Literature DB >> 34231930

Influence of payer coverage and out-of-pocket costs on ordering of NGS panel tests for hereditary cancer in diverse settings.

Grace A Lin1,2,3, Julia R Trosman3,4, Michael P Douglas3, Christine B Weldon4, Maren T Scheuner2,3,5, Allison Kurian6, Kathryn A Phillips2,3,5.   

Abstract

The landscape of payment for genetic testing has been changing, with an increase in the number of laboratories offering testing, larger panel offerings, and lower prices. To determine the influence of payer coverage and out-of-pocket costs on the ordering of NGS panel tests for hereditary cancer in diverse settings, we conducted semi-structured interviews with providers who conduct genetic counseling and order next-generation sequencing (NGS) panels purposefully recruited from 11 safety-net clinics and academic medical centers (AMCs) in California and North Carolina, states with diverse populations and divergent Medicaid expansion policies. Thematic analysis was done to identify themes related to the impact of reimbursement and out-of-pocket expenses on test ordering. Specific focus was put on differences between settings. Respondents from both safety-net clinics and AMCs reported that they are increasingly ordering panels instead of single-gene tests, and tests were ordered primarily from a few commercial laboratories. Surprisingly, safety-net clinics reported few barriers to testing related to cost, largely due to laboratory assistance with prior authorization requests and patient payment assistance programs that result in little to no patient out-of-pocket expenses. AMCs reported greater challenges navigating insurance issues, particularly prior authorization. Both groups cited non-coverage of genetic counseling as a major barrier to testing. Difficulty of access to cascade testing, particularly for family members that do not live in the United States, was also of concern. Long-term sustainability of laboratory payment assistance programs was a major concern; safety-net clinics were particularly concerned about access to testing without such programs. There were few differences between states. In conclusion, the use of laboratories with payment assistance programs reduces barriers to NGS panel testing among diverse populations. Such programs represent a major change to the financing and affordability of genetic testing. However, access to genetic counseling is a barrier and must be addressed to ensure equity in testing.
© 2021 National Society of Genetic Counselors.

Entities:  

Keywords:  cost; decision-making; genetic testing; hereditary cancer panels; reimbursement; underrepresented populations

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34231930      PMCID: PMC8893352          DOI: 10.1002/jgc4.1459

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Genet Couns        ISSN: 1059-7700            Impact factor:   2.537


  20 in total

1.  Genetic Testing and Results in a Population-Based Cohort of Breast Cancer Patients and Ovarian Cancer Patients.

Authors:  Allison W Kurian; Kevin C Ward; Nadia Howlader; Dennis Deapen; Ann S Hamilton; Angela Mariotto; Daniel Miller; Lynne S Penberthy; Steven J Katz
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2019-04-09       Impact factor: 44.544

2.  Identifying disparities in germline and somatic testing for ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Marilyn Huang; Priyanka Kamath; Matthew Schlumbrecht; Feng Miao; Devin Driscoll; Sean Oldak; Brian Slomovitz; Tulay Koru-Sengul; Sophia George
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2019-03-16       Impact factor: 5.482

3.  Financial barriers in a county genetics clinic: Problems and solutions.

Authors:  Deanna J Erwin; Christina LaMaire; Alex Espana; Tanya N Eble; Shweta U Dhar
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2020-04-10       Impact factor: 2.537

4.  Emergence of Hybrid Models of Genetic Testing Beyond Direct-to-Consumer or Traditional Labs.

Authors:  Kathryn A Phillips; Julia R Trosman; Michael P Douglas
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2019-06-25       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  NCCN Guidelines Insights: Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast, Ovarian, and Pancreatic, Version 1.2020.

Authors:  Mary B Daly; Robert Pilarski; Matthew B Yurgelun; Michael P Berry; Saundra S Buys; Patricia Dickson; Susan M Domchek; Ahmed Elkhanany; Susan Friedman; Judy E Garber; Michael Goggins; Mollie L Hutton; Seema Khan; Catherine Klein; Wendy Kohlmann; Allison W Kurian; Christine Laronga; Jennifer K Litton; Julie S Mak; Carolyn S Menendez; Sofia D Merajver; Barbara S Norquist; Kenneth Offit; Tuya Pal; Holly J Pederson; Gwen Reiser; Kristen Mahoney Shannon; Kala Visvanathan; Jeffrey N Weitzel; Myra J Wick; Kari B Wisinski; Mary A Dwyer; Susan D Darlow
Journal:  J Natl Compr Canc Netw       Date:  2020-04       Impact factor: 11.908

6.  Prevalence of mutations in a diverse cohort of 3162 women tested via the same multigene cancer panel in a managed care health plan.

Authors:  Mónica Alvarado; George E Tiller; Joanie Chung; Reina Haque
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2020-02-24

7.  Genetic Testing in a Population-Based Sample of Breast and Ovarian Cancer Survivors from the REACH Randomized Trial: Cost Barriers and Moderators of Counseling Mode.

Authors:  Laurie E Steffen; Ruofei Du; Amanda Gammon; Jeanne S Mandelblatt; Wendy K Kohlmann; Ji-Hyun Lee; Saundra S Buys; Antoinette M Stroup; Rebecca A Campo; Kristina G Flores; Belinda Vicuña; Marc D Schwartz; Anita Y Kinney
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2017-09-29       Impact factor: 4.254

8.  Gaps in Incorporating Germline Genetic Testing Into Treatment Decision-Making for Early-Stage Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Allison W Kurian; Yun Li; Ann S Hamilton; Kevin C Ward; Sarah T Hawley; Monica Morrow; M Chandler McLeod; Reshma Jagsi; Steven J Katz
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2017-04-12       Impact factor: 50.717

9.  A Commentary on Commercial Genetic Testing and the Future of the Genetic Counseling Profession.

Authors:  Nicholas D Wolff; Jon A Wolff
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2018-03-09       Impact factor: 2.537

10.  Current conditions in medical genetics practice.

Authors:  Deborah R Maiese; Alisha Keehn; Megan Lyon; David Flannery; Michael Watson
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2019-01-28       Impact factor: 8.822

View more
  2 in total

1.  Utilizing Public Health Frameworks and Partnerships to Ensure Equity in DNA-Based Population Screening.

Authors:  Elyse Azriel; Candace Henley; Joan Ehrhardt; Heather Hampel; Anna Newlin; Erica Ramos; Catherine Wicklund; Debra Duquette
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2022-05-13       Impact factor: 4.772

2.  Hereditary cancer panel testing challenges and solutions for the latinx community: costs, access, and variants.

Authors:  Michael P Douglas; Grace A Lin; Julia R Trosman; Kathryn A Phillips
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2021-11-06
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.