Cost-Effectiveness of Unselected Multigene Germline and Somatic Genetic Testing for Epithelial Ovarian Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Parallel panel germline and somatic genetic testing of all patients with ovarian cancer (OC) can identify more pathogenic variants (PVs) that would benefit from PARP inhibitor (PARPi) therapy, and allow for precision prevention in unaffected relatives with PVs. In this study, we estimate the cost-effectiveness and population impact of parallel panel germline and somatic BRCA testing of all patients with OC incorporating PARPi therapy in the United Kingdom and the United States compared with clinical criteria/family history (FH)-based germline BRCA testing. We also evaluate the cost-effectiveness of multigene panel germline testing alone. METHODS: Microsimulation cost-effectiveness modeling using data from 2,391 (UK: n=1,483; US: n=908) unselected, population-based patients with OC was used to compare lifetime costs and effects of panel germline and somatic BRCA testing of all OC cases (with PARPi therapy) (strategy A) versus clinical criteria/FH-based germline BRCA testing (strategy B). Unaffected relatives with germline BRCA1/BRCA2/RAD51C/RAD51D/BRIP1 PVs identified through cascade testing underwent appropriate OC and breast cancer (BC) risk-reduction interventions. We also compared the cost-effectiveness of multigene panel germline testing alone (without PARPi therapy) versus strategy B. Unaffected relatives with PVs could undergo risk-reducing interventions. Lifetime horizon with payer/societal perspectives, along with probabilistic/one-way sensitivity analyses, are presented. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained were compared with £30,000/QALY (UK) and $100,000/QALY (US) thresholds. OC incidence, BC incidence, and prevented deaths were estimated. RESULTS: Compared with clinical criteria/FH-based BRCA testing, BRCA1/BRCA2/RAD51C/RAD51D/BRIP1 germline testing and BRCA1/BRCA2 somatic testing of all patients with OC incorporating PARPi therapy had a UK ICER of £51,175/QALY (payer perspective) and £50,202/QALY (societal perspective) and a US ICER of $175,232/QALY (payer perspective) and $174,667/QALY (societal perspective), above UK/NICE and US cost-effectiveness thresholds in the base case. However, strategy A becomes cost-effective if PARPi costs decrease by 45% to 46% or if overall survival with PARPi reaches a hazard ratio of 0.28. Unselected panel germline testing alone (without PARPi therapy) is cost-effective, with payer-perspective ICERs of £11,291/QALY or $68,808/QALY and societal-perspective ICERs of £6,923/QALY or $65,786/QALY. One year's testing could prevent 209 UK BC/OC cases and 192 deaths, and 560 US BC/OC cases and 460 deaths. CONCLUSIONS: Unselected panel germline and somatic BRCA testing can become cost-effective, with a 45% to 46% reduction in PARPi costs. Regarding germline testing, unselected panel germline testing is highly cost-effective and should replace BRCA testing alone.

Potential corporate uses of polygenic indexes: Starting a conversation about the associated ethics and policy issues.

Some commercial firms currently sell polygenic indexes (PGIs) to individual consumers, despite their relatively low predictive power. It might be tempting to assume that because the predictive power of many PGIs is so modest, other sorts of firms-such as those selling insurance and financial services-will not be interested in using PGIs for their own purposes. We argue to the contrary. We build this argument in two ways. First, we offer a very simple model, rooted in economic theory, of a profit-maximizing firm that can gain information about a single consumer's genome. We use the model to show that, depending on the specific economic environment, a firm would be willing to pay for statistically noisy PGIs, even if they allow for only a small reduction in uncertainty. Second, we describe two plausible scenarios in which these different kinds of firms could conceivably use PGIs to maximize profits. Finally, we briefly discuss some of the associated ethics and policy issues. They deserve more attention, which is unlikely to be given until it is first recognized that firms whose services affect a large swath of the public will indeed have incentives to use PGIs.

Feasibility and cost-effectiveness of genetic counselling for all patients with newly diagnosed ovarian cancer: a single-centre retrospective study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS OF THE STUDY: Due to its importance for treatment and potential prevention in family members, germline testing for BRCA1/2 in patients with newly diagnosed ovarian cancer is decisive and considered a standard of care. Maintenance therapy with poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors substantially improves progression-free survival in patients with BRCA mutations and homologous recombination-deficient tumours by inducing synthetic lethality. In Switzerland, they are licensed only for these patients. Therefore, it is crucial to test patients early while they are receiving adjuvant chemotherapy. This study aimed to determine whether genetic counselling followed by homologous recombination deficiency testing is feasible for initialising maintenance therapy within eight weeks and cost-effective in daily practice in Switzerland compared to somatic tumour analysis of all patients at diagnosis. METHODS: This single-centre retrospective study included 44 patients with newly diagnosed high-grade serous ovarian cancer of a Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage of IIIA-IVB diagnosed between 12/2020 and 12/2022. It collected the outcomes of genetic counselling, germline testing, and somatic Geneva test for homologous recombination deficiency. Delays in initiating maintenance therapy, total testing costs per patient, and progression-free survival were examined to assess feasibility and cost-effectiveness in clinical practice. RESULTS: Thirty-seven of 44 patients (84%) with newly diagnosed ovarian cancer received counselling, of which 34 (77%) were tested for germline BRCA and other homologous recombination repair gene mutations. Five (15%) BRCA and three (9%) other homologous recombination deficiency mutations were identified. Eleven of the remaining 26 patients (42%) had tumours with somatic homologous recombination deficiency. The mean time to the initiation of maintenance therapy of 5.2 weeks was not longer than in studies for market authorisation (SOLO1, PAOLA, and PRIMA). The mean testing costs per patient were 3880 Swiss Franks (CHF), compared to 5624 CHF if all patients were tested at diagnosis with the myChoice CDx test (p <0.0001). CONCLUSION: Using genetic counselling to consent patients with newly diagnosed ovarian cancer for germline testing fulfils the international gold standard. Subsequent somatic homologous recombination deficiency analysis complements testing and identifies more patients who will benefit from PARP inhibitor maintenance therapy. Contrary to previous health cost model studies, the procedure does not increase testing costs in the Swiss population and does not delay maintenance therapy. Therefore, all patients should be offered a primary germline analysis. The challenge for the future will be to ensure sufficient resources for prompt genetic counselling and germline testing.

Simultaneous Detection of Common Founder Mutations Using a Cost-Effective Deep Sequencing Panel.

Inherited retinal diseases (IRDs) are a clinically and genetically heterogeneous group of diseases which cause visual loss due to Mendelian mutations in over 250 genes, making genetic diagnosis challenging and time-consuming. Here, we developed a new tool, CDIP (Cost-effective Deep-sequencing IRD Panel) in which a simultaneous sequencing of common mutations is performed. CDIP is based on simultaneous amplification of 47 amplicons harboring common mutations followed by next-generation sequencing (NGS). Following five rounds of calibration of NGS-based steps, CDIP was used in 740 IRD samples. The analysis revealed 151 mutations in 131 index cases. In 54 (7%) of these cases, CDIP identified the genetic cause of disease (the remaining were single-heterozygous recessive mutations). These include a patient that was clinically diagnosed with retinoschisis and found to be homozygous for NR2E3-c.932G>A (p.R311Q), and a patient with RP who is hemizygous for an RPGR variant, c.292C>A (p.H98N), which was not included in the analysis but is located in proximity to one of these mutations. CDIP is a cost-effective deep sequencing panel for simultaneous detection of common founder mutations. This protocol can be implemented for additional populations as well as additional inherited diseases, and mainly in populations with strong founder effects.

Focused Exome Sequencing Gives a High Diagnostic Yield in the Indian Subcontinent.

The genetically isolated yet heterogeneous and highly consanguineous Indian population has shown a higher prevalence of rare genetic disorders. However, there is a significant socioeconomic burden for genetic testing to be accessible to the general population. In the current study, we analyzed next-generation sequencing data generated through focused exome sequencing from individuals with different phenotypic manifestations referred for genetic testing to achieve a molecular diagnosis. Pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants are reported in 280 of 833 cases with a diagnostic yield of 33.6%. Homozygous sequence and copy number variants were found as positive diagnostic findings in 131 cases (15.7%) because of the high consanguinity in the Indian population. No relevant findings related to reported phenotype were identified in 6.2% of the cases. Patients referred for testing due to metabolic disorder and neuromuscular disorder had higher diagnostic yields. Carrier testing of asymptomatic individuals with a family history of the disease, through focused exome sequencing, achieved positive diagnosis in 54 of 118 cases tested. Copy number variants were also found in trans with single-nucleotide variants and mitochondrial variants in a few of the cases. The diagnostic yield and the findings from this study signify that a focused exome test is a good lower-cost alternative for whole-exome and whole-genome sequencing and as a first-tier approach to genetic testing.

Medicolegal and insurance issues regarding BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene tests in high income countries.

Hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome is an autosomal dominant cancer susceptibility syndrome mainly due to variants in BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes. Patients presenting with BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene mutations have a lifetime risk of developing breast or ovarian cancer (80% and 40%, respectively). Genetic testing to explore the predisposition to develop cancer represents a pivotal factor in such cases, and this review wants to explore the main implications in terms of medicolegal liability and insurance issues. Medicolegal issues related to these diagnostic processes include: (a) failure to recommend the test; (b) failure to properly interpret the test; (c) failure to correctly translate results into clinical practice; (d) lack of informed consent; and (e) failure to refer patients to specialized genetic counseling. Such errors may lead to compensation since the legal burden inherent in the efficacy of prophylactic interventions is a proof that requires the so-called 'preponderance of the evidence'. Concerning insurance issues, the carriers of such alleles without cancer are healthy because the genetic predisposition is not a disease per se but represents a (relevant) health risk. However, disclosure of these conditions can be impelled by insurers. It can lead to so-called 'genetic discrimination' because insurance companies might use genetic information to limit insurance options or increase their costs. Many private and public healthcare funders do not cover risk reducing surgeries, even when recommended as part of a risk reduction management plan for BRCA gene mutation carriers. Here, positions on these matters from different high income countries are discussed, stressing the importance of a common supranational or international regulatory framework to reach a trade-off between the economic interests of insurers and the rights of carriers not to disclose extremely sensitive information.

An evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of population genetic screening for familial hypercholesterolemia in US patients.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Familial hypercholesterolemia is an underdiagnosed genetic metabolic condition limiting the clearance of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and increasing lifetime risk of cardiovascular disease. Population genetic screening in unselected individuals could quickly identify cases of familial hypercholesterolemia and enable early prevention, but the economic impact of widespread screening on patients has not been studied. METHODS: We assessed the cost-effectiveness of population genetic screening for familial hypercholesterolemia in 20 and 35-year-old adults in the United States from the perspective of patients. We developed a decision tree Markov hybrid model to examine diagnoses, cardiovascular disease, cardiac events, quality of life, and costs under population genetic screening compared to family-based cascade testing. RESULTS: While population genetic screening increased diagnoses and reduced incidence of cardiovascular disease, population genetic screening was not cost-effective compared to cascade testing at current levels of willingness to pay. Lower genetic testing costs, combined screening with other genetic conditions, and support to maintain lipid-lowering therapy use over time could improve the cost-effectiveness of population genetic screening. CONCLUSIONS: Future research is needed to examine how cost-sharing strategies may affect the cost-effectiveness of screening to patients and how families and providers experience the clinical and economic outcomes of population screening.

Systematic reanalysis of genomic data by diagnostic laboratories: a scoping review of ethical, economic, legal and (psycho)social implications.

With the introduction of Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) techniques increasing numbers of disease-associated variants are being identified. This ongoing progress might lead to diagnoses in formerly undiagnosed patients and novel insights in already solved cases. Therefore, many studies suggest introducing systematic reanalysis of NGS data in routine diagnostics. Introduction will, however, also have ethical, economic, legal and (psycho)social (ELSI) implications that Genetic Health Professionals (GHPs) from laboratories should consider before possible implementation of systematic reanalysis. To get a first impression we performed a scoping literature review. Our findings show that for the vast majority of included articles ELSI aspects were not mentioned as such. However, often these issues were raised implicitly. In total, we identified nine ELSI aspects, such as (perceived) professional responsibilities, implications for consent and cost-effectiveness. The identified ELSI aspects brought forward necessary trade-offs for GHPs to consciously take into account when considering responsible implementation of systematic reanalysis of NGS data in routine diagnostics, balancing the various strains on their laboratories and personnel while creating optimal results for new and former patients. Some important aspects are not well explored yet. For example, our study shows GHPs see the values of systematic reanalysis but also experience barriers, often mentioned as being practical or financial only, but in fact also being ethical or psychosocial. Engagement of these GHPs in further research on ELSI aspects is important for sustainable implementation.

Australian researcher's perspectives on the Australian industry-led moratorium on genetic tests in life insurance.

Fear of insurance discrimination can inhibit genetic research participation. In 2019, an industry-led partial moratorium on using genetic results in Australian life insurance underwriting was introduced. This mixed-methods study used online surveys (n = 59 participants) and semi-structured interviews (n = 22 participants) to capture researchers' perceptions about the moratorium. 66% (n = 39/59) were aware of the moratorium before the survey. Of researchers returning genetic results, 56% (n = 22/39) reported that insurance implications were mentioned in consent forms, but a minority reported updating consent forms post-moratorium (n = 13/39, 33%). Most researchers reported that concerns regarding life insurers utilizing research results inhibited recruitment (35/59, 59%), and few perceived that the moratorium positively influenced participation (n = 9/39, 23%). These findings were supported by qualitative findings which revealed that genetic discrimination concerns were a major issue for some individuals, though these concerns could be eclipsed by the promise of a diagnosis through research participation. The majority thought a regulatory solution should be permanent (n = 34/51, 67%), have financial limits of at least ≥1,000,000 AUD (37/51, 73%), and involve government oversight/legislation (n = 44/51, 86%). In an era where an increasing number of research studies involve genomics as a primary or secondary objective, it is crucial that we have regulatory solutions to address participants' hesitation.

A Systematic Review of Value Criteria for Next-Generation Sequencing/Comprehensive Genomic Profiling to Inform Value Framework Development.

OBJECTIVES: To comprehensively identify and map an exhaustive list of value criteria for the assessment of next-generation sequencing/comprehensive genomic profiling (NGS/CGP), to be used as an aid in decision making. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review to identify existing value frameworks (VFs) applicable to any type of healthcare technology. VFs and criteria were mapped to a previously published Latin American (LA) VF to harmonize definitions and identify additional criteria and or subcriteria. Based on this analysis, we extracted a comprehensive, evidence-based list of criteria and subcriteria to be considered in the design of a NGS/CGP VF. RESULTS: A total of 42 additional VFs were compared with the LA VF, 88% were developed in high-income countries, 30% targeted genomic testing, and 16% specifically targeted oncology. A total of 242 criteria and subcriteria were extracted; 227 (94%) were fully/partially included in the LA VF; and 15 (6%) were new. Clinical benefit and economic aspects were the most common criteria. VFs oriented to genomic testing showed significant overlap with other VFs. Considering all criteria and subcriteria, a total of 18 criteria and 36 individual subcriteria were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Our study provides an evidence-based set of criteria and subcriteria for healthcare decision making useful for NGS/CGP as well as other health technologies. The resulting list can be beneficial to inform decision making and will serve as a foundation to co-create a multistakeholder NGS/CGP VF that is aligned with the needs and values of health systems and could help to improve patient access to high-value technologies.

Narrowing the diagnostic gap: Genomes, episignatures, long-read sequencing, and health economic analyses in an exome-negative intellectual disability cohort.

PURPOSE: Genome sequencing (GS)-specific diagnostic rates in prospective tightly ascertained exome sequencing (ES)-negative intellectual disability (ID) cohorts have not been reported extensively. METHODS: ES, GS, epigenetic signatures, and long-read sequencing diagnoses were assessed in 74 trios with at least moderate ID. RESULTS: The ES diagnostic yield was 42 of 74 (57%). GS diagnoses were made in 9 of 32 (28%) ES-unresolved families. Repeated ES with a contemporary pipeline on the GS-diagnosed families identified 8 of 9 single-nucleotide variations/copy-number variations undetected in older ES, confirming a GS-unique diagnostic rate of 1 in 32 (3%). Episignatures contributed diagnostic information in 9% with GS corroboration in 1 of 32 (3%) and diagnostic clues in 2 of 32 (6%). A genetic etiology for ID was detected in 51 of 74 (69%) families. Twelve candidate disease genes were identified. Contemporary ES followed by GS cost US$4976 (95% CI: $3704; $6969) per diagnosis and first-line GS at a cost of $7062 (95% CI: $6210; $8475) per diagnosis. CONCLUSION: Performing GS only in ID trios would be cost equivalent to ES if GS were available at $2435, about a 60% reduction from current prices. This study demonstrates that first-line GS achieves higher diagnostic rate than contemporary ES but at a higher cost.

Potential Costs and Benefits of Incorporating PGT-A Across Age Groups: A Canadian Clinic Perspective.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the potential costs and benefits of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) across age groups, considering financial costs, total euploidy rates and the potential for morphology grading to predict a euploid embryo. METHODS: This study is a blinded retrospective chart review of patients who incorporated PGT-A as part of their in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment cycle at a university-affiliated fertility clinic. Patients between 25-44 years of age undergoing IVF with intracytoplasmic sperm injection and PGT-A with autologous oocytes (n = 220) were included in this study. Number of blastocysts achieved, euploidy rates and PGT-A costs were compared between 3 age groups: <35 years, 35-37, and ≥38. Additionally, agreement on the top-quality embryo based on morphology assessment alone versus PGT-A selection was analyzed and further compared based on the number of blastocysts achieved. RESULTS: A significant negative correlation between patient age and number of embryos produced, PGT-A costs, and euploidy rates (P < 0.001) was observed. Additionally, morphology alone ratings were able to predict the top-quality euploid embryo 78% of the time in the <35 age group, but only 32% of the time in the ≥38 age group (P < 0.05), with a trend toward even lower agreement when 3 or fewer blastocysts were produced. CONCLUSION: Based on our cost analysis, it may be advantageous to incorporate PGT-A when maternal age is ≥38, given the lower financial costs associated with each cycle and the low likelihood of transferring a euploid embryo on the first attempt for this age group. Nevertheless, we acknowledge that PGT-A remains a complex decision influenced by a multitude of factors.

Sequencing projects will screen 200,000 newborns for disease.

U.K. and New York City efforts face cost and ethical issues.

Diagnostic and economic value of biomarker testing for targetable mutations in non-small-cell lung cancer: a literature review.

We aimed to assess the diagnostic and economic value of next-generation sequencing (NGS) versus single-gene testing, and of liquid biopsy (LBx) versus tissue biopsy (TBx) in non-small-cell lung cancer biomarker testing through literature review. Embase and MEDLINE were searched to identify relevant studies (n = 43) from 2015 to 2020 in adults with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. For NGS versus single-gene testing, concordance was 70-99% and sensitivity was 86-100%. For LBx versus TBx, specificity was 43-100% and sensitivity was ≥60%. Turnaround times were longer for NGS versus single-gene testing (but not vs sequential testing) and faster for LBx versus TBx. NGS was cost-effective, and LBx reduced US per-patient costs. NGS versus single-gene testing and LBx versus TBx were concordant. NGS and LBx may be cost-effective for initial screening.

Plain language summary Patients with lung cancer with specific genetic mutations can benefit from medications that are specific to those mutations, known as targetable mutations. There are many methods to test for specific genetic mutations in patients with lung cancer. To detect genetic mutations, doctors can test the blood or urine, or they can test biopsy tissue; a small piece of the tumor removed from the lung. These tests can either look for mutations in one specific gene at a time, or they can use technology that reads the entire DNA sequence to observe multiple genes at once. In this review, we examined scientific reports to answer important questions about using genetic testing to find targetable mutations in patients with lung cancer. How accurate are different genetic tests? How fast can doctors get results from different genetic tests? How much do different genetic tests cost? We found that reading the entire DNA sequence was as accurate as testing one specific gene. Reading the entire DNA sequence takes more time than testing one specific gene, but it might reduce overall costs. Testing blood or urine was not as accurate as testing tissue, but it took less time for doctors to receive genetic test results and reduced costs.

Screening of CNVs using NGS data improves mutation detection yield and decreases costs in genetic testing for hereditary cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Germline CNVs are important contributors to hereditary cancer. In genetic diagnostics, multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification (MLPA) is commonly used to identify them. However, MLPA is time-consuming and expensive if applied to many genes, hence many routine laboratories test only a subset of genes of interest. METHODS AND RESULTS: We evaluated a next-generation sequencing (NGS)-based CNV detection tool (DECoN) as first-tier screening to decrease costs and turnaround time and expand CNV analysis to all genes of clinical interest in our diagnostics routine. We used DECoN in a retrospective cohort of 1860 patients where a limited number of genes were previously analysed by MLPA, and in a prospective cohort of 2041 patients, without MLPA analysis. In the retrospective cohort, 6 new CNVs were identified and confirmed by MLPA. In the prospective cohort, 19 CNVs were identified and confirmed by MLPA, 8 of these would have been lost in our previous MLPA-restricted detection strategy. Also, the number of genes tested by MLPA across all samples decreased by 93.0% in the prospective cohort. CONCLUSION: Including an in silico germline NGS CNV detection tool improved our genetic diagnostics strategy in hereditary cancer, both increasing the number of CNVs detected and reducing turnaround time and costs.

Adopted individuals' interest in elective genomic testing.

PURPOSE: Adoptees are a population that could benefit from genetic testing to fill gaps in family health history (FHH). Elective genomic testing (EGT) provides adoptees with clinical genetic testing options to learn about genetic health risks in the absence of FHH. We assessed adoptees' interests in, motivations for and perceived utility of EGT. METHODS: Adult adoptees and non-adoptees completed an anonymous, online survey regarding their interest and motivations for EGT, perceived utility of potential results and willingness to pay for EGT. A validated measure of social identity was included to measure the effects of social identity on testing interest. RESULTS: There were 112 adoptees and 229 non-adoptees included in the study. Adoptees reported greater interest in EGT (OR 5.0, 95% CI 2.2 to 11.3) than non-adoptees. They were motivated by curiosity and a desire to learn information about risks to children and grandchildren more than non-adoptees. Adoptees with higher education and non-adoptees with higher incomes were significantly more likely to spend more on EGT. Adoptees with higher incomes and non-adoptees with higher education were not significantly more likely to spend more. Social identity was a significant mediator between adoption and testing motivation. CONCLUSION: Understanding adoptees' unique motivations and interests in EGT will allow healthcare providers to better address the informational needs and desires of this population. Social identity provides a foundation for recognising adoptees' universal experiences that influence motivations for genetic testing.

Exome first approach to reduce diagnostic costs and time - retrospective analysis of 111 individuals with rare neurodevelopmental disorders.

This single-center study aims to determine the time, diagnostic procedure, and cost saving potential of early exome sequencing in a cohort of 111 individuals with genetically confirmed neurodevelopmental disorders. We retrospectively collected data regarding diagnostic time points and procedures from the individuals' medical histories and developed criteria for classifying diagnostic procedures in terms of requirement, followed by a cost allocation. All genetic variants were re-evaluated according to ACMG recommendations and considering the individuals' phenotype. Individuals who developed first symptoms of their underlying genetic disorder when Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) diagnostics were already available received a diagnosis significantly faster than individuals with first symptoms before this cutoff. The largest amount of potentially dispensable diagnostics was found in genetic, metabolic, and cranial magnetic resonance imaging examinations. Out of 407 performed genetic examinations, 296 (72.7%) were classified as potentially dispensable. The same applied to 36 (27.9%) of 129 cranial magnetic resonance imaging and 111 (31.8%) of 349 metabolic examinations. Dispensable genetic examinations accounted 302,947.07€ (90.2%) of the total 335,837.49€ in potentially savable costs in this cohort. The remaining 32,890.42€ (9.8%) are related to non-required metabolic and cranial magnetic resonance imaging diagnostics. On average, the total potentially savable costs in our study amount to €3,025.56 per individual. Cost savings by first tier exome sequencing lie primarily in genetic, metabolic, and cMRI testing in this German cohort, underscoring the utility of performing exome sequencing at the beginning of the diagnostic pathway and the potential for saving diagnostic costs and time.

NUDT15 genetic testing-guided 6-mercaptopurine dosing in children with ALL likely to be cost-saving in China.

OBJECTIVE: The cost-effectiveness of NUDT15 genetic testing-guided initial 6-mercaptopurine (6-MP) dosing in children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) was evaluated. METHODS: A decision tree model was used to evaluate the cost to China's medical system per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained and cost per case of severe leukopenia avoided of NUDT15 genetic testing using public clinical data. RESULTS: Genetic testing-guided initial 6-MP dosing reduced overall costs by $518.61, and prevented 0.221 cases of Grade III-IV leukopenia and increased QALY by 0.00136 per patient. Results were robust in one-way analyses and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: NUDT15 genetic testing prior to the initial administration of 6-MP in pediatric ALL patients in China is less expensive than standard dosing without genetic testing.

Trends in Use of Next-Generation Sequencing in Patients With Solid Tumors by Race and Ethnicity After Implementation of the Medicare National Coverage Determination.

Importance: In March 2018, Medicare issued a national coverage determination (NCD) for next-generation sequencing (NGS) to facilitate access to NGS testing among Medicare beneficiaries. It is unknown whether the NCD affected health equity issues for Medicare beneficiaries and the overall population. Objective: To examine the association between the Medicare NCD and NGS use by insurance types and race and ethnicity. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted using electronic health record data derived from a real-world database. Data originated from approximately 280 cancer clinics (approximately 800 sites of care) in the US. Patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC), metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), metastatic breast cancer (mBC), or advanced melanoma diagnosed from January 1, 2011, through March 31, 2020, were included. Exposure: Pre- vs post-NCD period. Main Outcomes and Measures: Patients were classified by insurance type and race and ethnicity to examine patterns in NGS testing less than or equal to 60 days after diagnosis. Difference-in-differences models examined changes in average NGS testing in the pre- and post-NCD periods by race and ethnicity, and interrupted time-series analysis examined whether trends over time varied by insurance type and race and ethnicity. Results: Among 92 687 patients with aNSCLC, mCRC, mBC, or advanced melanoma, mean (SD) age was 66.6 (11.2) years, 51 582 (55.7%) were women, and 63 864 (68.9%) were Medicare beneficiaries. The largest racial and ethnic categories according to the database used and further classification were Black or African American (8605 [9.3%]) and non-Hispanic White (59 806 [64.5%]). Compared with Medicare beneficiaries, changes in pre- to post-NCD NGS testing trends were similar in commercially insured patients (odds ratio [OR], 1.03; 95% CI, 0.98-1.08; P = .25). Pre- to post-NCD NGS testing trends increased at a slower rate among patients in assistance programs (OR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.87-0.99; P = .03) compared with Medicare beneficiaries. The rate of increase for patients receiving Medicaid was not statistically significantly different compared with those receiving Medicare (OR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.84-1.01; P = .07). The NCD was not associated with statistically significant changes in NGS use trends by racial and ethnic groups within Medicare beneficiaries alone or across all insurance types. Compared with non-Hispanic White individuals, increases in average NGS use from the pre-NCD to post-NCD period were 14% lower (OR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.74-0.99; P = .04) among African American and 23% lower (OR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.62-0.96; P = .02) among Hispanic/Latino individuals; increases among Asian individuals and those with other races and ethnicities were similar. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this study suggest that expansion of Medicare-covered benefits may not occur equally across insurance types, thereby further widening or maintaining disparities in NGS testing. Additional efforts beyond coverage policies are needed to ensure equitable access to the benefits of precision medicine.