Total cost of lung cancer care associated with broad panel versus narrow panel sequencing.

Authors

Rogelio Brito

Rogelio Alberto Brito

CVS Health, Woonsocket, RI

Rogelio Alberto Brito , Bob Cullum , Kevin Hastings , Elisea Avalos-Reyes , Rebecca Karos , Kjel Andrew Johnson

Organizations

CVS Health, Woonsocket, RI, Aetna, Hartford, CT, CVS Health, Irving, TX, Aetna, Wellesley, MA, CVS Health, Lincoln, RI

Research Funding

Other
CVS Health

Background: Many lung cancer patients are diagnosed late with advanced or metastatic disease. Targeted therapies can improve quality of life and increase the chances of progression-free survival versus conventional treatments. An understanding that there may be more than one driver mutation associated with a specific lung tumor is crucial for the timing and delivery of the most effective line of therapy. Broad panel sequencing (BPS) minimizes tissue use and enables personalized treatment that decreases the use of ineffective agents and unwarranted side effects, in addition to opening pathways to early clinical trials. However, many payors do not reimburse for BPS. The objective of this study was to determine if BPS leads to lower total cost of care versus narrow panel sequencing (NPS). Methods: We identified new lung cancer patients who completed BPS (Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) code 81455, 51+ genomic test) or NPS (CPT code 81445, 5-50 genomic test) using medical claims from January 1, 2018, to March 31, 2019. We defined total cost of care as allowed costs paid for medical and pharmacy claims across a six-month time period from the first gene sequencing panel. We also compared the allowed costs of BPS and NPS. A Student’s t-test was used to compare differences and results are presented as mean +/- standard deviation. Results: From January 2018 to March 2019, we identified 45 patients who underwent BPS sequencing and 399 patients who underwent NPS. The average BPS cost was $1,977 +/- $2,713 versus the average NPS lab cost $719 +/- $1,087, p < 0.0001. The average 6-month per member per month (PMPM) total cost was $11,535 +/- $9,168 among those who underwent BPS compared to $20,039 +/-19,642 in those who underwent NPS. This difference of $8,504 was statistically significant, p = 0.0022. Conclusions: BPS has been shown to optimize treatments in patients with lung cancer. These initial results of claims suggest that while lung cancer patients undergoing BPS have higher total sequencing costs than those undergoing NPS, BPS significantly reduces overall total cost of lung cancer care. Identifying the broader genomic landscape of a patient’s tumor earlier will empower oncology providers and lung cancer patients with information to make timely, precise treatment decisions that are ultimately more cost effective.

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2020 ASCO Virtual Scientific Program

Session Type

Poster Session

Session Title

Health Services Research and Quality Improvement

Track

Quality Care/Health Services Research

Sub Track

Value/Cost of Care

Citation

J Clin Oncol 38: 2020 (suppl; abstr 7077)

DOI

10.1200/JCO.2020.38.15_suppl.7077

Abstract #

7077

Poster Bd #

349

Abstract Disclosures

Similar Abstracts

First Author: Gunjan Sharma

First Author: Puneeth Indurlal

First Author: Analia Nguyen

First Author: Ishwaria M. Subbiah