BACKGROUND: Testing technologies are increasingly used to target cancer therapies. Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) testing to target trastuzumab for patients with breast cancer provides insights into the evidence needed for emerging testing technologies. METHODS: The authors reviewed literature on HER2 test utilization and cost effectiveness of HER2 testing for patients with breast cancer. They examined available evidence on: percentage of eligible patients tested for HER2; test methods used; concordance of test results between community and central/reference laboratories; use of trastuzumab by HER2 test result; and cost effectiveness of testing strategies. RESULTS: Little evidence was available to determine whether all eligible patients are tested, how many are retested to confirm results, and how many with negative HER2 test results still receive trastuzumab. Studies suggested that up to 66% of eligible patients had no documentation of testing in claims records, up to 20% of patients receiving trastuzumab were not tested or had no documentation of a positive test, and 20% of HER2 results may be incorrect. Few cost-effectiveness analyses of trastuzumab explicitly considered the economic implications of various testing strategies. CONCLUSIONS: There was little information about the actual use of HER2 testing in clinical practice, but evidence suggested important variations in testing practices and key gaps in knowledge exist. Given the increasing use of targeted therapies, it is critical to build an evidence base that supports informed decision making on emerging testing technologies in cancer care.
BACKGROUND: Testing technologies are increasingly used to target cancer therapies. Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) testing to target trastuzumab for patients with breast cancer provides insights into the evidence needed for emerging testing technologies. METHODS: The authors reviewed literature on HER2 test utilization and cost effectiveness of HER2 testing for patients with breast cancer. They examined available evidence on: percentage of eligible patients tested for HER2; test methods used; concordance of test results between community and central/reference laboratories; use of trastuzumab by HER2 test result; and cost effectiveness of testing strategies. RESULTS: Little evidence was available to determine whether all eligible patients are tested, how many are retested to confirm results, and how many with negative HER2 test results still receive trastuzumab. Studies suggested that up to 66% of eligible patients had no documentation of testing in claims records, up to 20% of patients receiving trastuzumab were not tested or had no documentation of a positive test, and 20% of HER2 results may be incorrect. Few cost-effectiveness analyses of trastuzumab explicitly considered the economic implications of various testing strategies. CONCLUSIONS: There was little information about the actual use of HER2 testing in clinical practice, but evidence suggested important variations in testing practices and key gaps in knowledge exist. Given the increasing use of targeted therapies, it is critical to build an evidence base that supports informed decision making on emerging testing technologies in cancer care.
Authors: Allison W Kurian; Rebecca Newton Thompson; Allison F Gaw; Sally Arai; Rafael Ortiz; Alan M Garber Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2007-02-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Soonmyung Paik; John Bryant; Elizabeth Tan-Chiu; Edward Romond; William Hiller; Kyeongmee Park; Ann Brown; Greg Yothers; Steve Anderson; Roy Smith; D Lawrence Wickerham; Norman Wolmark Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2002-06-05 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Antonio C Wolff; M Elizabeth H Hammond; Jared N Schwartz; Karen L Hagerty; D Craig Allred; Richard J Cote; Mitchell Dowsett; Patrick L Fitzgibbons; Wedad M Hanna; Amy Langer; Lisa M McShane; Soonmyung Paik; Mark D Pegram; Edith A Perez; Michael F Press; Anthony Rhodes; Catharine Sturgeon; Sheila E Taube; Raymond Tubbs; Gail H Vance; Marc van de Vijver; Thomas M Wheeler; Daniel F Hayes Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2006-12-11 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Muin J Khoury; Marta Gwinn; Paula W Yoon; Nicole Dowling; Cynthia A Moore; Linda Bradley Journal: Genet Med Date: 2007-10 Impact factor: 8.822
Authors: Y Ardeshirpour; V Chernomordik; J Capala; M Hassan; R Zielinsky; G Griffiths; S Achilefu; P Smith; A Gandjbakhche Journal: Technol Cancer Res Treat Date: 2011-12
Authors: Jennifer S Haas; Kathryn A Phillips; Su-Ying Liang; Michael J Hassett; Carol Keohane; Elena B Elkin; Joanne Armstrong; Michele Toscano Journal: J Oncol Pract Date: 2011-05 Impact factor: 3.840
Authors: Adriana V F Massicano; Supum Lee; Bryant K Crenshaw; Tolulope A Aweda; Retta El Sayed; Ian Super; Ron Bose; Bernadette V Marquez-Nostra; Suzanne E Lapi Journal: Cancer Biother Radiopharm Date: 2019-01-24 Impact factor: 3.099
Authors: Stephanie L Van Bebber; Julia R Trosman; Su-Ying Liang; Grace Wang; Deborah A Marshall; Sara Knight; Kathryn A Phillips Journal: Per Med Date: 2010-07 Impact factor: 2.512
Authors: John K Chan; Thomas J Herzog; Lilian Hu; Bradley J Monk; Tuyen Kiet; Kevin Blansit; Daniel S Kapp; Xinhua Yu Journal: Oncologist Date: 2014-04-10