Judicialization of health: profile of demands for oncological medicines in a state in the central region of Brazil

Background The significant increase in access to oncological medicines through court cases suggests that constitutional guarantees of integral and universal care in the Brazilian public health system are uncertain. Methods A retrospective observational study was conducted to analyze data from lawsuits requesting oncological medicines from 2014 to 2020 in the State of Goias, Brazil, in state and federal courts. Sociodemographic, medical, and legal variables were statistically examined using descriptive, association, and correlation methods. Results Women brought more than half (54%) of the 301 processes analyzed. The most frequent age group was over 55 years, with income below 3 x the minimum wage (total about USD$600/month), and their cases were promoted through the public minister and public defender's offices. The most requested medications, not on official public health system lists, were indicated for multiple myeloma and brain cancer. Conclusions Improved quality of life, frequently used as a justification, could be conceptually confused with increased survival. Finally, judicialization itself indicates that individual health needs arise even with properly defined and adequately implemented public policies. These needs should be considered for the adequate provisioning of services by the state to ensure the right to health.

Automated summary

The increase in access to oncological medicines through court cases raises concerns about the constitutional guarantees of integral and universal care in the Brazilian public health system. The study found that women accounted for a significant portion of the lawsuits, with most cases filed by individuals over 55 years old with low income. Non-official oncological medicines were the most frequently requested drugs.