Utilization of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) testing in the United States: a case study of T3 translational research

Racial disparities in cancer care, an eyeopener for developing better global cancer management strategies

BACKGROUND

In the last few decades, advancements in cancer research, both in the field of cancer diagnostics as well as treatment of the disease have been extensive and multidimensional. Increased availability of health care resources and growing awareness has resulted in the reduction of consumption of carcinogens such as tobacco; adopting various prophylactic measures; cancer testing on regular basis and improved targeted therapies have greatly reduced cancer mortality among populations, globally. However, this notable reduction in cancer mortality is discriminate and reflective of disparities between various ethnic populations and economic classes. Several factors contribute to this systemic inequity, at the level of diagnosis, cancer prognosis, therapeutics, and even point-of-care facilities.

RECENT FINDINGS

In this review, we have highlighted cancer health disparities among different populations around the globe. It encompasses social determinants such as status in society, poverty, education, diagnostic approaches including biomarkers and molecular testing, treatment as well as palliative care. Cancer treatment is an active area of constant progress and newer targeted treatments like immunotherapy, personalized treatment, and combinatorial therapies are emerging but these also show biases in their implementation in various sections of society. The involvement of populations in clinical trials and trial management is also a hotbed for racial discrimination. The immense progress in cancer management and its worldwide application needs a careful evaluation by identifying the biases in racial discrimination in healthcare facilities.

CONCLUSION

Our review gives a comprehensive evaluation of this global racial discrimination in cancer care and would be helpful in designing better strategies for cancer management and decreasing mortality.

Disparities in lung cancer

Lung cancer is the second most common cancer and the leading cause of cancer death among men and women in the United States. Despite a substantial decline in lung cancer incidence and mortality across all races in the last few decades, medically underserved racial and ethnic minority populations continue to carry the greatest burden of disease throughout the lung cancer continuum. Black individuals experience a higher incidence of lung cancer due to lower rates of low-dose computed tomography screening, which translate into advanced disease stage at diagnosis and poorer survival outcomes compared with White individuals. With respect to treatment, Black patients are less likely to receive gold standard surgery, have access to biomarker testing or high-quality treatment compared with White patients. The reasons for those disparities are multifactorial and include socioeconomic (eg, poverty, lack of health insurance, and inadequate education), and geographic inequalities. The objective of this article is to review the sources of racial and ethnic disparities in lung cancer, and to propose recommendations to help address them.

Disparities in Lung Cancer Treatment

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Despite an overall reduction in lung cancer incidence and mortality rates worldwide, Blacks still have higher mortality rates compared to Whites. There are many factors that contribute to this difference. This review seeks to highlight racial disparities in treatment and the possible reasons for these disparities.

RECENT FINDINGS

Factors attributing to racial disparities in lung cancer treatment include social determinants of health, differences in the administration of guideline-concordant therapy as well as molecular testing that is essential for most NSCLC patients. One way to circumvent disparities in lung cancer survivorship is to ensure equal representation of race in research at all levels that will provide insight on interventions that will address social determinants of health, differences in treatment patterns, molecular testing, and clinical trial involvement.

Molecular Tumor Board Review and Improved Overall Survival in Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer

With the introduction of precision medicine, treatment options for non-small-cell lung cancer have improved dramatically; however, underutilization, especially in disadvantaged patients, like those living in rural Appalachian regions, is associated with poorer survival. Molecular tumor boards (MTBs) represent a strategy to increase precision medicine use. UK HealthCare at the University of Kentucky (UK) implemented a statewide MTB in January 2017. We wanted to test the impact of UK MTB review on overall survival in Appalachian and other regions in Kentucky.

METHODS

We performed a case-control study of Kentucky patients newly diagnosed with non-small-cell lung cancer between 2017 and 2019. Cases were reviewed by the UK MTB and were compared with controls without UK MTB review. Controls were identified from the Kentucky Cancer Registry and propensity-matched to cases. The primary end point was the association between MTB review and overall patient survival.

RESULTS

Overall, 956 patients were included, with 343 (39%) residing in an Appalachian region. Seventy-seven (8.1%) were reviewed by the MTB and classified as cases. Cox regression analysis showed that poorer survival outcome was associated with lack of MTB review (hazard ratio [HR] = 8.61; 95% CI, 3.83 to 19.31; P < .0001) and living in an Appalachian region (hazard ratio = 1.43; 95% CI, 1.17 to 1.75; P = .004). Among individuals with MTB review, survival outcomes were similar regardless of whether they lived in Appalachia or other parts of Kentucky.

CONCLUSION

MTB review is an independent positive predictor of overall survival regardless of residence location. MTBs may help overcome some health disparities for disadvantaged populations.

Molecular Biomarker and Programmed Death-Ligand 1 Expression Testing in Patients With Advanced Stage Non-small Cell Lung Cancer Across North Carolina Community Hospitals

BACKGROUND

Precision medicine in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) requires molecular biomarker testing in patients with nonsquamous and select patients with squamous histologies, and programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) testing in both.

RESEARCH QUESTION

What are rates of molecular and PD-L1 biomarker testing in patients with advanced NSCLC in community practices, and do rates vary by sociodemographic factors? What is the prevalence of molecular biomarker mutations and PD-L1 expression levels?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

From 389 stage IV NSCLC pathology reports obtained through the University of North Carolina Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center's Rapid Case Ascertainment Program from 38 community hospitals across North Carolina, we abstracted demographics, histology, molecular biomarker testing and results, and PD-L1 testing and expression. We geocoded patient and hospital addresses to determine travel time, distance to care, and census block level contextual variables. We compared molecular biomarker and PD-L1 testing rates, the prevalence of molecular biomarkers, and PD-L1 expression levels by race and sex, using χ² tests. We determined predictors of testing, using multivariable logistic regression and report adjusted ORs and 95%CI.

RESULTS

Among patients with nonsquamous NSCLC, 64.4% were tested for molecular biomarkers, and among all NSCLC patients 53.2% were tested for PD-L1 expression. Differences in biomarker testing rates by sociodemographic factors were not statistically significant in univariate or adjusted analyses. Adjusted analyses showed that patients living in areas with higher household internet access were more likely to undergo PD-L1 testing (adjusted OR = 1.66, 95% CI, 1.02-2.71). Sociodemographic differences in molecular biomarker prevalence and PD-L1 expression levels were not statistically significant, except for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) mutations, which occurred in 16.7% of males vs 0% in females, P = .05.

INTERPRETATION

Biomarker testing remains underused in NSCLC. Future work should include larger populations and evaluate hospital-specific testing protocols to identify and address barriers to guideline-recommended testing.

Utilisation and Determinants of Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Mutation Testing in Patients with Non-small Cell Lung Cancer in Routine Clinical Practice: A Global Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation testing is recommended for selecting patients with non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) for EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor drug treatment.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this article was to systematically review available evidence on the utilisation and determinants of EGFR mutation testing of patients with NSCLC in routine clinical practice.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Searches were made of five electronic databases (Web of Science, MEDLINE [Ovid], Science Direct, EMBASE and Scopus), bibliographies of relevant articles, studies that cited included studies and relevant cancer websites. Studies were included if they: (1) reported the rate of uptake of EGFR testing in patients with NSCLC; (2) were conducted in routine clinical practice settings; (3) were published in English prior to July 2017; and (4) had full text available. Studies were appraised using the STROBE and the National Institutes of Health (National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute) checklists.

RESULTS

Eighteen eligible studies were identified for this systematic review, published between 2011 and 2017, from the USA (n = 7), Canada (n = 2), Republic of Korea (n = 2), Norway (n = 1), Sweden (n = 1), Germany (n = 1), Spain (n = 1), New Zealand (n = 1), China (n = 1) and multiple countries from the Asia-Pacific region (n = 1). Overall, testing for EGFR mutations was undertaken in 16,146 of 52,257 study patients (31%), although testing rates varied widely between different studies (from 7.8% to 78.3%). Single institution retrospective audits reported higher rates of testing (median 65.7%, range 31.3-78.3%) than population-based retrospective cohort analyses (median 23%, range 11-69%) and multi-institutional cross-sectional practitioner surveys (median 19.8%, range 7.8-31.8%). Nine studies reported increasing rates of testing over the study period but maximum testing rates remained less than 75% in most studies. Factors associated with higher testing uptake rates included: female sex; younger age; former/no smoking; advanced stage of lung cancer; adenocarcinoma histology; better mobility; radiation therapy; available tissue specimen; and private insurance. Among 16,146 tested patients, EGFR mutations were detected in 4328 patients (26.8%). However, estimates of mutation prevalence were biased by incomplete and selective testing in many studies.

CONCLUSIONS

The uptake of EGFR mutation testing of patients with NSCLC is suboptimal in many parts of the world. Incomplete uptake of testing is fuelled by selective testing referral practices, sample limitations, and funding constraints.

Disparities and Trends in Genetic Testing and Erlotinib Treatment among Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients

BACKGROUND

Despite reports of socioeconomic disparities in rates of genetic testing and targeted therapy treatment for metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), little is known about whether such disparities are changing over time.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis to identify disparities and trends in genetic testing and treatment with erlotinib. Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database, we identified 9,900 patients with stage IV NSCLC diagnosed in 2007 to 2011 at age 65 or older. We performed logistic regression analyses to identify patient factors associated with odds of receiving a genetic test and erlotinib treatment, and to assess trends in these differences with respect to diagnosis year.

RESULTS

Patients were more likely to receive genetic testing if they were under age 75 at diagnosis [odds ratio (OR), 1.55] independent of comorbidity level, and this age-based gap showed a decrease over time (OR, 0.93). For untested patients, erlotinib treatment was associated with race (OR, 0.58, black vs. white; OR, 2.45, Asian vs. white), and was more likely among female patients (OR, 1.45); for tested patients, erlotinib treatment was less likely among low-income patients (OR, 0.32). Most of these associations persisted or increased in magnitude.

CONCLUSIONS

Race and sex are associated with rates of erlotinib treatment for patients who did not receive genetic testing, and low-income status is associated with treatment rates for those who did receive testing. The racial disparity remained stable over time, while the income-based disparity grew larger.

IMPACT

Attention to reducing disparities is needed as precision cancer treatments continue to be developed.

Association of Early Palliative Care With Chemotherapy Intensity in Patients With Advanced Stage Lung Cancer: A National Cohort Study

INTRODUCTION

Patients with advanced lung cancer have a poor prognosis, but both chemotherapy and early palliative care (EPC) have been shown to improve survival and quality of life (QOL). The relationship between palliative care and receipt of chemotherapy receipt is understudied. We sought to determine if EPC is associated with chemotherapy receipt and intensity among patients with advanced stage lung cancer.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study of patients in the national Veterans Health Administration (VA) with stage IIIB or IV lung cancer diagnosed between January 2007- December 2013. EPC was defined as a specialist-delivered palliative care received within 90 days of cancer diagnosis. Outcomes included any chemotherapy receipt and high-intensity chemotherapy receipt defined as: i) more than 4 cycles of a platinum-based doublet, ii) ≥3 lines of chemotherapy, iii) Bevacizumab/Cetuximab triplet therapy, iv) Erlotinib use prior to 2011, and v) chemotherapy in the last days of life. Logistic regression was used to determine the association between EPC and chemotherapy receipt after adjustment for patient and tumor characteristics.

RESULTS

Among the entire cohort (N=23,566), 37% received EPC and 45% received any chemotherapy. Among those with EPC, 34% received chemotherapy compared to 51% among those without EPC (Adjusted Odds Ratio (AOR=0.55, 95% CI: 0.51-0.58). Patients who received EPC had reduced receipt of high-intensity chemotherapy including >4 cycles of platinum-based doublet (AOR=0.68, 95% CI: 0.60-0.77), ≥ 3 lines of chemotherapy (AOR=0.61, 95% CI: 0.53-0.71), triplet therapy (AOR=0.68, 95% CI: 0.56-0.82) and use of erlotinib prior to 2011 (AOR=0.66, 95% CI: 0.55-0.79). Patients with EPC were more likely to receive chemotherapy in the last 14 (AOR=1.65, 95% CI: 1.44-1.87) and 30 days (AOR=1.67, 95% CI: 1.51-1.85) of life compared to those without EPC.

CONCLUSIONS

EPC was associated with reduced receipt of both any chemotherapy and high-intensity chemotherapy. However, receipt of chemotherapy at the very end-of-life was increased among patients with EPC compared to those without EPC. Among patients with advanced lung cancer, EPC may optimize patient selection for chemotherapy receipt leading to reduced use of high-intensity therapy by focusing on quality of life in accordance with patients' performance, preferences and goals of care.

EGFR Mutation Testing of non-squamous NSCLC: Impact and Uptake during Implementation of Testing Guidelines in a Population-Based Registry Cohort from Northern New Zealand

BACKGROUND

Since 2013, clinical practice guidelines recommend EGFR mutation testing of non-squamous NSCLC to select advanced-stage patients for first-line treatment using EGFR-TKIs.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to determine population-based trends in the real-world uptake and impact in routine practice of these recently updated testing guidelines.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A population-based observational study was conducted of notifications to the New Zealand Cancer Registry of patients eligible for EGFR testing diagnosed in northern New Zealand between January 2010 and April 2014. The main study variable was EGFR mutation testing. Main outcome measures (overall survival and dispensing of EGFR-TKIs) were extracted from prospectively archived electronic databases until October 2015.

RESULTS

The population-based cohort of 1857 patients had an average age of 70 years. Most had adenocarcinoma and metastatic disease at diagnosis. EGFR testing was undertaken in 500 patients (27%) with mutations detected in 109 patients (22%). EGFR testing increased during the period of study from <5% to 67% of patients (P < 0.0001). Full uptake of testing by all eligible patients was limited by a lack of availability of specimens for testing and variable testing referral practices. The proportion of patients treated with EGFR-TKIs decreased during the same time period, both among untested patients (from 12.2% to 2.8% (P < 0.0001)) and in the population as a whole (from 13.7% to 10.6% (P < 0.05)). EGFR testing was associated with prolonged overall survival (Adjusted HR = 0.76 (95% CI, 0.65-0.89) Log-rank P < 0.0001) due at least in part to the much longer overall survival achieved by mutation-positive patients, of whom 79% received EGFR-TKIs. Compared to untested EGFR-TKI-treated patients, mutation-positive EGFR-TKI-treated patients received EGFR-TKIs for longer, and survived longer both from the start of EGFR-TKI treatment and date of their diagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS

In this real world setting, high uptake of EGFR testing was achieved and associated with major changes in EGFR-TKI prescribing and improved health outcomes. Modifiable factors determined testing uptake. Study registration ACTRN12615000998549.

Validation of Molecular Pathology Codes for the Identification of Mutational Testing in Lung and Colon Cancer

BACKGROUND

Targeted therapy for patients with lung and colon cancer based on tumor molecular profiles is an important cancer treatment strategy, but the impact of gene mutation tests on cancer treatment and outcomes in large populations is not clear. In this study, we assessed the accuracy of an algorithm to identify tumor mutation testing in administrative claims data during a period before test-specific Current Procedural Terminology codes were available.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We used Pennsylvania Cancer Registry data to select patients with lung or colon cancer diagnosed between 2007 and 2011 who were treated at the University of Pennsylvania Health System, and we obtained their administrative claims. A combination of Current Procedural Terminology laboratory codes (stacking codes) was used to identify potential tumor mutation testing in the claims data. Patients' electronic medical records were then searched to determine whether tumor mutation testing actually had been performed. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated.

RESULTS

An algorithm using stacking codes had moderate sensitivity (86% for lung cancer and 81% for colon cancer) and high specificity (98% for lung cancer and 96% for colon cancer). Sensitivity and specificity did not vary significantly during 2007-2011. In patients with lung cancer, PPV was 98% and NPV was 92%. In patients with colon cancer, PPV was 96% and NPV was 83%.

CONCLUSIONS

An algorithm using stacking codes can identify tumor mutation testing in administrative claims data among patients with lung and colon cancer with a high degree of accuracy.

The Clinical and Economic Impact of Inaccurate EGFR Mutation Tests in the Treatment of Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Advances in personalized medicine are supported by companion diagnostic molecular tests. Testing accuracy is critical for selecting patients for optimal therapy and reducing treatment-related toxicity. We assessed the clinical and economic impact of inaccurate test results between laboratory developed tests (LDTs) and a US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved test for detection of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations. Using a hypothetical US cohort of newly diagnosed metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients and EURTAC (erlotinib versus standard chemotherapy as first-line treatment for European patients with advanced EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer) clinical trial data, we developed a decision analytic model to estimate the probability of misclassification with LDTs compared to a FDA-approved test. We estimated the clinical and economic impact of inaccurate test results by quantifying progression-free and quality-adjusted progression-free life years (PFLYs, QAPFLYs) lost, and costs due to incorrect treatment. The base-case analysis estimated 2.3% (n = 1422) of 60,502 newly diagnosed metastatic NSCLC patients would be misclassified with LDTs compared to 1% (n = 577) with a FDA-approved test. An average of 477 and 194 PFLYs were lost among the misclassified patients tested with LDTs compared to the FDA-approved test, respectively. Aggregate treatment costs for patients tested with LDTs were approximately $7.3 million more than with the FDA-approved test, due to higher drug and adverse event costs among patients incorrectly treated with targeted therapy or chemotherapy, respectively. Invalid tests contributed to greater probability of patient misclassification and incorrect therapy. In conclusion, risks associated with inaccurate EGFR mutation tests pose marked clinical and economic consequences to society. Utilization of molecular diagnostic tests with demonstrated accuracy could help to maximize the potential of personalized medicine.

Medical Oncologists' Experiences in Using Genomic Testing for Lung and Colorectal Cancer Care

PURPOSE

Genomic testing improves outcomes for many at-risk individuals and patients with cancer; however, little is known about how genomic testing for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and colorectal cancer (CRC) is used in clinical practice.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In 2012 to 2013, we surveyed medical oncologists who care for patients in diverse practice and health care settings across the United States about their use of guideline- and non-guideline-endorsed genetic tests. Multivariable regression models identified factors that are associated with greater test use.

RESULTS

Of oncologists, 337 completed the survey (participation rate, 53%). Oncologists reported higher use of guideline-endorsed tests (eg, KRAS for CRC; EGFR for NSCLC) than non-guideline-endorsed tests (eg, Onco typeDX Colon; ERCC1 for NSCLC). Many oncologists reported having no patients with CRC who had mismatch repair and/or microsatellite instability (24%) or germline Lynch syndrome (32%) testing, and no patients with NSCLC who had ALK testing (11%). Of oncologists, 32% reported that five or fewer patients had KRAS and EGFR testing for CRC and NSCLC, respectively. Oncologists, rather than pathologists or surgeons, ordered the vast majority of tests. In multivariable analyses, fewer patients in nonprofit integrated health care delivery systems underwent testing than did patients in hospital or office-based single-specialty group settings (all P < .05). High patient volume and patient requests (CRC only) were also associated with higher test use (all P < .05).

CONCLUSION

Genomic test use for CRC and NSCLC varies by test and practice characteristics. Research in specific clinical contexts is needed to determine whether the observed variation reflects appropriate or inappropriate care. One potential way to reduce unwanted variation would be to offer widespread reflexive testing by pathology for guideline-endorsed predictive somatic tests.

Utilization of genetic tests: analysis of gene-specific billing in Medicare claims data

PURPOSE

We examined the utilization of precision medicine tests among Medicare beneficiaries through analysis of gene-specific tier 1 and 2 billing codes developed by the American Medical Association in 2012.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional study. The primary source of data was 2013 Medicare 100% fee-for-service claims. We identified claims billed for each laboratory test, the number of patients tested, expenditures, and the diagnostic codes indicated for testing. We analyzed variations in testing by patient demographics and region of the country.

RESULTS

Pharmacogenetic tests were billed most frequently, accounting for 48% of the expenditures for new codes. The most common indications for testing were breast cancer, long-term use of medications, and disorders of lipid metabolism. There was underutilization of guideline-recommended tumor mutation tests (e.g., epidermal growth factor receptor) and substantial overutilization of a test discouraged by guidelines (methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase). Methodology-based tier 2 codes represented 15% of all claims billed with the new codes. The highest rate of testing per beneficiary was in Mississippi and the lowest rate was in Alaska.

CONCLUSIONS

Gene-specific billing codes significantly improved our ability to conduct population-level research of precision medicine. Analysis of these data in conjunction with clinical records should be conducted to validate findings.Genet Med advance online publication 26 January 2017.

Sharpening the attack on non-small cell lung cancer

Advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has long been a diagnosis with few treatment options and poor outcomes. However, recent discoveries about the molecular biology of NSCLC are changing the way it is treated. Driver mutations that cause uncontrolled cancer cell proliferation have been discovered in some types of NSCLC. This has led to the discovery of therapies that can target a specific driver mutation in advanced NSCLC and halt cancer progression. This article reviews standard treatment of NSCLC and explores the targetable mutations of NSCLC, available targeted treatments, treatment obstacles, and the future of targeted therapy in NSCLC.

Biopsy Procedures and Molecular Testing Utilization and Related Costs in Patients with Metastatic Lung Cancer

BACKGROUND

Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) gene mutations and anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) gene rearrangements are key therapeutic targets for biomarker-driven treatment with an EGFR or ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). To appropriately guide treatment decisions, since 2011, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network and the American Society of Clinical Oncology therefore recommend EGFR and ALK analysis in tumor samples obtained at the time of diagnosis in patients with non-squamous NSCLC. Currently, there are limited data on utilization patterns and cost of biopsy procedures and biomarker tests in patients with metastatic NSCLC who receive an EGFR or ALK TKI.

OBJECTIVES

To (a) describe utilization patterns and costs associated with biopsy procedures and biomarker testing in patients with NSCLC who received erlotinib or crizotinib between 2009 and 2012 and (b) investigate the timing of these procedures relative to the erlotinib or crizotinib index date.

METHODS

Adult patients with metastatic lung cancer were identified by ICD-9-CM diagnostic codes within the Truven Health Analytic MarketScan database. Patients were included in the analysis if they had an index erlotinib or crizotinib claim between January 1, 2009, and September 30, 2012 (index period) and were continuously enrolled for ≥ 12 months before the index claim. Because there is no specific ICD-9-CM diagnostic code for NSCLC, patients with metastatic lung cancer who received erlotinib or crizotinib were considered to have metastatic NSCLC. Using CPT and ICD-9-CM codes, lung biopsy procedures performed during the 24 months before or 12 months after the index claim date were identified. For every patient, biomarker testing claims for EGFR and ALK were identified using the molecular pathology stacked CPT code during the 2 months before or 1 month after the index date. The frequency of claims for biopsy procedures and biomarker testing was analyzed descriptively. The overall summary measures for biomarker testing, especially frequency of EGFR testing in patients receiving erlotinib, was also described as before and after 2011, the year when biomarker testing became part of the guidelines. Per patient and overall costs for biopsy procedures and biomarker testing were calculated from payer and patient perspectives.

RESULTS

Of the 4,926 identified patients, 4,801 (97.5%) received erlotinib, and 125 (2.5%) received crizotinib. Biopsy procedure claims were identified for 3,579 (72.7%) patients, including 3,503 (73.0%) erlotinib recipients and 76 (60.8%) crizotinib recipients. Biomarker testing claims were identified for 675 (13.7%) patients, including 634 (13.2%) erlotinib recipients and 41 (32.8%) crizotinib recipients. Overall, most biomarker testing procedures (476 of 741) were identified in 435 (of 675) patients after year 2011. Also, among erlotinib recipients, percentage of patients receiving EGFR testing was increased over the index period. Per patient mean (SD) numbers of biopsy procedures and biomarker tests were 1.2 (1.1) and 0.2 (0.4), respectively. In the outpatient setting, per patient mean (SD) cost per biopsy procedure was $1,223 ($1,899) from the payer perspective and $60 ($147) from the patient perspective, whereas in the inpatient setting, it was $8,163 ($18,712) and $180 ($691), respectively. Among patients receiving at least 1 biomarker test, the per patient mean (SD) cost for the overall population was $891 ($1,062) and $43 ($229); for erlotinib recipients, it was $906 ($1,084) and $42 ($228); and for crizotinib recipients, it was $664 ($576) and $55 ($243) in payer and patient perspectives, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides insight into the use and cost of biopsy and biomarker testing procedures in patients with metastatic NSCLC. The low frequency of biomarker testing highlights the need for more awareness of testing to guide treatment decisions in these patients. Costs associated with biopsy procedures and biomarker testing provide insight into the economic impact on metastatic NSCLC patients treated with targeted therapy.

DISCLOSURES

This study was sponsored by Merck & Co. Shinde is a study manager working for Merck under contract with AllSourcePPS, an Agile 1 company in Huntington Beach, California. Cao and Kothari are employees of Merck & Co., Kenilworth, New Jersey. Study concept and design were contributed primarily by Shinde and Kothari. Data analysis was performed by Cao. Data interpretation was performed by Shinde, Cao, and Kothari. Shinde wrote the manuscript with assistance from Cao and Kothari. The revision was completed primarily by Shinde and Kothari.

Predicting EGFR mutation status in lung cancer:Proposal for a scoring model using imaging and demographic characteristics

OBJECTIVE

To determine if a combination of CT and demographic features can predict EGFR mutation status in bronchogenic carcinoma.

METHODS

We reviewed demographic and CT features for patients with molecular profiling for resected non-small cell lung carcinoma. Using multivariate logistic regression, we identified features predictive of EGFR mutation. Prognostic factors identified from the logistic regression model were then used to build a more practical scoring system.

RESULTS

A scoring system awarding 5 points for no or minimal smoking history, 3 points for tumours with ground glass component, 3 points for airbronchograms, 2 points for absence of preoperative evidence of nodal enlargement or metastases and 1 point for doubling time of more than a year, resulted in an AUROC of 0.861. A total score of at least 8 yielded a specificity of 95 %. On multivariate analysis sex was not found to be predictor of EGFR status.

CONCLUSIONS

A weighted scoring system combining imaging and demographic data holds promise as a predictor of EGFR status. Further studies are necessary to determine reproducibility in other patient groups. A predictive score may help determine which patients would benefit from molecular profiling and may help inform treatment decisions when molecular profiling is not possible.

KEY POINTS

• EGFR mutation-targeted chemotherapy for bronchogenic carcinoma has a high success rate. • Mutation testing is not possible in all patients. • EGFR associations include subsolid density, slow tumour growth and minimal/no smoking history. • Demographic or imaging features alone are weak predictors of EGFR status. • A scoring system, using imaging and demographic features, is more predictive.

Implementation of the 21-gene recurrence score test in the United States in 2011

PURPOSE

We examined hospital use of the 21-gene breast cancer test in the United States. We report state-level differences in utilization and propose a model for predicting implementation of guideline-recommended genomic testing.

METHODS

Genomic Health provided test orders for calendar year 2011.We summarized utilization at the hospital and state levels. Using logistic regression, we analyzed the association between the likelihood to order the test and the hospital's institutional and regional characteristics.

RESULTS

In 2011, 45% of 4,712 acute-care hospitals ordered the test, which suggests that 25% of newly diagnosed invasive female breast cancer cases were tested. Significant predictors of testing included participation in National Cancer Institute (NCI) clinical research cooperative groups (odds ratio (OR) 3.73; 95% confidence interval, 2.96-4.70), advanced imaging (OR, 2.19; CI, 1.78-2.68), high-complexity laboratory (OR, 2.15; CI, 1.24-3.70), affiliation with a medical school (OR, 1.57; CI, 1.31-1.88), and reconstructive surgery (OR, 1.23; CI, 1.01-1.50). Significant regional predictors included metropolitan county (OR, 3.77; CI, 2.83-5.03), above-mean income (OR, 1.37; CI, 1.11-1.69), and education (OR, 1.26; CI, 1.03-1.54). Negative predictors included designation as a critical-access hospital (OR, 0.10; CI, 0.07-0.14) and distance from an NCI cancer center (OR, 0.998; CI, 0.997-0.999), with a 15% decrease in likelihood for every 100 miles.

CONCLUSION

Despite considerable market penetration of the test, there are significant regional and site-of-care differences in implementation, particularly in rural states.Genet Med 18 10, 982-990.

Cost-effectiveness of multiplexed predictive biomarker screening in non-small-cell lung cancer

INTRODUCTION

Population-wide screening for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations and anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) gene rearrangements to inform cancer therapy in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is recommended by guidelines. We estimated cost-effectiveness of multiplexed predictive biomarker screening in metastatic NSCLC from a societal perspective in the United States.

METHODS

We constructed a microsimulation model to compare the life expectancy and costs of multiplexed testing and molecularly guided therapy versus treatment with cisplatin-pemetrexed (CisPem). All testing interventions included a two-step algorithm of concurrent EGFR mutation and ALK overexpression testing with immunohistochemistry followed by ALK rearrangement confirmation with a fluorescence in situ hybridization assay for immunohistochemistry-positive results. Three strategies were included: "Test-treat" approach, where molecularly guided therapy was initiated after obtainment of test results; "Empiric switch therapy," with concurrent initiation of CisPem and testing and immediate switch to test-result conditional treatment after one cycle of CisPem; and "Empiric therapy" approach in which CisPem was continued for four cycles before start of a tyrosine kinase inhibitor.

RESULTS

The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for "Test-treat" compared with treatment with CisPem was $136,000 per quality-adjusted life year gained. Both empiric treatment approaches had less favorable incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. "Test-treat" and "Empiric switch therapy" yielded higher expected outcomes in terms of quality-adjusted life years and life-years than "Empiric therapy." These results were robust across plausible ranges of model inputs.

CONCLUSION

From a societal perspective, our cost-effectiveness results support the value of multiplexed genetic screening and molecularly guided therapy in metastatic NSCLC.

Whole-genome sequencing of asian lung cancers: second-hand smoke unlikely to be responsible for higher incidence of lung cancer among Asian never-smokers

Asian nonsmoking populations have a higher incidence of lung cancer compared with their European counterparts. There is a long-standing hypothesis that the increase of lung cancer in Asian never-smokers is due to environmental factors such as second-hand smoke. We analyzed whole-genome sequencing of 30 Asian lung cancers. Unsupervised clustering of mutational signatures separated the patients into two categories of either all the never-smokers or all the smokers or ex-smokers. In addition, nearly one third of the ex-smokers and smokers classified with the never-smoker-like cluster. The somatic variant profiles of Asian lung cancers were similar to that of European origin with G.C>T.A being predominant in smokers. We found EGFR and TP53 to be the most frequently mutated genes with mutations in 50% and 27% of individuals, respectively. Among the 16 never-smokers, 69% had an EGFR mutation compared with 29% of 14 smokers/ex-smokers. Asian never-smokers had lung cancer signatures distinct from the smoker signature and their mutation profiles were similar to European never-smokers. The profiles of Asian and European smokers are also similar. Taken together, these results suggested that the same mutational mechanisms underlie the etiology for both ethnic groups. Thus, the high incidence of lung cancer in Asian never-smokers seems unlikely to be due to second-hand smoke or other carcinogens that cause oxidative DNA damage, implying that routine EGFR testing is warranted in the Asian population regardless of smoking status.