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

Colorado Hospitals Share Self-Pay Prices as New Transparency Law Takes Effect; Hospital Medical Laboratories and Anatomic Pathologists Working with Hospitals Could be Impacted

Regardless of potential confusion, the bill’s passage is seen as a positive step toward greater transparency by high-level members of the state’s government

In an effort to promote price transparency in healthcare, Colorado legislators passed a new law requiring hospitals in that state to post self-pay prices for the most common procedures and treatments. Their hope is healthcare consumers who lack insurance will find it easier to price shop and, therefore, make informed healthcare decisions.

However, not all providers in that state think the bill is needed and some are concerned it could cause confusion. It remains to be seen how Colorado hospital medical laboratories and outpatient practices, such as anatomic pathology groups, will be impacted by the new transparency requirements.

Potential Confusion a Concern for UCHealth

The Transparency in Health Care Prices Act (SB17-065), which took effect on January 1, 2018, calls for Colorado hospitals to post self-pay prices for their top 50 diagnosis-related-group codes; and self-pay prices for the 25 leading current procedural technology billing codes, according to the Denver Business Journal.

Physicians’ practices and other providers also must post prices for their 15 most popular procedures under the new law, Healthcare Dive reported. In an issues brief, the Colorado Hospital Association (CHA) supported the bill “because it aligns with the Association’s transparency policy principles.”

But some Colorado healthcare providers have expressed concerns about the new requirements.

“Because of the complexity of pricing, it’s possible the self-pay prices we have posted on our website might increase confusion,” Dan Weaver, Senior Director of Public Relations for UCHealth, told Colorado Politics. “Patients who have insurance coverage, Medicaid or Medicare will have very different out-of-pocket responsibilities [from the posted price].” The article was later published in the Durango Herald.

Various points of potential confusion include:

  • Prices show what self-pay patients must pay and not what an insured patient would pay under their health plans, which would be much lower;
  • Only 7% of Colorado residents are uninsured, according to a Colorado Health Institute report; and,
  • Even an “apple-to-apple” comparison by price is not so easy to do, reported Healthcare Finance based on its analysis of some Colorado hospitals’ price lists.

Christine Clark, Associate CFO Revenue Cycle (above), Denver Health, told Healthcare Finance, “We do have concerns that this will make the issue more confusing to patients as there is not a ‘one size fits all’ approach to providing patients estimates due to the wide variability insurance plans bring to the process. Providing a self-pay price for a service is probably the least complicated.” However, she added, “There is always some variability in the price of procedures due to different patient needs.”

Regardless of the potential confusion, however, some see passage of the bill as a step in the right direction.

Senate Republican Kevin Lundberg (above right) shaking hands with Colorado’s governor following signing of SB17-065, which Lundberg sponsored. In a statement, he noted, “Coloradans have a tough enough time navigating the complicated structure of our broken healthcare system without worrying about hidden healthcare costs.” (Photo copyright: Colorado Senate Republicans.)

Studies Show Consumers Not Highly Motivated to Shop for Healthcare

Ironically, consumers do not appear to be rushing to compare hospital prices, as they do for other products and services. And those who do shop around do not like the price data tools or understand the data, state and national studies found.

“Even with pricing data available, patients tend to rely more on their physician’s advice about where and from whom to seek medical care,” noted the Health Policy Institute of Ohio (HPIO). According the HPIO report, consumers say healthcare price data tools are not user-friendly.

And a national study, published in Health Affairs, that explored American’s views and habits when shopping for healthcare, noted:

  • Only 13% of 3,000 survey respondents who had out-of-pocket responsibilities sought cost information before their healthcare encounters; and,
  • Just 3% compared costs across possible providers before accessing care.

The researchers acknowledged the existence of price transparency tools, such as those offered by Colorado, Ohio, and on other state websites. Nevertheless, survey respondents still reported:

  • Lack of awareness about available price information;
  • Unwillingness to switch providers; and,
  • Network constraints and lack of providers available to patients.

“Simply passing price transparency laws or regulations appears insufficient to facilitate price shopping. Price information must be more accessible and comprehensible,” the study authors wrote in Health Affairs. “Even if information was more accessible, patients’ preference to maintain provider relationships and efforts to coordinate care would limit overall rates of shopping.”

Keeping it Simple Could Be the Key

Researchers suggested non-urgent services in quantity, such as a package of physical therapy visits, may best suit comparison price shopping.

“Price is not being presented in a simplified enough way for consumers to make informed decisions,” Elena Prager, PhD, Assistant Professor, Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern University, told Healthcare Finance.

Ultimately, it’s not enough that healthcare price data is simply made available to consumers, it also must be easily found and understood. Though transparency laws might not be directly aimed at clinical laboratories; lab leaders are nonetheless encouraged to ensure self-pay prices for procedures and diagnostic tests are accessible to the public.

—Donna Marie Pocius

Related Information:

Colorado Hospitals Must Begin Posting Prices for Most Common Procedures on Jan. 1

Colorado Law Requires Hospitals Post Prices for Common Procedures

Issue Brief, Senate Bill 17-065 Price Transparency

Colorado Sings Law Mandating Hospitals Post Self-Pay Prices

New Colorado Law Gives Patients More Transparency on Medical Fees

Colorado Health Access Survey

Healthcare Data Transparency Basics-2016

Americans Support Price Shopping for Health Care, But Few Actually Seek Out Price Information

Vitals Study Shows Consumers Using Cost Transparency Tools Select Clinical Laboratories with Low Test Prices

Direct-to-Consumer Clinical Laboratory Test Developer, EverlyWell, Receives $1 Million in Funding from Shark Tank Investor

Direct-to-consumer medical laboratory testing company gets a major shot in the arm as developers find ready investors and increasing consumer demand

Clinical laboratory tests, usually performed without fanfare, were thrust into the limelight during a recent episode of Shark Tank, an American reality TV show on which aspiring entrepreneurs compete for the attention and partnership funds of various investors.

EverlyWell, a direct-to-consumer (DTC) company that offers at-home lab tests without lab visits or doctor referrals, obtained a $1-million line of credit from Lori Greiner, one of Shark Tank’s participating entrepreneurs, according to MobiHealthNews. EverlyWell has consumers collect their own specimens at home, which are then sent to a medical laboratory testing facility.

Based in Austin, Texas, EverlyWell was founded in 2015 by Julia Taylor Cheek, CEO, with an aim to “make lab tests accessible, simple, and meaningful,” according to a news release. Cheek is also a Venture Partner with NextGen Venture Partners and formerly the Director of Strategy and Operations with the George W. Bush Institute.

“It’s incredible for the industry that we were selected and aired on a show like Shark Tank. It really shows the intersection of what’s happening in consumer healthcare and the high cost in healthcare and that people are really responding to new solutions,” Cheek told MobiHealthNews.

“I think the product is brilliantly crafted,” Greiner stated during the episode’s taping, according to MobiHealthNews. “It’s really nice; it’s really easy. It’s super clear. I think the state of healthcare in our country now is so precarious. I think this gives people an empowered way … to know whether or not they have to go find a doctor,” she concluded.

Greiner offered the $1 million line of credit (with 8% interest) in exchange for a 5% equity stake in EverlyWell, explained Austin360. According to SiliconHillsNews, she did so after reviewing certain EverlyWell financial indicators, including:

  • $2.5 million in revenue in 2016;
  • $5 million expected revenue in 2017; and
  • 20% monthly growth rate.

Julia Cheek, CEO and Founder of EverlyWell (above), in a news release following her success on reality show Shark Tank, said, “We’re leading a major shift in the consumer health marketplace by bringing the lab to consumers’ doorsteps, and we are moving quickly to expand our channels, launch innovative tests, and deliver a world-class customer experience.” (Photo copyright: Forbes/Whitney Martin.)

Physician Review Still Part of Home-testing Process

EverlyWell lists 22 home lab tests on its website and a market share that encompasses 46 states. Shoppers can search for specific tests based on symptoms or by test categories that include:

  • General Wellness;
  • Men’s Health;
  • Women’s Health;
  • Energy and Weight; and
  • Genomic Test (through a partnership with Helix, a personal genomics company).

The most popular test panels include:

  • Food sensitivity;
  • Thyroid;
  • Metabolism;
  • Vitamin D; and,
  • Inflammation.

Prices range from $59 for a glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) test (found under the general wellness category) to $399 for a women’s health testing kit. EverlyWell explains that it has no insurance contracts for these diagnostic tests, which do not require office or lab visits.

The testing process, according to EverlyWell’s website, proceeds as follows:

  • After ordering and paying online, kits arrive at the customer’s home;
  • The consumer self-collects a sample (such as blood spots, dried urine, or saliva) and returns it by prepaid mail to a medical laboratory that partners with EverlyWell. The company notes that it works with CLIA (Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendment)-certified laboratories;
  • A board-certified doctor reviews the lab results; and,
  • A report is available online in a few days.

“Our goal is not to remove the importance of physician review. It’s to make the experience easier for the consumer,” Cheek told Texas CEO Magazine. “We designed a platform that is all about access and empowering consumers to have access to and monitor their own health information,” she continued.

Texas CEO Magazine explained that Cheek was inspired to create the company following “a bad personal experience with health and wellness testing that sent her to seven different specialists, cost $2,000 out of pocket, and left her with pages of unreadable results.”

Since then, the three-year old start-up company has garnered more than $5 million in venture capital, noted the news release.

Many Choices in Direct-to-Consumer Lab Company Market

EverlyWell is not the only player in the DTC clinical laboratory test space. According to MedCityNews, there are at least 20 other DTC lab test companies in the market including:

  • 23andMe;
  • Laboratory Corporation of America (LabCorp);
  • Mapmygenome;
  • Pathway Genomics;
  • Quest Diagnostics (Quest);
  • Sonora Quest Labs;
  • Theranos; and others.

The direct-to-consumer lab test market grew from $15 million to about $150 million in 2015 and includes both large and small clinical laboratory test developers, noted Kalorama Information.

Clearly, the DTC testing market is expanding and garnering the attention of major developers and investors alike. This growing demand for home-testing diagnostics could impact anatomic pathology groups and smaller clinical laboratories in the form of reduced order testing and decreased revenue.

—Donna Marie Pocius

Related Information:

Mail-Order Lab Test Startup EverlyWell Makes Million Dollar Deal on ABC’s Shark Tank

EverlyWell Raises Additional Capital, Bringing Total to $5 Million

This Austin Entrepreneur Scored Historic Deal on Shark Tank

Austin-based EverlyWell Lands Deal on Shark Tank

Innovative Texas Businesses: Empowering Consumers; Julia Cheek’s EverlyWell’s Health and Wellness Testing

Meet the Start-up Revolutionizing the Lab Testing Industry

20 Key Payers in the Direct-to-Consumer Lab Testing Market

Direct-to-Consumer Services Put Down Roots in US Lab Testing Market

Clinical Pathology Laboratories Should Expect More Direct-to-Consumer Testing

Sales of Direct-to-Consumer Clinical Laboratory Genetic Tests Soar, as Members of Congress Debate How Patient Data Should be Handled, Secured, and Kept Private

Some Hospitals Launch Concierge Care Clinics to Raise Revenue, Generating both Controversy and Opportunity for Medical Laboratories

Critics are quick to note that this creates a disparity in how patients access healthcare services

Independent concierge care (AKA concierge medicine) is available to anyone willing to pay the additional costs, which are over and above any health insurance. In a concierge care medical practice, patients pay an annual retainer fee to gain increased access to doctors, specialists, and services, such as faster TATs on clinical laboratory testing.

Depending on the program, concierge care also can offer patients a range of “improved” healthcare benefits, including same-day appointments, extended appointment times, around-the-clock telehealth services, and the experience of receiving care from a physician with a smaller patient roster and in a more personalized manner.

Clinical laboratories and anatomic pathology groups might also find benefit from the concierge care model. Though some concierge providers bill insurance, most work on a cash basis with payment due upfront for services. This ensures prompt payment for any medical laboratory testing provided, reduces administrative overhead, and eliminates the need to deal with payers.

Concierge Medicine Is Not Just for the Wealthy Anymore

Since its inception, concierge care has been considered a luxury available to only financially well-off patients. However, that may soon change. Several major health systems and hospitals are piloting scaled-back versions of concierge care aimed at both middle- and upper-class consumers. However, the programs are not without critics and have elicited both positive and negative responses from healthcare providers.

According to Modern Healthcare, hospitals and health systems currently testing concierge care programs include:

Patients with busy schedules or chronic conditions may see the biggest gains from investing in concierge care. The added flexibility and increased access might allow them to take advantage of care options more frequently. Physicians being able to take their time during consultations and more closely focus on specific concerns is also seen as a benefit to patients.

However, Modern Healthcare points out that patients are not the only ones to see benefits from this arrangement.

“Doctors who have switched to concierge-style medicine sing its praises, claiming the smaller patient panel allows the doctor to build relationships with patients and spend more time on preventive medicine,” Modern Healthcare noted.

In 2016, Dark Daily reported on similar findings from the American Academy of Private Physicians (AAPP). They noted that the average primary care physician in the US maintained between 2,000 and 4,000 patients using the traditional care model. In contrast, the AAPP found concierge physicians maintained on average only 600 patients. (See, “Concierge Medicine Increases in Popularity as More Consumers Opt for This Care Model; Will Clinical Laboratories Exploit This Business Opportunity?” May 6, 2016.)

Paul-Huang-MD-PhD-Mass General-500w@96ppi

Paul Huang, MD, PhD (above right), a concierge doctor at Massachusetts General Hospital, told Modern Healthcare, “We are not doing this just to make more money—we are doing this to make money to put back into the mission of the hospital and to support programs that otherwise would be difficult to support.” (Photo copyright: Modern Healthcare.)

Concierge Care: Controversial Approach or Major Boon to Hospitals?

Since its debut in the 1990s, concierge care has faced scrutiny and opposition from those who feel it discriminates against those who cannot afford retainer premiums and out-of-pocket expenses.

One health system that has drawn such criticism is Michigan Medicine (MM), which is owned by the University of Michigan. As reported by the Detroit Free Press, in a letter to hospital administration, 200 of MM’s own doctors and staff expressed their feelings about the concierge care program, stating, “Victors Care purports to offer ‘better’ healthcare to those with enough money to pay a large access fee. The University of Michigan is a public institution and our commitment is to serve the public, not a private few. We do not feel this is the role of a state university and are unable to justify this to the patients and families we serve.”

Tom Cassels, a consulting partner with the Advisory Board Company, told Modern Healthcare, “It’s a cultural learning curve, because most not-for-profit health systems are geared toward providing the same level of service to everyone in their community. The fundamental model of concierge medicine is to price-discriminate.”

However, media coverage also highlights how the hospitals creating concierge care services are using the financial benefits to help offset the cost of low-margin services or provide care to low-income patients who wouldn’t otherwise have access to care.

Misty Hathaway, Senior Director of the Center for Specialized Services at Mass General, explained to Modern Healthcare that since their physicians are salaried, margins from concierge services can help support “things like our substance abuse program, or other parts of primary care where the margin is a little bit harder to achieve.”

Despite the ethical debates, use of concierge care services continues to gain momentum as middle and upper-class patients find the increased quality of care a worthy value proposition. As more options emerge at major healthcare centers, medical laboratories and other service providers might find that this trend also offers an opportunity to increase revenue with a minimal impact on administrative and billing costs.

—Jon Stone

Related Information:

Concierge Care Taking Hold at Some Large, Urban Hospitals

No Appointment? No Problem … For a Price

Exclusive U-M Medical Plan Buys You ‘Better’ Care, Special Access

The Future of Healthcare Could Be in Concierge Medicine

The Doctor Won’t See You Now

Concierge Medicine Increases in Popularity as More Consumers Opt for This Care Model; Will Clinical Laboratories Exploit This Business Opportunity?

More Doctors Consider Concierge Medicine as Healthcare Reform Looms

Concierge Medicine Trend Continues and Creates New Clients for Clinical Pathology Laboratories

KFF Study Finds HDHPs and Increased Cost-Sharing Requirements for Medical Services are Making Healthcare Increasingly Inaccessible to Consumers

Though ACA reforms may have slowed healthcare spending, rapidly increasing deductibles and cost sharing requirements have many experts questioning if patients can afford care at all, despite the increased availability of insurance coverage

Much of the debate surrounding efforts to replace and repeal the Affordable Care Act (ACA) has centered on premiums as a central facet of out-of-pocket spending. However, new data from a Kaiser Family Foundation (KFF) survey reveals that premiums are only one factor affecting consumers’ ability to pay healthcare bills. High-deductible health plans (HDHPs) are another culprit. This directly impacts clinical laboratories and anatomic pathology groups that find revenues down as more American’s avoid costs by delaying or opting out of testing and treatments.

The KFF report highlights both the complexity of managing healthcare costs and how the current focus on premium prices might miss other important considerations that make healthcare inaccessible to many Americans.

High Deductibles and Consumers’ Lack of Savings

An increasing number of insurance plans now include high deductibles—particularly in the individual markets, though employer-based insurance plans are experiencing steady increases as well.

This leaves consumers facing larger bills and making tough decisions about whether their healthcare is affordable—even with insurance.

When healthcare consumers cannot afford the out-of-pocket costs of healthcare, they are less likely to schedule wellness visits, adhere to treatments, or follow through on physician-ordered clinical laboratory tests they don’t consider essential to their well-being or simply cannot afford.

Even when they follow protocols and recommendations, that does not mean patients will be able to pay medical laboratories for tests performed, or anatomic pathology groups for specialized services, when the bill comes due.

The Ever-Growing Deductible Dilemma

In its 2017 study, “Do Health Plan Enrollees have Enough Money to Pay Cost Sharing?,” the KFF compares median data on liquid assets from 6,254 single and multi-person households—spanning a range of incomes and age brackets—to the average cost of both standard employer-based insurance and individual market insurance deductibles.

They further note that their data modeling and estimates present a “conservative estimate,” because chronic conditions might cause an extended period of out-of-pocket spending, and that median assets might not be available at a single time or throughout the year.

Concerning a previous 2016 KFF study on high-deductible insurance plans, the authors noted in a press release, “In 2016, 83% of covered workers face a deductible for single coverage, which averages $1,478. That’s up $159 or 12% from 2015, and $486 or 49% since 2011. The average deductible for workers who face one is higher for workers in small firms (three to 199 employers) than in large firms ($2,069 vs. $1,238).”

In the press release following KFF’s 2016 survey, Drew Altman, CEO (above), Kaiser Family Foundation, noted, “We’re seeing premiums rising at historically slow rates, which helps workers and employers alike, but it’s made possible in part by the more rapid rise in the deductibles workers must pay.” (Image copyright: Kaiser Family Foundation.)

In their latest look at deductibles and out-of-pocket spending, the KFF study authors note, “About half (53%) of single-person non-elderly households could pay the $2,000 from their liquid assets towards cost sharing, and only 37% could pay $6,000, which … was less than the maximum out-of-pocket limit for single coverage in 2016. For multi-person families, 47% could pay $4,000 from their liquid assets for cost sharing, while only 35% could pay $12,000.”

This sets the stage for the grim picture now facing many Americans. Despite increased access to medical insurance, being able to use the insurance to obtain care can be a struggle for a sizeable part of the lower to middle class population.

Creating a More Affordable Future for Healthcare

Data from the Q1 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) show that growth in high-deductible plans might skew these numbers further still. They found that the number of persons under the age of 65 enrolled in HDHPs increased from 25.3% in 2010 to 40.0% in the first quarter of 2016 despite uninsured rates dropping from 22.3% to 11.9% over the same period.

In the 2017 study, KFF outlines the complexity of the issue: “There are significant differences across the income spectrum … For example, 63% of multi-person households with incomes of 400% of poverty or more could pay $12,000 from liquid assets for cost sharing, compared with only 18% of households with incomes between 150% and 400% of poverty, and 4% of households with incomes below 150% of poverty.”

While there are no simple answers to address today’s increasing deductibles, KFF emphasizes the importance of looking at the bigger picture.

“Much of the discussion around affordability has centered on premium costs. A broader notion of affordability will have to focus on the ability of families,” they note. “To adequately address the issue of affordability of health insurance, reform proposals should be evaluated on the affordability of out-of-pocket costs, especially for low and moderate-income families, and be sensitive to the financial impacts that high cost sharing will have on financial wellbeing.”

In the meantime, lack of access to preventative care and regular checkups can increase long-term healthcare costs and health risks, creating a spiral of financial concerns for patients as well as the healthcare professionals and the clinical laboratories serving them.

—Jon Stone

Related Information:

The Biggest Health Issue We Aren’t Debating

Do Health Plan Enrollees Have Enough Money to Pay Cost Sharing?

Average Annual Workplace Family Health Premiums Rise Modest 3% to $18,142 in 2016; More Workers Enroll in High-Deductible Plans with Savings Option Over Past Two Years

Americans Are Facing Rising Out-of-Pocket Healthcare Costs—Here’s Why

Americans’ Out-of-Pocket Healthcare Costs Are Skyrocketing

Americans Are Shouldering More and More of Their Healthcare Costs

Medicare Out-of-Pocket Costs Seen Rising to Half of Senior Income

Consumer Reaction to High-Deductible Health Plans and Rising Out-of-Pocket Costs Continues to Impact Physicians and Clinical Laboratories

Because of Sizeable Deductibles, More Patients Owe More Money to Clinical Pathology Laboratories, Spurring Labs to Get Smarter about Collecting from Patients

Growth in High Deductible Health Plans Cause Savvy Clinical Labs and Pathology Groups to Collect Full Payment at Time of Service

 

Researchers at Several Top Universities Unveil CRISPR-Based Diagnostics That Show Great Promise for Clinical Laboratories

Three innovative technologies utilizing CRISPR-Cas13, Cas12a, and Cas9 demonstrate how CRISPR might be used for more than gene editing, while highlighting potential to develop new diagnostics for both the medical laboratory and point-of-care (POC) testing markets

CRISPR (Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats) is in the news again! The remarkable genetic-editing technology is at the core of several important developments in clinical laboratory and anatomic pathology diagnostics, which Dark Daily has covered in detail for years.

Now, scientists at three universities are investigating ways to expand CRISPR’s use. They are using CRISPR to develop new diagnostic tests, or to enhance the sensitivity of existing DNA tests.

One such advancement improves the sensitivity of SHERLOCK (Specific High Sensitivity Reporter unLOCKing), a CRISPR-based diagnostic tool developed by a team at MIT. The new development harnesses the DNA slicing traits of CRISPR to adapt it as a multifunctional tool capable of acting as a biosensor. This has resulted in a paper-strip test, much like a pregnancy test, that can that can “display test results for a single genetic signature,” according to MIT News.

Such a medical laboratory test would be highly useful during pandemics and in rural environments that lack critical resources, such as electricity and clean water.

One Hundred Times More Sensitive Medical Laboratory Tests!

Co-lead authors Jonathan Gootenberg, PhD Candidate, Harvard University and Broad Institute; and Omar Abudayyeh, PhD and MD student, MIT, published their findings in Science. They used CRISPR Cas13 and Cas12a to chop up RNA in a sample and RNA-guided DNA binding to target genetic sequences. Presence of targeted sequences is then indicated using a paper-based testing strip like those used in consumer pregnancy tests.

MIT News highlighted the high specificity and ease-of-use of their system in detecting Zika and Dengue viruses simultaneously. However, researchers stated that the system can target any genetic sequence. “With the original SHERLOCK, we were detecting a single molecule in a microliter, but now we can achieve 100-fold greater sensitivity … That’s especially important for applications like detecting cell-free tumor DNA in blood samples, where the concentration of your target might be extremely low,” noted Abudayyeh.

Feng-Zhang-Broad-Institute-500w@96ppi

“The [CRISPR] technology demonstrates potential for many healthcare applications, including diagnosing infections in patients and detecting mutations that confer drug resistance or cause cancer,” stated senior author Feng Zhang, PhD. Zhang, shown above in the MIT lab named after him, is a Core Institute Member of the Broad Institute, Associate Professor in the departments of Brain and Cognitive Sciences and Biological Engineering at MIT, and a pioneer in the development of CRISPR gene-editing tools. (Photo copyright: MIT.)

Creating a Cellular “Black Box” using CRISPR

Another unique use of CRISPR technology involved researchers David Liu, PhD, and Weixin Tang, PhD, of Harvard University and Howard Hughes Medical Institute (HHMI). Working in the Feng Zhang laboratory at the Broad Institute, they developed a sort of “data recorder” that records events as CRISPR-Cas9 is used to remove portions of a cell’s DNA.

They published the results of their development of CRISPR-mediated analog multi-event recording apparatus (CAMERA) systems, in Science. The story was also covered by STAT.

“The order of stimuli can be recorded through an overlapping guide RNA design and memories can be erased and re-recorded over multiple cycles,” the researchers noted. “CAMERA systems serve as ‘cell data recorders’ that write a history of endogenous or exogenous signaling events into permanent DNA sequence modifications in living cells.”

This creates a system much like the “black box” recorders in aircraft. However, using Cas9, data is recorded at the cellular level. “There are a lot of questions in cell biology where you’d like to know a cell’s history,” Liu told STAT.

While researchers acknowledge that any medical applications are in the far future, the technology holds the potential to capture and replay activity on the cellular level—a potentially powerful tool for oncologists, pathologists, and other medical specialists.

Using CRISPR to Detect Viruses and Infectious Diseases

Another recently developed technology—DNA Endonuclease Targeted CRISPR Trans Reporter (DETECTR)—shows even greater promise for utility to anatomic pathology groups and clinical laboratories.

Also recently debuted in Science, the DETECTR system is a product of Jennifer Doudna, PhD, and a team of researchers at the University of California Berkeley and HHMI. It uses CRISPR-Cas12a’s indiscriminate single-stranded DNA cleaving as a biosensor to detect different human papillomaviruses (HPVs). Once detected, it signals to indicate the presence of HPV in human cells.

Despite the current focus on HPVs, the researchers told Gizmodo they believe the same methods could identify other viral or bacterial infections, detect cancer biomarkers, and uncover chromosomal abnormalities.

Future Impact on Clinical Laboratories of CRISPR-based Diagnostics

Each of these new methods highlights the abilities of CRISPR both as a data generation tool and a biosensor. While still in the research phases, they offer yet another possibility of improving efficiency, targeting specific diseases and pathogens, and creating new assays and diagnostics to expand medical laboratory testing menus and power the precision medicine treatments of the future.

As CRISPR-based diagnostics mature, medical laboratory directors might find that new capabilities and assays featuring these technologies offer new avenues for remaining competitive and maintaining margins.

However, as SHERLOCK demonstrates, it also highlights the push for tests that produce results with high-specificity, but which do not require specialized medical laboratory training and expensive hardware to read. Similar approaches could power the next generation of POC tests, which certainly would affect the volume, and therefore the revenue, of independent clinical laboratories and hospital/health system core laboratories.

—Jon Stone

 

Related Information:

Multiplexed and Portable Nucleic Acid Detection Platform with Cas13, Cas12a, and Csm6

Rewritable Multi-Event Analog Recording in Bacterial and Mammalian Cells

CRISPR-Cas12a Target Binding Unleashes Indiscriminate Single-Stranded DNase Activity

Researchers Advance CRISPR-Based Tool for Diagnosing Disease

CRISPR Isn’t Just for Gene Editing Anymore

CRISPR’s Pioneers Find a Way to Use It as a Glowing Virus Detector

With New CRISPR Inventions, Its Pioneers Say, You Ain’t Seen Nothin’ Yet

New CRISPR Tools Can Detect Infections Like HPV, Dengue, and Zika

Breakthrough DNA Editing Tool May Help Pathologists Develop New Diagnostic Approaches to Identify and Treat the Underlying Causes of Diseases at the Genetic Level

CRISPR-Related Tool Set to Fundamentally Change Clinical Laboratory Diagnostics, Especially in Rural and Remote Locations

Harvard Researchers Demonstrate a New Method to Deliver Gene-editing Proteins into Cells: Possibly Creating a New Diagnostic Opportunity for Pathologists

PwC Predicts Forces Shaping Healthcare in 2018; Some Could Impact Clinical Laboratories and Anatomic Pathology Groups

PwC’s list of 12 factors that will shape the healthcare landscape in 2018 calls attention to many new innovations Dark Daily has reported on that will impact how medical laboratories perform their tests

PwC’s Health Research Institute (HRI) issued its annual report, detailing the 12 factors expected to impact the healthcare industry the most in 2018. Dark Daily culled items from the list that will most likely impact clinical laboratories and anatomic pathology groups. They include:

How clinical laboratory leaders respond to these items could, in part, be determined by new technologies.

AI Is Everywhere, Including in the Medical Laboratory

Artificial intelligence is becoming highly popular in the healthcare industry. According to an article in Healthcare IT News, business executives who were polled want to “automate tasks such as routine paperwork (82%), scheduling (79%), timesheet entry (78%), and accounting (69%) with AI tools.” However, only about 20% of the executives surveyed have the technology in place to use AI effectively. The majority—about 75%—plan to invest in AI over the next three years—whether they are ready or not.

One such example of how AI could impact clinical laboratories was demonstrated by a recent advancement in microscope imaging. Researchers at the University of Waterloo (UW) developed a new spectral light fusion microscope that captures images in full color and is far less expensive than microscopes currently on the market.

“In medicine, we know that pathology is the gold standard in helping to analyze and diagnose patients, but that standard is difficult to come by in areas that can’t afford it,” Alexander Wong, PhD, one of the UW researchers, told CLP.

“The newly developed microscope has no lens and uses artificial intelligence and mathematical models of light to develop 3D images at a large scale. To get the same effect using current technologies—using a machine that costs several hundred thousand dollars—a technician is required to ‘stitch together’ multiple images from traditional microscopes,” CLP noted.

Healthcare Intermediaries Could Become Involved with Clinical Laboratory Data

Pricing is one of the biggest concerns for patients and government entities. This is a particular concern for the pharmaceutical sector. PwC’s report notes that “stock values for five of the largest intermediaries in the pharmacy supply chain have slumped in the last two years as demands for lower costs and better outcomes have intensified.”

Thus, according to PwC, pressure may come to bear on intermediaries such as Pharmacy Benefit Managers (PBMs) and wholesalers, to “prove value and success in creating efficiencies or risk losing their place in the supply chain.”

Similar pressures to lower costs and improve efficiency are at work in the clinical laboratory industry as well. Dark Daily reported on one such cost-cutting measure that involves shifting healthcare payments toward digital assets using blockchains. The technology digitally links trusted payers and providers with patient data, including medical laboratory test results. (See, “Blockchain Technology Could Impact How Clinical Laboratories and Pathology Groups Exchange Lab Test Data,” September 29, 2017.)

PwC 2018 Annual Report

PwC’s latest report predicts 12 forces that will continue to impact healthcare, including clinical laboratories and anatomic pathology groups, in 2018. Click on the image of the cover above to access an online version of the report. (Photo copyright: PwC/Issuu.)

The Opioid Crisis Remains at the Forefront

Healthcare will continue to feel the impact of the opioid crisis, according to the PwC report. Medical laboratories will continue to be involved in the diagnosis and treatment of opioid addition, which has garnered the full attention of the federal government and has become a multi-million-dollar industry.

Security Remains a Concern

Cybersecurity will continue to impact every facet of healthcare in 2018. Healthcare IT News reported, “While 95% of provider executives believe their organization is protected against cybersecurity attacks, only 36% have access management policies and just 34% have a cybersecurity audit process.”

Patients are aware of the risks and are often skeptical of health information technology (HIT), Dark Daily reported in June of last year. Clinical laboratories must work together with providers and healthcare organizations to audit their security measures. Recognizing the importance of the topic, the National Independent Laboratory Association (NILA) has named cybersecurity for laboratory information systems (LIS) a focus area.

Patient Experience a Priority

Although there have been significant improvements in the area of administrative tasks, there is still an enormous demand for a better patient experience, including in clinical laboratories. Healthcare providers want patients to make changes for the better that ultimately improve outcomes and the patient experience is one path toward that goal.

“Provider reimbursements will be based in part on patient engagement efforts such as promoting self-management and coaching patients between visits,” PwC noted in its report, a fact that Dark Daily has continually reported on for years. (See, “Pathologists and Clinical Lab Executives Take Note: Medicare Has New Goals and Deadlines for Transitioning from Fee-For-Service Healthcare Models to Value-Based Reimbursement,” April 1, 2015.)

Demands for Price Transparency Increase

As they follow healthcare reform guidelines to increase quality while lowering costs, state governments will continue to ramp up pressure on healthcare providers and third parties in the area of pricing. Rather than simply requiring organizations to report on pricing, states are moving towards legislating price controls, as Dark Daily reported in February.

Social Factors Affect Healthcare Access

The transition to value-based care makes the fact that patients’ socioeconomic statuses matter when it comes to their health. “The most important part of getting good results is not the knowledge of the doctors, not the treatment, not the drug. It’s the logistics, the social support, the ability to arrange babysitting,” David Berg, MD, co-founder of Redirect Health told PwC.

One such transition that is helping patients gain access to healthcare involves microhospitals and their adoption of telemedicine technologies, which Dark Daily reported on in March.

“Right now, they seem to be popping up in large urban and suburban metro areas,” Priya Bathija, Vice President, Value Initiative American Hospital Association, told NPR. “We really think they have the potential to help in vulnerable communities that have a lack of access.”

Data Collection Challenges Pharma

The 21st Century Cures Act, along with the potential exploitation of Big Data, will make it possible for organizations to gain faster, less expensive approvals from the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). As Dark Daily noted in April, the FDA “released guidelines on how the agency intends to regulate—or not regulate—digital health, clinical-decision-support (CDS), and patient-decision-support (PDS) software applications.

“Physician decision-support software utilizes medical laboratory test data as a significant part of a full dataset used to guide caregivers,” Dark Daily noted. “Thus, if the FDA makes it easier for developers to get regulatory clearance for these types of products, that could positively impact medical labs’ ability to service their client physicians.”

Healthcare Delivery During and Following Natural Disasters

PwC predicts the long-term physical results, financial limitations, and supply chain disruptions following natural disasters will continue to affect healthcare in 2018. The devastation can prevent many people from receiving adequate, timely healthcare.

However, new laboratory-on-a-chip (LOC) and other “lab-on-a-…” testing technologies, coupled with medical drone deliver services, can bring much need healthcare to remote, unreachable areas that lack electricity and other services. (See Dark Daily, “Lab-on-a-Fiber Technology Continues to Highlight Nano-Scale Clinical Laboratory Diagnostic Testing in Point-of-Care Environments,” April 2, 2018, and, “Johns Hopkins’ Test Drone Travels 161 Miles to Set Record for Delivery Distance of Clinical Laboratory Specimens,” November 15, 2017.)

PwC’s report is an important reminder of from where the clinical laboratory/anatomic pathology industry has come, and to where it is headed. Sharp industry leaders will pay attention to the predictions contained therein.

—Dava Stewart

Related Information:

Top Health Industry Issue of 2018

PwC Health Research Institute Top Health Industry Issues of 2018 Report: Issuu Slide Presentation

12 Defining Healthcare Issues of 2018

Is Laboratory Medicine Ready for Artificial Intelligence?

Artificial Intelligence Imaging Research Facilitates Disease Diagnosis

Blockchain Technology Could Impact How Clinical Laboratories and Pathology Groups Exchange Lab Test Data

Skepticism, Distrust of HIT by Healthcare Consumers Undermines Physician Adoption of Medical Reporting Technologies, But Is Opportunity for Pathology Groups, Clinical Laboratories

Pathologists and Clinical Lab Executives Take Note: Medicare Has New Goals and Deadlines for Transitioning from Fee-For-Service Healthcare Models to Value-Based Reimbursement

Researchers Point to Cost of Services, including Medical Laboratories, for Healthcare Spending Gap Between the US and Other Developed Countries

Telemedicine and Microhospitals Could Make Up for Reducing Numbers of Primary Care Physicians in US Urban and Metro Suburban Areas

New FDA Regulations of Clinical Decision-Support/Digital Health Applications and Medical Software Has Consequences for Medical Laboratories

Lab-on-a-Fiber Technology Continues to Highlight Nano-Scale Clinical Laboratory Diagnostic Testing in Point-of-Care Environments

Johns Hopkins’ Test Drone Travels 161 Miles to Set Record for Delivery Distance of Clinical Laboratory Specimens

;