Dataset Information

Laboratory business models and practices: implications for availability and access to germline genetic testing.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

Germline testing laboratories have evolved over several decades. We describe laboratory business models and practices and explore their implications on germline testing availability and access.

Methods

We conducted semistructured interviews with key informants using purposive sampling. We interviewed 13 key informants representing 14 laboratories. We used triangulation and iterative data analysis to identify topics concerning laboratory business models and practices.

Results

We characterized laboratories as full-service (FSL), for-profit germline (PGL), and not-for-profit germline (NGL). Relying on existing payer contracts is a key characteristic of the FSL business models. FSLs focus on high-volume germline tests with evidence of clinical utility that have reimbursable codes. In comparison, a key business model characteristic of PGLs is direct patient billing facilitated by commodity-based pricing made possible by investors and industry partnerships. Client billing is a key business model characteristic of NGLs. Because many NGLs exist within academic settings, they are challenged by their inability to optimize laboratory processes and billing practices.

Conclusion

Continued availability of, and access to germline testing will depend on the financial success of laboratories; organizational characteristics of laboratories and payers; cultural factors, particularly consumer interest and trust; and societal factors, such as regulation and laws surrounding pricing and reimbursement.

SUBMITTER: Scheuner MT

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8460432 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Recent progress in genome data collection and analysis technologies has led to a surge of direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing services. Owing to the clinical value and sensitivity of genomic data, as well as uncertainty and hearsay surrounding business practices of DTC genetic testing service providers, DTC genetic testing has faced significant criticism by researchers and practitioners. Research in this area has centered on ethical and legal implications of providing genetic tests directly to consumers, but we still lack a more profound understanding of how businesses in the DTC genetic testing markets work and provide value to different stakeholders. OBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to address the lack of knowledge concerning business models of DTC genetic testing services by systematically identifying the salient properties of various DTC genetic testing service business models as well as discerning dominant business models in the market. METHODS:We employed a 3-phased research approach. In phase 1, we set up a database of 277 DTC genetic testing services. In phase 2, we drew on these data as well as conceptual models of DTC genetic testing services and iteratively developed a taxonomy of DTC genetic testing service business models. In phase 3, we used a 2-stage clustering method to cluster the 277 services that we identified during phase 1 and derived 6 dominant archetypes of DTC genetic testing service business models. RESULTS:The contributions of this research are 2-fold. First, we provided a first of its kind, systematically developed taxonomy of DTC genetic testing service business models consisting of 15 dimensions in 4 categories. Each dimension comprises 2 to 5 characteristics and captures relevant aspects of DTC genetic testing service business models. Second, we derived 6 archetypes of DTC genetic testing service business models named as follows: (1) low-cost DTC genomics for enthusiasts, (2) high-privacy DTC genomics for enthusiasts, (3) specific information tests, (4) simple health tests, (5) basic low-value DTC genomics, and (6) comprehensive tests and low data processing. CONCLUSIONS:Our analysis paints a much more complex business landscape in the DTC genetic testing market than previously anticipated. This calls for further research on business models and their effects that underlie DTC genetic testing services and invites specific regulatory interventions to protect consumers and level the playing field.

Project description:Currently, trust is one of the key factors that ensures the acceptable mechanisms of economic and social relationships. It is not only an element of correct communication, but also a factor in inter-organizational bonds and a source of social dialogue. Trust has become a factor in the creation of value, as well as a key component of the conceptualization and operationalization of business models. It has revealed many problems at the strategic level, in the water sector in particular. From this perspective, trust is a major factor of strategies, models, and business processes which are currently being built. New types of business models that emerge have also started to include trust as part of their configuration. This is the case in the construction and implementation of social business models. A social business model can be understood as a business model whose factors that stimulate development include social aspects expressed in balancing economic, environmental, and social issues with the involvement of communities and their dynamic communication focused on the selected attributes of business models that stimulate growth and that are conducive to achieving success, expressed by economic and/or social profit. The satisfaction of stakeholders with such a solution is another condition for embedding this solution in the sphere of the social economy. In this approach, trust, which stimulates the growth of social and economic value in the component structure of the social business model, becomes particularly important. The aim of the paper is to present the place and role of trust as a key component of social business models. The scope of the paper includes research into public water sector industry companies located in the Province of Silesia and their social business models, with a focus on defining the position of trust among other attributes of these business models. The authors put forward a hypothesis that trust is a crucial component of the social business models of water supply companies that operate at the intersection of the market and social economy. Trust also helps companies from the water supply sector achieve both social and economic effects. It also becomes a source of reverse market polarization, where the value of a social business model materializes to create social and environmental effects without detriment to the economic effects.

Project description:ImportanceProstate cancer is the third leading cause of cancer-related death in men in the United States. Although serious, most of these diagnoses are not terminal. Inherited risk for prostate cancer is associated with aggressive disease and poorer outcomes, indicating a critical need for increased genetic screening to identify disease-causing variants that can pinpoint individuals at increased risk for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.ObjectiveTo identify positive (pathogenic, likely pathogenic, and increased risk) germline variants in a large prostate cancer cohort and to evaluate the usefulness of current practice guidelines in recognizing individuals at increased risk for prostate cancer who would benefit from diagnostic genetic testing.Design, setting, and participantsCross-sectional study of data from 3607 men with a personal history of prostate cancer who underwent germline genetic testing between 2013 and 2018 and were unselected for family history, stage of disease, or age at diagnosis. Referral-based testing was performed at a Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments/College of American Pathologists-certified diagnostic laboratory. All analysis took place between February 2017 and August 2018.Main outcomes and measuresThe frequency and distribution of positive germline variants, and the percentage of individuals with prostate cancer who met National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines for germline genetic testing.ResultsOf 3607 men (mean [SD] age at testing, 67 [9.51] years; mean age at diagnosis, 60 [9.05] years) with a personal diagnosis of prostate cancer who were referred for genetic testing, 620 (17.2%) had positive germline variants, of which only 30.7% were variants in BRCA1/2. Positive variants in HOXB13, a gene associated only with prostate cancer risk, were identified in 30 patients (4.5%). DNA mismatch repair variants with substantial known therapeutic implications were detected in 1.74% of variants in the total population tested. Examination of self-reported family histories indicated that 229 individuals (37%) with positive variants in this cohort would not have been approved for genetic testing using the NCCN genetic/familial breast and ovarian guidelines for patients with prostate cancer.Conclusions and relevanceCurrent NCCN guidelines and Gleason scores cannot reliably stratify patients with prostate cancer for the presence or absence of pathogenic germline variants. Most positive genetic test results identified in this study have important management implications for patients and their families, which underscores the need to revisit current guidelines.

Project description:PurposeTumor mutational profiling is increasingly performed in patients with advanced cancer. We determined the extent to which germline mutation profiling guides therapy selection in patients with advanced cancer.MethodsPatients with cancer undergoing tumor genomic profiling were prospectively consented for germline cancer predisposition gene analysis (2015-2019). In patients harboring germline likely pathogenic or pathogenic (LP/P) alterations, therapeutic actionability was classified using a precision oncology knowledge base. Patients with metastatic or recurrent cancer receiving germline genotype-directed therapy were determined.ResultsAmong 11,947 patients across > 50 malignancies, 17% (n = 2,037) harbored a germline LP/P variant. By oncology knowledge base classification, 9% (n = 1042) had an LP/P variant in a gene with therapeutic implications (4% level 1; 4% level 3B; < 1% level 4). BRCA1/2 variants accounted for 42% of therapeutically actionable findings, followed by CHEK2 (13%), ATM (12%), mismatch repair genes (11%), and PALB2 (5%). When limited to the 9,079 patients with metastatic or recurrent cancer, 8% (n = 710) harbored level 1 or 3B genetic findings and 3.2% (n = 289) received germline genotype-directed therapy. Germline genotype-directed therapy was received by 61% and 18% of metastatic cancer patients with level 1 and level 3B findings, respectively, and by 54% of BRCA1/2, 75% of mismatch repair, 43% of PALB2, 35% of RAD51C/D, 24% of BRIP1, and 19% of ATM carriers. Of BRCA1/2 patients receiving a poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor, 45% (84 of 188) had tumors other than breast or ovarian cancer, wherein the drug, at time of delivery, was delivered in an investigational setting.ConclusionIn a pan-cancer analysis, 8% of patients with advanced cancer harbored a germline variant with therapeutic actionability with 40% of these patients receiving germline genotype-directed treatment. Germline sequence analysis is additive to tumor sequence analysis for therapy selection and should be considered for all patients with advanced cancer.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Genetic testing (GT) for prostate cancer (PCA) is rising, with limited insights regarding genetic counseling (GC) needs of males. Genetic Evaluation of Men (GEM) is a prospective multigene testing study for inherited PCA. Men undergoing GC were surveyed on knowledge of cancer risk and genetics (CRG) and understanding of personal GT results to identify GC needs. METHODS:GEM participants with or high-risk for PCA were recruited. Pre-test GC was in-person, with video and handout, or via telehealth. Post-test disclosure was in-person, by phone, or via telehealth. Clinical and family history data were obtained from participant surveys and medical records. Participants completed measures of knowledge of CRG, literacy, and numeracy pre-test and post-test. Understanding of personal genetic results was assessed post-test. Factors associated with knowledge of CRG and understanding of personal genetic results were examined using multivariable linear regression or McNemar's test. RESULTS:Among 109 men who completed pre- and post-GT surveys, multivariable analysis revealed family history meeting hereditary cancer syndrome (HCS) criteria was significantly predictive of higher baseline knowledge (P?=?0.040). Of 101 men who responded definitively regarding understanding of results, 13 incorrectly reported their result (McNemar's P?<?0.001). Factors significantly associated with discordance between reported and actual results included having a variant of uncertain significance (VUS) (P?<?0.001) and undergoing GC via pre-test video and post-test phone disclosure (P?=?0.015). CONCLUSIONS:While meeting criteria for HCS was associated with higher knowledge of CRG, understanding of personal GT results was lacking among a subset of males with VUS. A more exploratory finding was lack of understanding of results among men who underwent GC utilizing video and phone. Studies optimizing GC strategies for males undergoing multigene testing for inherited PCA are warranted.