco-growing states.Princessiccia

research smoking smoking bans smoking cessation smoking ordinances tobacco tobacco prevention

Gusty 12:22 Add Comment

A University of Kentucky College of Nursing study published in The Milbank Quarterly has shown that five major tobacco-growing states�Kentucky, North Carolina, Virginia, South Carolina and Tennessee�fall behind the rest of the states in enacting laws to reduce tobacco use.

Tobacco and the diseases it causes affect those five states more than others across the nation, and tobacco is the leading cause of preventable death in the U.S. Those states also have fewer smoke-free laws and lower tobacco taxes, which are two evidence-based policies that help reduce tobacco use, write the authors, Amanda Fallin and Stanton A. Glantz.

The researchers used five case studies chronicling the history of tobacco-control policy "based on public records, key informant interviews, media articles and previously secret internal tobacco industry documents available in the Legacy Tobacco Documents Library," they write.

They found that beginning in the late 1960s, tobacco companies focused on creating a pro-tobacco culture to block tobacco-control policies. However, since 2003, tobacco-growing states have seen passage of more state ad local smoking bans, partly because the alliance between tobacco companies and the tobacco farmers dissolved and hospitality organizations stopped objecting to such bans. National Cancer Institute research projects also built infrastructure that led to tobacco-control coalitions. "Although tobacco production has dramatically fallen in these states, pro-tobacco sentiment still hinders tobacco-control policies in the major tobacco-growing states," the researchers write.

To continue the progress, health advocates need to teach the public as well as policymakers about "the changing reality in the tobacco-growing states, notably the great reduction in the number of tobacco farmers as well as in the volume of tobacco produced," Fallin and Glantz write. Kentucky once had about 50,000 tobacco farmers; today it has about 5,000, and production is dominated by large farmers. The study is behind a paywall; to read its abstract, click here.

Princess Health and Half again as many Kentucky newborns were hospitalized for drug dependency last year as the year before.Princessiccia

Princess Health and Half again as many Kentucky newborns were hospitalized for drug dependency last year as the year before.Princessiccia

drug abuse drug treatment drug use drugs hospitals infant health narcotics neonatal care pain

Gusty 07:59 Add Comment

Mother Samantha Adams and her newborn Leopoldo Bautista,
10 days old, spend quality time inside the Louisville Norton
Healthcare child care center for children experiencing drug
withdrawal. (Photo by Alton Strupp, The Courier-Journal)

Increasing drug abuse drove up hospitalizations of drug-dependent newborns in Kentucky by 48 percent last year, to 1,409 from 955 in 2013. "The latest numbers represent a 50-fold increase from only 28 hospitalizations in 2000," reports Laura Ungar of The Courier-Journal.

"The seemingly never-ending increase every year is so frustrating to see," Van Ingram, executive director of the state Office of Drug Control Policy, told Ungar. "It's a horrible thing to spend the first days of your life in agony."

"These infants are born into suffering," Ungar writes. "They cry piercingly and often. They suffer vomiting, diarrhea, feeding difficulties, low-grade fevers, seizures � and even respiratory distress if they're born prematurely."

Drug-dependent newborns are becoming more common nationwide, Ungar notes, but "Vanderbilt University researchers publishing in the Journal of Perinatology [a subspecialty of obstetrics concerned with the care of the fetus and complicated, high-risk pregnancies] say rates are highest in a region encompassing Tennessee, Mississippi, Alabama and Kentucky."

While the increase is blamed mostly on illegal drug use, the Vanderbilt study found that 28 percent of pregnant Medicaid recipients in Tennessee filled at least one painkiller prescription, Ungar writes: "Legitimate use not only raises the risk of having a drug-dependent baby, it can sometimes lead to abuse and addiction."

While Medicaid now pays for behavioral-health and substance-abuse treatment, "Drug treatment for pregnant women is sorely lacking," Ungar reports. In Kentucky, only 71 of the 286 treatment facilities listed by the U.S. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration treat pregnant women. 

Princess Health and Supreme Court upholds Obamacare subsides in all states; ruling has no direct effect on Kentucky, but focuses political debate.Princessiccia

Princess Health and Supreme Court upholds Obamacare subsides in all states; ruling has no direct effect on Kentucky, but focuses political debate.Princessiccia

Affordable Care Act federal government governor's race health care law health insurance insurance coverage insurance exchange obamacare Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act U.S. Supreme Court

Gusty 15:40 Add Comment

By Molly Burchett
Kentucky Health News

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Thursday that the tax subsidies provided under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act are legal in every state.

While the ruling has no effect on Kentucky, and would have had no direct effect if it had gone the other way, it sets the table for continued political debate about health policy in Congress and in Kentucky's race for governor.

"Congress passed the Affordable Care Act to improve health insurance markets, not to destroy them," Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in the 6-3 majority opinion. "If at all possible, we must interpret the Act in a way that is consistent with the former, and avoids the latter."

The law says the federal government can pay subsidies to help people afford insurance bought through �an Exchange established by the State.� The lawsuit argued that Americans in the 34 states using the federal exchanges were not eligible for the subsidies, which are crucial to the law's success, helping to make health insurance more affordable, reducing the number of uninsured Americans. Proponents of the law say not providing subsidies to individuals in those 34 states relying on the federal exchange would have upended the law, notes CNN.

President Obama called on critics to accept the law as permanent, saying after the ruling, "The Affordable Care Act is here to stay."

But Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., called Obamacare �a rolling disaster for the American people,� with a �multitude of broken promises, including the one that resulted in millions of Americans losing the coverage they had and wanted to keep. Today�s ruling won�t change the skyrocketing costs in premiums, deductibles, and co-pays that have hit the middle class so hard over the last few years.�

Maps: Percentage uninsured in 2012, above, and 2014, below

Obama countered, "The setbacks I remember clearly. But as the dust has settled, there can be no doubt that this law is working. It has changed, and in some cases saved, American lives. It set this country on a smarter, stronger course." He added, "The law has helped hold the price of health care to its slowest growth in 50 years" and "Nearly one in three Americans who was uninsured a few years ago is insured today. The uninsured rate in America is the lowest since we began to keep records."

A White House fact sheet noted that the law also expanded "access to preventive care, including immunizations, well-child visits, certain cancer screenings, and contraceptive services, with no additional out-of-pocket costs as well as no more annual caps on essential benefit coverage and new annual limits on out-of-pocket costs."

Since Kentucky established its own exchange, Kynect, for buying subsidized health insurance or signing up for Medicaid, the ruling may seem moot for Kentuckians. However, it establishes some of the facts for a health-care policy debate in the governor's race between Republican Matt Bevin and Democratic Attorney General Jack Conway.

The exchanges and the expansion of the federal-state Medicaid program are choices for the states, and Bevin has said that if elected he would shut down Kynect and end the Medicaid expansion, which has covered about 430,000 Kentuckians. The federal government is paying their entire cost through next year; in 2017 the state would start picking up a small share, rising to the law's limit of 10 percent in 2020.

Conway has acknowledged questions about whether the state can afford to pay its share, but to �say you�re going to kick a half a million people off of health insurance based on what we may or may not be able to afford in 2021 is irresponsible.� A Conway spokesman said he "appreciates the court's careful consideration of this case and agrees with today's decision," reports the Lexington Herald-Leader.

The Herald-Leader's Mary Meehan interviewed officials and experts for a package of questions and answers about the law and Kentucky. It is published at http://www.kentucky.com/2015/06/25/3917832_in-light-of-the-supreme-court.html.

Outgoing Gov. Steve Beshear, a Democrat who expanded Medicaid, said in a statement that the decision �reaffirms that, from the very start, we did the right thing for the more than 500,000 Kentuckians who have qualified for health-care coverage through Kynect since January 1, 2014.�

Susan Zepeda, president and CEO of the Foundation for a Healthy Kentucky, said in a release, "While many have been awaiting this important decision, we must remember that much remains to be done to assure that all Kentuckians � and all Americans � have timely access to safe, effective and affordable quality care." Zepeda said Kentuckians continue to work on ways to improve and protect Kentuckians' health, such as reforming the way we pay for care and making health care cost and pricing more transparent.

"As people who have forgone care too long because of its expense now gain access to care, it will place a larger short-term burden on the health-care system, which approaches like these can help to address," said Zepeda. "The Affordable Care Act permits � and incentivizes � local health care innovation. We can and must shape Kentucky solutions to Kentucky�s health challenges."

Princess Health and The Homeplace at Midway opens, with cottages for nursing, assisted living, memory care; first 'Green House' facility in Ky..Princessiccia

Princess Health and The Homeplace at Midway opens, with cottages for nursing, assisted living, memory care; first 'Green House' facility in Ky..Princessiccia

Alzheimer's disease assisted living dementia elderly long-term care memory loss nursing homes seniors

Gusty 14:45 Add Comment

By Kacie Kelly and Al Cross
University of Kentucky School of Journalism and Telecommunications

The Homeplace at Midway was formally opened Thursday, June 25, bringing to fruition a 16-year campaign for a nursing home in the Woodford County town of 1,700. For photos from its June 28 open house, click here.

Construction this spring (Christian Care Communities photo)

The Homeplace, which has four residential buildings that look like single-family homes, is more than a nursing home. Two of the buildings are for skilled nursing, but one is for assisted living and the other is for "memory care" or personal care of patients with dementia and other cognitive impairments.

�The Homeplace at Midway represents a new beginning for older adults in Kentucky and for communities across the commonwealth to embrace them as living treasures, not a burden or a challenge,� Dr. Keith Knapp, president and chief executive officer of Christian Care Communities, which built the Homeplace and will operate it, said at the ribbon-cutting ceremony.

Assisted living cottage (Photo by Kacie Kelly)

�We are extremely grateful to the City of Midway, the Midway Nursing Home Task Force, Midway College, state and local government agencies, our capital campaign�s Leadership Council and all our friends and supporters who championed this new direction and envisioned with us a new day when older adults would receive the highest quality care and support, without feeling their lives are being disrupted or overtaken,� Knapp said. �We trust that it will inspire other senior living providers to move in a similar direction.�

The Homeplace is the first facility in Kentucky built with The Green House model, which includes home-like environments and strong relationships with caregivers, with the goal of meaningful lives for residents. Dr. William Thomas, creator of the model, told the crowd at the event, �The Homeplace, with its emphasis on home, shows how care can be made more loving, community centered and effective.�

One of the two skilled-care cottages (Photo by Kacie Kelly)

Patients have been moving in all month. The staff at The Homeplace is trained to use the �best friend approach,� Laurie Dorough, the facility's community-relations manager, said in an interview. Staff and volunteers are to treat residents as they would treat a best friend.

Knapp said at the ribbon-cutting, �Each resident will have a private bedroom and bath and share, just as people do in any home, the kitchen, living room, den and porch areas. It�s all designed to give residents the freedom to set their own daily routines and to live life to its fullest, while receiving the individual care they need � within each cottage.

The assisted-living cottage is larger than the others, to provide room for more activities and �the potential for spouses to live there,� said Laurie Dorough. �It�s kind of the first step out of independent living,� she said. The cottage has an open kitchen where residents can get involved with meal preparation or �come out and see what�s cooking.�

Skilled-care cottage bathroom lift system (Photo by Kacie Kelly)

The skilled-nursing cottages have bedrooms with medicine cupboards rather than medical carts, and a bathroom lift system (photo at right) that takes the resident straight to their own bathroom. The bedrooms are relatively small, an incentive for residents to spend more time in the communal living space.

The Homeplace campus, across Weisenberger Mill Road from Midway College, also includes an administrative cottage and the Lucy Simms Lloyd Gathering House for special gatherings, worship services and activities.

Between the cottages is the courtyard, with lighted walking paths from building to building, a gazebo, and space for outdoor activities. �Our hope is to maybe start a community garden,� said Dorough.

The long campaign for a nursing home, led by the Midway Nursing Home Task Force, began to see success in 2010 when Louisville-based Christian Care agreed to be the developer. Christian Care has facilities in 11 Kentucky cities, and a church-outreach program with more than 230 churches as partners.

The Homeplace will have a partnership with Midway College, which becomes Midway University July 1. �We are excited to work with Midway College to not only provide learning opportunities for students but also for the residents of The Homeplace,� said Tonya Cox, the facility's executive director.

The Homeplace will be offering internships and other learning opportunities for students. This partnership will also benefit residents, Cox said: �Our residents will also have the opportunity to attend events and classes to foster their lifelong learning.�

Cox said The Homeplace aims to provide �unique long-term care in a way that honors their preferences and desires to be home.� More information is on the facility's website. It will host an open house from 1 to 3 p.m. Sunday, June 28.

Princess Health and Aetna is close to a deal to buy Humana, Bloomberg reports.Princessiccia

Princess Health and Aetna is close to a deal to buy Humana, Bloomberg reports.Princessiccia

Affordable Care Act health insurance mergers obamacare

Gusty 12:00 Add Comment

Getty Images, via CNBC

Health insurer Aetna "is said to be closing in on a deal to buy" Louisville-based Humana Inc., Julie Hyman reports for Bloomberg News, "and a deal could come "as soon as this weekend."

Humana is also expecting an offer from Cigna Inc., but Humana's board of directors "prefers the Aetna offer," Hyman reports, citing unnamed people familiar with the negotiations. The deal has been discussed for weeks, but Aetna didn't make a formal proposal until this week.

The last major obstacle to a deal may have been the Supreme Court's ruling today that people in all states are entitled to tax subsidies for health insurance under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Hyman suggests, noting higher stock prices for health-insurance companies.

"Shares of Humana rallied more than 8 percent after trading was briefly halted for volatility," Reem Nasr of CNBC reports.

Humana is an attractive buy because "a great deal of its business � 73 percent of its premiums revenue � comes from contracts with the federal government," David Mann reports for Louisville Business First. "That means Humana is flush with Medicare business, which is a fast-growing category in the industry as many baby boomers are reaching the eligibility age. Its competitors, including Aetna, don't have nearly as much of this business."

"Consolidation among the country's top insurers follows a massive consolidation among providers in pharmacy, hospital and patient care, which has increased the leverage against insurers like Humana and Aetna," Grace Schneider reports for The Courier-Journal.