News, Analysis, Trends, Management Innovations for
Clinical Laboratories and Pathology Groups

Hosted by Robert Michel

News, Analysis, Trends, Management Innovations for
Clinical Laboratories and Pathology Groups

Hosted by Robert Michel
Sign In

Advancements That Could Bring Proteomics and Mass Spectrometry to Clinical Laboratories

Experts list the top challenges facing widespread adoption of proteomics in the medical laboratory industry

Year-by-year, clinical laboratories find new ways to use mass spectrometry to analyze clinical specimens, producing results that may be more precise than test results produced by other methodologies. This is particularly true in the field of proteomics.

However, though mass spectrometry is highly accurate and fast, taking only minutes to convert a specimen into a result, it is not fully automated and requires skilled technologists to operate the instruments.

Thus, although the science of proteomics is advancing quickly, the average pathology laboratory isn’t likely to be using mass spectrometry tools any time soon. Nevertheless, medical laboratory scientists are keenly interested in adapting mass spectrometry to medical lab test technology for a growing number of assays.

Molly Campbell, Science Writer and Editor in Genomics, Proteomics, Metabolomics, and Biopharma at Technology Networks, asked proteomics experts “what, in their opinion, are the greatest challenges currently existing in proteomics, and how can we look to overcome them?” Here’s a synopsis of their answers:

Lack of High Throughput Impacts Commercialization

Proteomics isn’t as efficient as it needs to be to be adopted at the commercial level. It’s not as efficient as its cousin genomics. For it to become sufficiently efficient, manufacturers must be involved.

John Yates III, PhD, Professor, Department of Molecular Medicine at Scripps Research California campus, told Technology Networks, “One of the complaints from funding agencies is that you can sequence literally thousands of genomes very quickly, but you can’t do the same in proteomics. There’s a push to try to increase the throughput of proteomics so that we are more compatible with genomics.”

For that to happen, Yates says manufacturers need to continue advancing the technology. Much of the research is happening at universities and in the academic realm. But with commercialization comes standardization and quality control.

“It’s always exciting when you go to ASMS [the conference for the American Society for Mass Spectrometry] to see what instruments or technologies are going to be introduced by manufacturers,” Yates said.

There are signs that commercialization isn’t far off. SomaLogic, a privately-owned American protein biomarker discovery and clinical diagnostics company located in Boulder, Colo., has reached the commercialization stage for a proteomics assay platform called SomaScan. “We’ll be able to supplant, in some cases, expensive diagnostic modalities simply from a blood test,” Roy Smythe, MD, CEO of SomaLogic, told Techonomy.


The graphic above illustrates the progression mass spectrometry took during its development, starting with small proteins (left) to supramolecular complexes of intact virus particles (center) and bacteriophages (right). Because of these developments, today’s medical laboratories have more assays that utilize mass spectrometry. (Photo copyright: Technology Networks/Heck laboratory, Utrecht University, the Netherlands.)

Achieving the Necessary Technical Skillset

One of the main reasons mass spectrometry is not more widely used is that it requires technical skill that not many professionals possess. “For a long time, MS-based proteomic analyses were technically demanding at various levels, including sample processing, separation science, MS and the analysis of the spectra with respect to sequence, abundance and modification-states of peptides and proteins and false discovery rate (FDR) considerations,” Ruedi Aebersold, PhD, Professor of Systems Biology at the Institute of Molecular Systems Biology (IMSB) at ETH Zurich, told Technology Networks.

Aebersold goes on to say that he thinks this specific challenge is nearing resolution. He says that, by removing the problem created by the need for technical skill, those who study proteomics will be able to “more strongly focus on creating interesting new biological or clinical research questions and experimental design.”

Yates agrees. In a paper titled, “Recent Technical Advances in Proteomics,” published in F1000 Research, a peer-reviewed open research publishing platform for scientists, scholars, and clinicians, he wrote, “Mass spectrometry is one of the key technologies of proteomics, and over the last decade important technical advances in mass spectrometry have driven an increased capability of proteomic discovery. In addition, new methods to capture important biological information have been developed to take advantage of improving proteomic tools.”

No High-Profile Projects to Stimulate Interest

Genomics had the Human Genome Project (HGP), which sparked public interest and attracted significant funding. One of the big challenges facing proteomics is that there are no similarly big, imagination-stimulating projects. The work is important and will result in advances that will be well-received, however, the field itself is complex and difficult to explain.

Emanuel Petricoin, PhD, is a professor and co-director of the Center for Applied Proteomics and Molecular Medicine at George Mason University. He told Technology Networks, “the field itself hasn’t yet identified or grabbed onto a specific ‘moon-shot’ project. For example, there will be no equivalent to the human genome project, the proteomics field just doesn’t have that.”

He added, “The equipment needs to be in the background and what you are doing with it needs to be in the foreground, as is what happened in the genomics space. If it’s just about the machinery, then proteomics will always be a ‘poor step-child’ to genomics.”

Democratizing Proteomics

Alexander Makarov, PhD, is Director of Research in Life Sciences Mass Spectrometry (MS) at Thermo Fisher Scientific. He told Technology Networks that as mass spectrometry grew into the industry we have today, “each new development required larger and larger research and development teams to match the increasing complexity of instruments and the skyrocketing importance of software at all levels, from firmware to application. All this extends the cycle time of each innovation and also forces [researchers] to concentrate on solutions that address the most pressing needs of the scientific community.”

Makarov describes this change as “the increasing democratization of MS,” and says that it “brings with it new requirements for instruments, such as far greater robustness and ease-of-use, which need to be balanced against some aspects of performance.”

One example of the increasing democratization of MS may be several public proteomic datasets available to scientists. In European Pharmaceutical Review, Juan Antonio Viscaíno, PhD, Proteomics Team Leader at the European Bioinformatics Institute (EMBL-EBI) wrote, “These datasets are increasingly reused for multiple applications, which contribute to improving our understanding of cell biology through proteomics data.”

Sparse Data and Difficulty Measuring It

Evangelia Petsalaki, PhD, Group Leader EMBL-EBI, told Technology Networks there are two related challenges in handling proteomic data. First, the data is “very sparse” and second “[researchers] have trouble measuring low abundance proteins.”

Petsalaki notes, “every time we take a measurement, we sample different parts of the proteome or phosphoproteome and we are usually missing low abundance players that are often the most important ones, such as transcription factors.” She added that in her group they take steps to mitigate those problems.

“However, with the advances in MS technologies developed by many companies and groups around the world … and other emerging technologies that promise to allow ‘sequencing’ proteomes, analogous to genomes … I expect that these will not be issues for very long.”

So, what does all this mean for clinical laboratories? At the current pace of development, its likely assays based on proteomics could become more common in the near future. And, if throughput and commercialization ever match that of genomics, mass spectrometry and other proteomics tools could become a standard technology for pathology laboratories.

—Dava Stewart

Related Information:

5 Key Challenges in Proteomics, As Told by the Experts

The Evolution of Proteomics—Professor John Yates

The Evolution of Proteomics—Professor Ruedi Aebersold

The Evolution of Proteomics—Professor Emanuel Petricoin

The Evolution of Proteomics—Professor Alexander Makarov

The Evolution of Proteomics—Dr. Evangelia Petsalaki

For a Clear Read on Our Health, Look to Proteomics

Recent Technical Advances in Proteomics

Emerging Applications in Clinical Mass Spectrometry

HPP Human Proteome Project

Open Data Policies in Proteomics Are Starting to Revolutionize the Field

Native Mass Spectrometry: A Glimpse Into the Machinations of Biology

Direct Primary Care is Emerging as a New Healthcare Model in the US, But Are Clinical Laboratories Prepared to Bill Patients Directly?

If insurance plans are removed from the billing cycle for primary care, it’s not clear how clinical laboratories will be reimbursed for their services

Direct Primary Care (DPC) is gaining popularity in the United States. This emerging movement enables primary care providers to bill patients directly for services rendered, bypassing traditional health plans. On a large scale, employers can contract with primary care practices directly for their employees’ primary care coverage. The idea is to lower healthcare costs. But what exactly is DPC and how are clinical laboratories affected by it?

In operation, direct primary care is similar to concierge medicine, where a patient pays an annual retainer for direct access to a specific healthcare provider. DPC practices offer members unlimited, on-demand visits to primary care physicians for a flat, monthly fee.

The DPC movement has its own lobbying group—the Direct Primary Care Coalition—which supports physicians who opt to practice direct primary care. According to the group’s website, there are currently about 1,000 DPC practices in 48 states which serve over 300,000 patients. 

DPC has gained Senatorial support. In December, Senators Bill Cassidy, MD (R-LA), Doug Jones (D-AL), Jerry Moran (R-KS) and Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) introduced legislation to “lower the cost of healthcare and expand patients’ access to their primary care providers.”

Their bill (H.R. 3708), titled the “Primary Care Enhancement Act of 2019,” would amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to “allow individuals with direct primary care service arrangements to remain eligible individuals for purposes of health savings accounts, and for other purposes.”

A press release announcing the Senate version of the bill (S. 2999), described DPC as a model that “encourages patients to develop personal relationships with their primary care physician, including extending access to care beyond office visits and business hours and through telemedicine. It focuses on prevention and primary care, relying less on specialist and hospital referrals. It is a growing model used by more than 1,000 practices across 48 states and the District of Columbia.”

The press release also states, “DPC models replace copays and deductibles with flat, affordable monthly fees. Current law makes DPC incompatible with health savings accounts (HSAs) paired with high-deductible health plans (HDHPs).”

Direct Primary Care in Practice

Physicians seem to like the DPC model. It frees them, they say, from the unnecessary interference of insurance providers, the burdens of excessive paperwork, and ever-increasing administration costs, while allowing them to have a better patient-doctor relationship. 

“I know all my patients by name. I have time for them,” Matthew Abinante, DO, told The DO, a journal of the American Osteopathic Association (AOA). “I probably interact with about 20 patients a day when you factor in the electronic communication.”

Abinante is a board-certified family physician. He practices at Elevated Health, a direct primary care practice in Huntington Beach, CA. Patients pay an average of $75 per month for membership. This fee includes unlimited same day/next day appointments and the ability to talk to a doctor via telephone, e-mail, text, or video chat—24/7.

Matthew Abinante, DO, is shown above treating a patient at Elevated Health, a DPC practice in California. “Our goal is to keep you as healthy as possible, while saving you time and money. We remove the barriers of traditional insurance and provide you with a modern take on the personal, old-fashioned care missing in today’s healthcare industry,” he said. (Photo copyright: Elevated Health.)

At Elevated Health, some minor clinical laboratory tests and procedures are included in the monthly fee. They include:

Other medical laboratory testing, imaging, and medications are available to patients at contracted wholesale prices, which are quoted up front. This is consistent with the trend for price transparency in healthcare.

“What everyone really needs to know is that patients do get better care when their doctor is more satisfied with what they’re doing. And that takes time. What the [fee-for-service] system cannot provide us is time with the patient,” Tiffanny Blythe, DO, told The DO. Blythe runs Blue Lotus Family Medicine, a DPC practice in Kansas City, MO.

When Direct Primary Care Does Not Work

The DPC model has been tried before. In 2010, a DPC provider called Qliance was formed primarily on investment capital from Jeff Bezos of Amazon. The goal was to free doctors and patients from the constraints of traditional health insurance.

Qliance opened several clinics in the Seattle area and by 2014 had nearly 50,000 DPC patients—including employees of Expedia and Comcast. It also had a contract to provide primary care services with a state Medicaid insurer. Nevertheless, Qliance closed in 2017.

“We would open up a clinic and add a bunch of docs before we had enough patients to pay for it,” Nick Hanauer, a Seattle venture capitalist and investor in Qliance, told STAT.

“It’s just hard to get the customers because you had to break the paradigm that was in everyone’s heads about how healthcare had to work, and you had to disrupt the relationships people had with their insurance companies,” Hanauer explained.

“Somebody with more economic power than we had could do this—and should,” he added.

Not All Physicians Support Direct Primary Care

Since the DPC model is so new, there is little research or statistics to confirm it will have a positive effect on healthcare outcomes or lower healthcare costs. Some healthcare professionals have reservations about direct primary care. Their concerns include the potential for less oversight of practitioners and the possibility that patients will slight themselves regarding insurance coverage.

“What we don’t hear about are the people who need more than can cover and what happens to them when they fall into that gap,” Carolyn Engelhard, a health policy analyst and Assistant Professor at the University of Virginia School of Medicine. “We don’t know if they just don’t get care or then enter the traditional healthcare system and start over.”

There are also concerns that DPC plans could draw a large percentage of healthier patients, which could raise costs for those in traditional insurance plans, and that it may be more difficult for DPC patients to gain access to needed specialists and other services. 

“Healthcare is fragmented, and if we continue to have little carve-outs so some [doctors] can practice medicine the way they want, it is not helping to make the system more responsive and integrated,” Engelhard added.

Nonetheless, both Direct Primary Care and Concierge Medicine are growing in popularity in the US. And because it’s unclear how clinical laboratories would interact with or bill DPC practices, clinical laboratory leaders should keep a close eye on this trend.

As more patients opt for these models of care, healthcare organizations, pathology groups, and clinical laboratories will have to create ways to adapt. Since DPC practices are out of most networks, clinical labs may have to bill patients directly for their services. Not all clinical labs are prepared to do that, and those that are could experience a slowdown in the payment process. Labs may also have to contract with physicians to provide testing services on a pre-determined wholesale cost basis.

—JP Schlingman

Related Information:

Can Amazon Cut Insurers Out of Primary Care?

A Pioneer In ‘Flat-Fee Primary Care’ Had to Close Its Clinics. What Went Wrong?

5 Things to Know About Direct Primary Care

10 Differences Between Concierge Medicine and Direct Primary Care

Concierge Medicine Is Growing

Lessons from Qliance Closing Its Doors

Smartphone Apps Enable Healthcare Consumers to Receive Primary Care without Traditional Office Visits, But How Will They Provide Needed Medical Laboratory Samples?

These virtual office visits use artificial intelligence and text messaging to allow real physicians to diagnose patients, write prescriptions, and order clinical laboratory tests

Clinical laboratories may soon be receiving test orders from physicians who never see their patients in person, instead evaluating and diagnosing them through a smartphone app. In response to major changes in the primary care industry—mostly driven by consumer demand—mobile app developers are introducing new methods for delivering primary care involving smartphones and artificial intelligence (AI).

Medical laboratories and pathology groups should prepare for consumers who expect their healthcare to be delivered in ways that don’t require a visit to a traditional medical office. One question is how patients using virtual primary care services will provide the specimens required for clinical laboratory tests that their primary care providers want performed?

Two companies on the forefront of such advances are 98point6 and K Health, and they provide a glimpse of primary care’s future. The two companies have developed smartphone apps that incorporate AI and the ability to interact with real physicians via text messaging.

Virtual Primary Care 24/7 Nationwide

Dark Daily has repeatedly reported that primary care in America is undergoing major changes driven by many factors including increasingly busy schedules, the popularity of rapid retail and urgent care clinics, consumer use of smartphones and the Internet to self-diagnose, and decreasing numbers of new doctors choosing primary care as a career path. 

Writing in Stat, two physicians who had just completed internal medicine residencies, explained their own decisions to leave primary care. In their article, titled, “We were inspired to become primary care physicians. Now we’re reconsidering a field in crisis,” Richard Joseph, MD, and Sohan Japa, MD, cited factors that include long hours, low compensation in comparison with specialty care, and deficiencies in primary care training. At the time of their writing they were senior residents in primary care-internal medicine at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston.

They also pointed to a decline in office visits to primary care doctors. “Patients are increasingly choosing urgent care centers, smartphone apps, telemedicine, and workplace and retail clinics that are often staffed by nurse practitioners and physician assistants for their immediate health needs,” they wrote.

One solution to declining populations of primary care physicians is a smartphone app created by Seattle-based 98point6. The service involves “providing virtual text-based primary care across the entire country, 24/7 of everyday,” explained Brad Younggren, MD, an emergency physician and Chief Medical Officer at 98point6, in a YouTube interview. “It’s text-based delivery of care overlaid with an AI platform on top of it.”

The service launched on May 1, 2018, in 10 states and is now available nationwide, according to press releases. 98point6 offers the service through individual subscriptions or through deals with employers, health plans, health systems, and other provider organizations. The personal plan costs $20 for the first year and $120 for the second, plus $1 per “visit.”

Here’s how it works:

  • Subscribers use text messaging to interact with an “automated assistant” that incorporates artificial intelligence. While messaging, they can describe symptoms or ask questions about medical topics.

“After the automated assistant has gathered as many questions as it deems necessary, it hands [the information] off to a physician,” Younggren said. In most cases, all communication is via text messaging. However, the doctor may ask the subscriber to send a photo or participate in a video meeting.

  • The doctor then makes a diagnosis and treatment plan. Prescriptions can be sent to a local pharmacy and the subscriber can be referred to a clinical laboratory for tests. LabCorp or Quest Diagnostics are preferred providers, but subscribers can choose to have orders sent to independent labs as well, states the company’s website.

Younggren claims the company’s physicians can resolve more than 90% of the cases they encounter. If, however, they can’t resolve a case, they can refer the patient to a local physician. And because most of 98point6’s interactions with subscribers are text-based, that messaging serves as reference documentation for other doctors, he said.

“We’ve set out to dramatically augment the primary-care physician with deep technology by delivering an on-demand primary-care experience,” Robbie Cape (above), CEO and co-founder of 98point6, told Modern Healthcare. (Photo copyright: Seattle Business Magazine.)

The 98point6 physicians are full-time employees and work with the company’s technologists to improve the AI’s capabilities, Younggren said. The company claims its doctors can diagnose and treat more than 400 conditions, including: allergies, asthma, skin problems, coughs, flu, diabetes, high blood pressure, and infections. For medical emergencies, subscribers are advised to seek emergency help locally.

98point6 also can function as a front end for interacting with patients in health systems that have their own primary-care doctors, Younggren said. The company’s health system clients “don’t actually have a good digital primary care front end to deliver care,” he said. “So, we can essentially give them that, and then we can also get some detailed understanding of how to coordinate care within the health system to drive patients to the care that they need.” For example, this can include directing the patient to an appropriate sub-specialist.

Leveraging Patient Data to Answer Health Questions

K Health in New York City offers a similar service based on its own AI-enabled smartphone app. The app incorporates data gleaned from the records of more than two million anonymous patients in Israel over the past 20 years, explained company co-founder Ran Shaul, co-founder and Chief Product Officer, in a blog post.

The software asks users about their “chief complaint” and then compares the answers with data from similar cases. “We call this group your ‘People Like Me’ cohort,” Shaul wrote. “It shows you how doctors diagnosed those people and all the ways they were treated.”

The K Health app is free, but for a fee ranging from $14 for a one-time visit to $39 for an annual subscription, users can text with doctors, the company’s website states.

Unlike 98point6, K Health’s doctors are employed by “affiliated physician-owned professional corporations,” the company says, not K Health itself.

“The doctor you chat with will discuss a recommended treatment plan that may include a physical exam, lab tests, or radiology scans,” states K Health’s website. “They may send you directly for some of these tests, but others will require you to visit a local doctor.”

These are just the latest examples of new technologies and services devised to help patients receive primary care. How a patient who uses a smartphone app gets the necessary clinical laboratory tests performed is a question yet to be answered.

Clinical laboratory leaders will want to watch this shift in the delivery of primary care and look for opportunities to serve consumers who are getting primary care from nontraditional sources.

—Stephen Beale

Related Information:

Bringing Primary Care to Smartphones

We Were Inspired to Become Primary Care Physicians. Now We’re Reconsidering A Field in Crisis

How K Delivers Free Personalized Healthcare Information

Robbie Cape Wants Everyone to Have Access to Affordable Primary Care

98point6 Inc.’s Hot Health Care App Is Attracting Investors

Consumer Trend to Use Walk-In and Urgent Care Clinics Instead of Traditional Primary Care Offices Could Impact Clinical Laboratory Test Ordering/Revenue

JAMA Study Shows American’s with Primary Care Physicians Receive More High-Value Care, Even as Millennials Reject Traditional Healthcare Settings

As Primary Care Providers and Health Insurers Embrace Telehealth, How Will Clinical Laboratories Provide Medical Lab Testing Services?

New Year of 2020 Brings Issues That Fully Challenge All Clinical Laboratory and Anatomic Pathology Leaders

Changes in reimbursement models and federal compliance, as well as tougher payer audits, make it critical clinical laboratory managers are fully informed and prepared for what lies ahead in 2020

Not only does January 1st bring the new year of 2020, but it also brings tough challenges for leaders of the nation’s clinical laboratories and anatomic pathology groups. Most of these challenges are triggered by the ongoing transformation of the American healthcare system.

“Healthcare’s transformation in this country has two primary elements,” said Robert L. Michel, Editor-in-Chief of The Dark Report, sister publication of Dark Daily. “One is the integration of medical care to meet the related goals of keeping people out of hospitals—the most expensive site of care—and to proactively manage patients to keep them healthy.

“The second is reimbursement reform,” he continued. “Healthcare policymakers want to eliminate fee-for-service payments and move providers to different forms of value-based reimbursement. The federal Medicare program seems to be taking the lead over private payers as it introduces different pilot programs that reimburse physicians and hospitals through such methods as bundled payments, shared-savings arrangements, and per-member per-month (PMPM) arrangements.”

Michel predicts that both the integration of care delivery and the shift away from fee-for-service payment will become more urgent challenges for clinical laboratory managers and pathologists during 2020.

“Take the integration of care, for example. Clinical laboratories, since their inception, have been organized to serve the different provider silos,” Michel stated. “Each client—whether it was a primary care physician, a specialist doctor, a hospital, or a nursing home—could be served as a stand-alone customer. That client ordered tests and the lab performed those tests, submitted the results to that client, then billed insurance as appropriate.

“Integration of clinical care changes that laboratory service model in significant ways,” he continued. “Now, when a provider within an integrated health system orders a medical laboratory test, the lab will want those lab test results to be available, via the electronic health record (EHR) system, to other providers within that health system.

“That is one example of how integrated care requires clinical labs to realign their service model,” Michel added. “Combine that need to change with the steady transition away from fee-for-service to reimbursement based on value and you can see why all labs in the United States will be uniquely challenged, not just in 2020, but in the succeeding years.”

Robert Michel (above) is Editor-in-Chief of The Dark Report and Dark Daily and founder of The Dark Intelligence Group. He will be hosting the 25th anniversary Executive War College on Lab and Pathology Management, which takes place April 28-29, 2020, in New Orleans. (Photo copyright: The Dark Report.)

Even Minor Changes in Care Require Major Responses by Medical Laboratories

It is important for clinical laboratory managers, pathology practice administrators, and the pathologists who are the business leaders of their groups to understand the width and depth of the changes happening in healthcare and laboratory medicine in the United States today. Even little changes in how care is delivered can require a major response in how medical laboratories are organized and how they deliver lab testing services.

For example, here are distinct trends associated with how providers are responding to healthcare’s current transformation:

Meanwhile, the clinical laboratory industry is undergoing its own transformation. Three major trends illustrate how labs are responding to the new healthcare marketplace realities:

  • More use of Lean, Six Sigma, and process improvement techniques as labs strive to cut costs while protecting quality and maintaining top-flight service levels.
  • More collaboration with providers, payers, and even consumers, as innovative medical laboratory organizations move to deliver more value, consistent with the Clinical Lab 2.0 business model.
  • Acquiring more robust information technologies and analytics tools needed to leverage the lab’s clinical test data in ways to provide increased value, not just to hospitals and physicians, but to payers, patients, and a new class of care management companies that want to use big data and machine learning to help payers and providers improve patient outcomes.

All of these trends will not only be high profile during 2020, but they will be driving forces throughout the decade of the 2020s.

This is why The Dark Report’s 25th anniversary Executive War College on Lab and Pathology Management, which takes place April 28-29, 2020, in New Orleans, will feature essential sessions and expert speakers who have the answers you need to guide your lab through the challenging times yet to come.

Narrowing networks that exclude your lab from access to patients? Executive War College has health plan lab network managers to share insights with you, along with experienced lab managed care contracting executives who can challenge these payers and teach you the secrets of winning and keeping status as an in-network laboratory.

Concerned about new compliance issues—such as EKRA (Eliminating Kickback in Recovery Act of 2018) and Medicare’s recent affiliation disclosure rule for tougher government and private payer audits—that challenge your lab’s financial integrity? Executive War College is bringing together the nation’s smartest minds in compliance, billing/collections, and lab accreditation to give you first-hand updates on the must-dos and the must-avoids, so your lab is always inspection ready and compliant.

Because this is the 25th anniversary of the Executive War College, we are pulling out all the stops to put on the biggest and best conference on lab and pathology management that the nation has seen. There will be more than 125 speakers and 90 sessions, along with our always-popular two-roundtables for Lab CFOs, Academic Pathology, Lab CIOs, and Lab Quality/Compliance Managers.

Most importantly for you, this year’s Executive War College may be the most important lab management meeting you attend in 2020, because there is no other place that puts you face-to-face with experts in every aspect of clinical laboratories and anatomic pathology group management, while—at the same time—giving you unparalleled networking with the lab profession’s innovators.

This is the best investment you can make in both your professional management career and the successful operation of your laboratory.

Register today at https://dark.regfox.com/executive-war-college-2020 to reserve your seat and save $200 off regular registration rates, but act now while it’s fresh on your mind as these super-early-bird savings end January 31.

—M.A.McBride

Related Information:

25th anniversary Executive War College on Lab and Pathology Management

Post-Acute Care Cheat Sheet: Integrated Delivery Networks

Big Mergers Dominate Healthcare Headlines

Health Insurers Spending Billions to Diversify

Cigna Completes Combination with Express Scripts, Establishing a Blueprint to Transform the Health Care System

Two Boston Health Systems Enter the Growing Direct-to-Consumer Gene Sequencing Market by Opening Preventative Genomics Clinics, but Can Patients Afford the Service?

By offering DTC preventative gene sequencing, hospital leaders hope to help physicians better predict cancer risk and provide more accurate diagnoses

Two Boston health systems, Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH), are the latest to open preventative gene sequencing clinics and compete with consumer gene sequencing companies, such as 23andMe and Ancestry, as well as with other hospital systems that already provide similar services.

This may provide opportunities for clinical laboratories. However, some experts are concerned that genetic sequencing may not be equally available to patients of all socioeconomic classes. Nor is it clear how health systems plan to pay for the equipment and services, since health insurance companies continue to deny coverage for “elective” gene sequencing, or when there is not a “clear medical reason for it, such as for people with a long family history of cancer,” notes STAT.

Therefore, not everyone is convinced of the value of gene sequencing to either patients or hospitals, even though advocates tout gene sequencing as a key element of precision medicine.

Is Preventative Genetic Sequencing Ready for the Masses?

Brigham’s Preventive Genomics Clinic offers comprehensive DNA sequencing, interpretation, and risk reporting to both adults and children. And MGH “plans to launch its own clinic for adults that will offer elective sequencing at a similar price range as the Brigham,” STAT reported.

The Brigham and MGH already offer similar gene sequencing services as other large health systems, such as Mayo Clinic and University of California San Francisco (UCSF), which are primarily used for research and cancer diagnoses and range in price depending on the depth of the scan, interpretation of the results, and storage options.

However, some experts question whether offering the technology to consumers for preventative purposes will benefit anyone other than a small percentage of patients.

“It’s clearly not been demonstrated to be cost-effective to promote this on a societal basis,” Robert Green, MD, MPH, medical geneticist at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, and professor of genetics at Harvard, told STAT. “The question that’s hard to answer is whether there are long-term benefits that justify those healthcare costs—whether the sequencing itself, the physician visit, and any downstream testing that’s stimulated will be justified by the situations where you can find and prevent disease.”

Additionally, large medical centers typically charge more for genomic scans than consumer companies such as 23andMe and Ancestry. Hospital-based sequencing may be out of the reach of many consumers, and this concerns some experts.

“The idea that genomic sequencing is only going to be accessible by wealthy, well-educated patrons who can pay out of pocket is anathema to the goals of the publicly funded Human Genome Project,” Jonathan Berg, MD, PhD, Genetics Professor, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, told Scientific American.

Nevertheless, consumer interest in preventative genetic sequencing is increasing and large health systems want a piece of the market. At the same time, genetics companies are reducing their costs and passing that reduction on to their customers. (See Dark Daily, “Veritas Genetics Drops Its Price for Clinical-Grade Whole-Genome Sequencing to $599, as Gene Sequencing Costs Continue to Fall,” October 23, 2018.)

Providers Go Direct to Consumers with Gene Sequencing

Healthcare providers and clinical laboratories played an important part in the growth of the Direct-to-Consumer (DTC) genetic testing, a market which the American Hospital Association (AHA) predicts is on track to expand dramatically over the next decade. BIS Research foresees a $6.3 billion valuation of the DTC genetic test market by 2028, according to a news release.

And, according to the American Journal of Managed Care, “It’s estimated that by 2021, 100 million people will have used a direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic test. As these tests continue to gain popularity, there is a need for educating consumers on their DTC testing results and validating these results with confirmatory testing in a medical-grade laboratory.”

This is why it’s critical that clinical laboratories and anatomic pathology groups have a genetic testing and gene sequencing strategy, as Dark Daily reported.

David Bick, MD, Chief Medical Officer at the HudsonAlpha Institute for Biotechnology and Medical Director of the Smith Family Clinic for Genomic Medicine, told Scientific American, “there’s just more and more interest from patients and families not only because of 23andMe and the like, but because there’s just this understanding that if you can find out information about your health before you become sick, then really our opportunity as physicians to do something to help you is much greater.”

In an article he penned for Medium, Robert Green, MD, MPH (shown above counseling a patient), medical geneticist at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and professor of genetics at Harvard, wrote, “The ultimate aim of our Genomes2People Research Program is to contribute to the transformation of medicine from reactive to proactive, from treatment-oriented to preventive. We are trying to help build the evidence base that will justify societal decision to make these technologies and services accessible to anyone who wants them, regardless of means, education or race and ethnicity.” (Photo copyright: Wall Street Journal.)

Is Preventative Genomics Elitist?

As large medical centers penetrate the consumer genetic testing market some experts express concerns. In a paper he wrote for Medium, titled, “Is Preventive Genomics Elitist?” Green asked, “Is a service like this further widening the inequities in our healthcare system?”

Green reported that while building the Preventive Genomics Clinic at Brigham, “we … struggled with the reality that there is no health insurance coverage for preventive genomic testing, and our patients must therefore pay out of pocket. This is a troubling feature for a clinic at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, which is known for its ties to communities in Boston with diverse ethnic and socioeconomic backgrounds.”

Most of Brigham’s early genetics patients would likely be “well-off, well-educated, and largely white,” Green wrote. “This represents the profile of typical early adopters in genetic medicine, and in technology writ large. It does not, however, represent the Clinic’s ultimate target audience.”

More Data for Clinical Laboratories

Nevertheless, preventive genomics programs offered by large health systems will likely grow as primary care doctors and others see evidence of value.

Therefore, medical laboratories that process genetic sequencing data may soon be working with growing data sets as more people reach out to healthcare systems for comprehensive DNA sequencing and reporting.

—Donna Marie Pocius

Related Information:

Top U.S. Medical Centers Roll Out DNA Sequencing Clinics for Healthy Clients

Brigham and Women’s Hospital Opens Preventive Genomics Clinic

Preventive Genomics for Healthy People

Consumers Buy into Genetic Testing Kits

Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing Market to Reach $6.36 Billion by 2028

Is Preventive Genomics Elitist?

Why It’s Time for All Clinical Laboratories and Anatomic Pathology Groups to Have a Genetic Testing and Gene Sequencing Strategy

More Clinical Laboratories and Genetic Testing Companies Are Sharing Gene Sequencing Data That Involve Variations

Veritas Genetics Drops Its Price for Clinical-Grade Whole-Genome Sequencing to $599, as Gene Sequencing Costs Continue to Fall

;