Step therapy, commonly referred to as ”fail first”, was designed to control costs by requiring patients to try lower-cost therapies before accessing the treatment originally prescribed. In theory, it promotes responsible utilization. In practice, it often introduces delays, administrative burden, and avoidable friction across the care continuum for both the patient and the provider.
For health systems and oncology practices in particular, the issue is no longer whether step therapy exists—but how to navigate it when it conflicts with clinical judgment.
When Cost Controls Create Clinical Friction
Utilization management strategies like step therapy and prior authorization have become a defining feature of modern healthcare operations at the payor level. Yet they are increasingly associated with delays in care, increased provider workload, and negative patient experiences.
Survey data from the CancerCare Red Tape Report quantifies the impact: nearly 1 in 5 patients report waiting two weeks or more for coverage decisions, and among those who appeal, the process can extend to a month or longer. Beyond delays, patients report downstream consequences including worsening physical health, increased emotional distress, financial strain, and erosion of trust in the healthcare system.
From an operational standpoint, these barriers shift time and resources away from patient care towards administrative overload. From a clinical standpoint, they can result in therapy changes that may not align with individualized treatment plans, particularly in complex conditions like oncology, where timing and treatment precision matter.
Exception Requests: An Underutilized Resource
While step therapy policies are unlikely to disappear in the near term, exception pathways offer a more immediate and practical solution.
Step therapy exception requests allow providers to bypass “fail-first” requirements when specific clinical criteria are met. These typically include situations where the required therapy is expected to be ineffective, has already been tried and failed, is contraindicated, or is likely to cause an adverse reaction or harm to the patient.
Despite being widely available, exception processes are often underutilized or inconsistently applied. Largely due to variability across payors and limited awareness of how to structure a successful request. To support more consistent use, providers can access state-specific resources and guidance through tools such as StepTherapy.com which outlines current legislation and provides downloadable exception request forms.
The Role of State-Level Protections
Policy momentum is beginning to address these challenges. To date, 38 states and counting have enacted step therapy protections, and many have implemented standardized exception request criteria or forms.
These frameworks are designed to:
- Define clear clinical scenarios where exceptions should be granted
- Establish response timelines for payors, in as little as 24-72 hours
- Provide structured documentation pathways for providers
Federal legislation known as the Safe Step Act (H.R. 5509 & S. 2903), aims to further standardize and strengthen these protections, though it remains under consideration. In the absence of a unified federal framework, variability across states and payors continues to create complexity for providers navigating exception requests.
Operationalizing a More Efficient Approach
Organizations that successfully navigate step therapy requirements tend to treat exception requests as a structured, proactive process rather than a reactive task.
Common best practices include:
- Leveraging state-specific forms and legislation language to align requests with payor expectations
- Submitting comprehensive documentation upfront, including detailed patient history and clinical rationale
- Developing internal workflows or support resources to standardize exception request submission
- Submitting step therapy exception request forms proactively during the prior authorization process
In other cases, pairing exception requests with a well-supported letter of medical necessity can improve approval outcomes, particularly when supportive clinical documentation clearly demonstrates why a step therapy requirement is not appropriate for an individual patient. Some providers have even used state specific legislative language within the body of these letters to support their clinical argument.
Looking Ahead
As healthcare systems continue to balance cost containment with patient-centered care, step therapy will remain a point of tension. However, the growing number of state-level protections and increased attention at the federal level, signals a shift toward more transparent and clinically aligned policies.
In the meantime, exception requests represent a practical, actionable tool for reducing delays and preserving clinical autonomy, making it a worthwhile proactive measure for both the provider and the patient.
For providers and health system leaders, the opportunity is straightforward: move beyond viewing step therapy as an administrative barrier and start treating exception pathways as a core pillar for improving patient access to appropriate care.
For more information, please reach out to STER@pharmacosmos.us
At the Becker's 11th Annual IT + Revenue Cycle Conference: The Future of AI & Digital Health, taking place September 14–17 in Chicago, healthcare executives and digital leaders from across the country will come together to explore how AI, interoperability, cybersecurity, and revenue cycle innovation are transforming care delivery, strengthening financial performance, and driving the next era of digital health. Apply for complimentary registration now.
