Costs of in-house genomic profiling and implications for economic evaluation: a case example of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)
Karissa Johnston, Brandon S. Sheffield, Stephen Yip, Pardis Lakzadeh, Christina Qian, Julian Nam
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Genomic profiling in oncology is vital for determining eligible patients for mutation-specific targeted therapies. Use of commercial genomic testing has the potential to improve patient outcomes. Economic evaluations of in-house genomic profiling typically only include material costs while external commercial services include many other factors. Using non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) as an example, this study sought to characterize the unique challenges of costing testing services and their impact on results of economic evaluations. METHODS: Structured interviews with Canadian oncologists, pathologists, and laboratory directors were conducted to identify material and non-material costs associated with genomic-testing laboratories to allow estimation of a more complete cost of in-house testing, with NSCLC cost-per-test calculated using annual operational costs and NSCLC-specific testing volume. A health and budget impact model of in-house versus external commercial profiling services was used to compare the impact of non-material costs on results. RESULTS: In-house testing costs, limited to materials, was $133/single-gene test and $1,400/panel. For a laboratory running 1,300 in-house tests/year, total annual non-material costs included equipment maintenance ($6,842), labor ($502,313; technicians, administrative, and medical staff), shipping/reporting and software updates ($146,050), for an additional $519/test. The combined cost of $652/single-gene and $1,919/panel was compared to a cost of $6,194 for a commercial external test. Based on current Canadian testing patterns and anticipated utilization of external testing, inclusion of in-house non-material costs reduced the estimated 3-year budget impact by 12%. CONCLUSION: When conducting economic evaluation to assess the value of introducing external tests, it is critical that non-material costs of standard testing strategies be measured and incorporated.