Many other healthcare systems also are partnering with private genetic testing companies to pursue research that drive precision medicine goals
It is certainly unusual when a major health network announces that it will give away free genetic tests to 10,000 of its patients as a way to lay the foundation to expand clinical services involving precision medicine. However, pathologists and clinical laboratory managers should consider this free genetic testing program to be the latest marketplace sign that acceptance of genetic medicine continues to move ahead.
Notably, it is community hospitals that are launching this
new program linked to clinical laboratory research that uses genetic tests for
specific, treatable conditions. The purpose of such genetic research is to
identify patients who would benefit from test results that identify the best
therapies for their specific conditions, a core goal of precision medicine.
Clinical laboratory leaders will be interested in this
initiative, as well other partnerships between healthcare systems and private
genetic testing companies aimed at identifying and enrolling patients in
research studies for disease treatment protocols and therapies.
The Future of Precision Medicine
Modern Healthcare reported that data from the WholeMe DNA study, which was funded through donations to the AdventHealth Foundation, also will be used by the healthcare network for research beyond FH, as AdventHealth develops its genomics services. The project’s cost is estimated to reach $2 million.
“Genomics is the future of medicine, and the field is rapidly evolving. As we began our internal discussions about genomics and how to best incorporate it at AdventHealth, we knew research would play a strong role,” Wes Walker MD, Director, Genomics and Personalized Health, and Associate CMIO at AdventHealth, told Becker’s Hospital Review.
“We decided to focus on familial hypercholesterolemia
screening initially because it’s a condition that is associated with
life-threatening cardiovascular events,” he continued. “FH is treatable once
identified and finding those who have the condition can lead to identifying
other family members who are subsequently identified who never knew they had
the disease.”
The AdventHealth Orlando website states that participants in the WholeMe study receive information stored in a confidential data repository that meets HIPAA security standards. The data covers ancestry and 22 other genetic traits, such as:
Asparagus Odor Detection
Bitter Taste
Caffeine Metabolism
Cilantro Taste Aversion
Circadian Rhythm
Coffee Consumption
Delayed Sleep
Earwax Type
Endurance vs Power
Exercise Impact on Weight
Eye Color
Freckling
Hair Curl and Texture
Hand Grip Strength
Height
Lactose Tolerance
Sleep Duration
Sleep Movement
Sleeplessness
Sweet Tooth
Tan vs. Sunburn
Waist Size
Those who test positive for a disease-causing FH variant will be referred by AdventHealth for medical laboratory blood testing, genetic counseling, and a cardiologist visit, reported the Ormond Beach Observer.
One in 250 people have FH, and 90% of them are undiagnosed,
according to the FH Foundation,
which also noted that children have a 50% chance of inheriting FH from parents
with the condition.
AdventHealth plans to expand the free testing beyond central
Florida to its 46 other hospitals located in nine states, Modern Healthcare
noted.
Other Genetics Data Company/Healthcare Provider Partnerships
Helix (above) is one of the world’s largest CLIA-certified, CAP-accredited next-generation sequencing labs. The partnership with AdventHealth offered study participants Exome+: a panel-grade medical exome enhanced by more than 300,000 informative non-coding regions; a co-branded ancestry + traits DNA product for all participants; secure storage of genomic data for the lifetime of the participant; infrastructure and data to facilitate research; and in-house clinical and scientific expertise, according to Helix’s website. (Photo copyright: Orlando Sentinel.)
Business Insider noted that Helix has focused on clinical partnerships for about a year and seems to be filling a niche in the genetic testing market.
“Helix is able to sidestep the costs of direct-to-consumer
marketing and clinical test development, while still expanding its customer
base through predefined hospital networks. And the company is in a prime
position to capitalize on providers’ interest in population health management,”
Business Insider reported.
Ochsner’s program is the first “fully digital population
health program” aimed at including clinical genomics data in primary care in an
effort to affect patients’ health, FierceHealthcare
reported.
Hereditary breast and ovarian cancer due to
mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes;
Lynch
syndrome, associated with colorectal and other cancers; and
FH.
Color also offers genetic testing and whole genome sequencing services to NorthShore’s DNA10K program, which plans to test 10,000 patients for risk for hereditary cancers and heart diseases, according to news release.
And, Jefferson Health offered Color’s genetic testing to the healthcare system’s 33,000 employees, 10,000 of which signed up to learn their health risks as well as ancestry, a Color blog post states.
“Understanding the genome warning signals of every patient will be an essential part of wellness planning and health management,” said Geisinger Chief Executive Officer David Feinberg, MD, when he announced the new initiative at the HLTH (Health) Conference in Las Vegas. “Geisinger patients will be able to work with their family physician to modify their lifestyle and minimize risks that may be revealed,” he explained. “This forecasting will allow us to provide truly anticipatory healthcare instead of the responsive sick care that has long been the industry default across the nation.”
It will be interesting to see how and if genetic tests—free
or otherwise—will advance precision medicine goals and population health
treatments. It’s important for medical laboratory leaders to be involved in health
network agreements with genetic testing companies. And clinical laboratories should
be informed whenever private companies share their test results data with
patients and primary care providers.
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.”
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.
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.
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.
According to Damo Consulting’s 2019 Healthcare
IT Demand Survey, when it comes to spending money on information
technology (IT), healthcare executives believe AI and digital healthcare
technologies—though promising—need more development.
Damo’s report notes that 71% of healthcare providers
surveyed expect their IT budgets to grow by 20% in 2019. However, much of that
growth will be allocated to improving EHR functionality, Healthcare Purchasing News reported
in its analysis of Damo survey data.
As healthcare executives plan upgrades to their EHRs,
hospital-based medical laboratories will need to take steps to ensure
interoperability, while avoiding disruption to lab workflow during transition.
The survey also noted that some providers that are considering
investing in AI and digital health technology are struggling to understand the
market, the news release states.
“Digital and AI are emerging as critical areas for technology spend among healthcare enterprises in 2019. However, healthcare executives are realistic about their technology needs versus their need to improve care delivery. They find the currently available digital health solutions in the market are not very mature,” explained Paddy Padmanabhan (above), Chief Executive Officer of Damo Consulting, in a news release. (Photo copyright: The Authors Guild.)
Providers More
Positive Than Vendors on IT Spend
Damo Consulting is a Chicago-area based healthcare and
digital advisory firm. In November 2018, Damo surveyed 64 healthcare executives
(40 technology and service leaders, and 24 healthcare enterprise executives). Interestingly, healthcare providers were more
positive than the technology developers on IT spending plans, reported HITInfrastructure.com, which
detailed the following survey findings:
79% of healthcare executives anticipate high
growth in IT spending in 2019, but only 60% of tech company representatives
believe that is so.
75% of healthcare executives and 80% of vendor
representatives say change in healthcare IT makes buying decisions harder.
71% of healthcare executives and 55% of vendors say
federal government policies help IT spending.
50% of healthcare executives associate
immaturity with digital solution offerings.
42% of healthcare providers say they lack
resources to launch digital.
“While information technology vendors are aggressively
marketing ‘digital’ and ‘AI,’ healthcare executives note that the currently
available solutions in these areas are not very mature. These executives are
confused by the buzz around ‘AI’ and ‘digital,’ the changing landscape of who
is playing what role, and the blurred lines of capabilities and competition,” noted
Padmanabhan in the survey report.
The survey also notes that “Health systems are firmly
committed to their EHR vendors. Despite the many shortcomings, EHR systems
appear to be the primary choice for digital initiatives among health systems at
this stage.”
Some Healthcare
Providers Starting to Use AI
Even as EHRs receive the lion’s share of healthcare IT
spends, some providers are devoting significant resources to AI-related
projects and processes.
For example, clinical
pathologists may be intrigued by work being conducted at Cleveland Clinic’s Center for
Clinical Artificial Intelligence (CCAI), launched in March. The CCAI is using
AI and machine learning in pathology, genetics, and cancer research, with the
ultimate goal of improving patient outcomes, reported Becker’s Hospital Review.
“We’re not in it because AI is cool, but because we believe
it can advance medical research and collaboration between medicine and
industry—with a focus on the patient,” Aziz Nazha, MD, Clinical
Hematology and Oncology Specialist and Director of the CCAI, stated in an
article posted by the American Medical Association (AMA).
AI Predictions Lower
Readmissions and Improve Outcomes
Cleveland Clinic’s CCAI reportedly has gathered data from
1.6 million patients, which it uses to predict length-of-stays and reduce
inappropriate readmissions. “But a prediction itself is insufficient,” Nazha told
the AMA. “If we can intervene, we can change the prognosis and make things
better.”
The CCAI’s ultimate goal is to use predictive models to “develop
a new generation of physician-data scientists and medical researchers.” Toward
that end, Nazha notes how his team used AI to develop genomic biomarkers that identify
whether a certain chemotherapy drug—azacitidine (aka,
azacytidine and marketed as Vidaza)—will work for specific patients. This is a
key goal of precision
medicine.
CCAI also created an AI prediction model that outperforms
existing prognosis scoring systems for patients with Myelodysplastic
syndromes (MDS), a form of cancer in bone marrow.
Meanwhile, at Johns
Hopkins Hospital, AI applications track availability of beds and more. The
Judy Reitz Capacity Command Center, built in collaboration with GE Healthcare Partners, is a
5,200 square feet center outfitted with AI apps and staff to transfer patients
and help smooth coordination of services, according to a news release.
Forbes described the Reitz command
center as a “cognitive hospital” and reports that it has essentially enabled
Johns Hopkins to expand its capacity by 16 beds without undergoing bricks-and-mortar-style
construction.
In short, medical laboratory leaders may want to interact
with IT colleagues to ensure uninterrupted workflows as EHR functionality evolves.
Furthermore, AI developments suggest opportunities for clinical laboratories to
leverage patient data and assist in improving the diagnostic accuracy of providers
in ways that improve patient care.
In what could be a major boon to clinical laboratories and healthcare providers, researchers found that fears of rampant testing and ballooning spending due to results of whole-genome sequencing may be less of a concern than opponents claim
Clinical laboratory testing and personalized medicine (AKA, precision medicine) continue to reshape how the healthcare industry approaches treating disease. And, whole-genome sequencing (WGS) has shown promise in helping in vitro diagnostic (IVD) companies develop specific treatments for specific patients’ needs based on their existing conditions and physiology.
Nevertheless, WGS development and the ensuing controversy continues. This has motivated researchers at Brigham and Women’s Hospital (BWH) in Boston to engage in a study that compares the upfront costs of WGS to the downstream costs of healthcare, in an attempt to determine if and how whole-genome sequencing does actually impact the cost of care.
Are Doctors Acting Responsibly?
The MedSeq Project study, published in Genetics in Medicine, a journal of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics, involved 200 people—100 of them healthy, the other 100 diagnosed with cardiomyopathy. Roughly half of each group underwent whole-genome sequencing, while the other half used family history to guide treatments and procedures. The project then collected data on downstream care costs for the next six months for each group to compare how whole-genome sequencing might impact the final totals.
“Whole genome sequencing is coming of age, but there’s fear that with these advancements will come rocketing healthcare costs,” lead author Kurt Christensen, PhD, Instructor of Medicine in the Division of Genetics at BWH, stated in a press release.
“Our pilot study is the first to provide insights into the cost of integrating whole-genome sequencing into the everyday practice of medicine,” noted Kurt Christensen, PhD, lead author of the Brigham and Women’s Hospital study. “Our data [provides] reassurance that physicians seem to be responding responsibly and that we’re not seeing evidence of dramatically increased downstream spending.” (Photo copyright: ResearchGate.)
Clinical Laboratory Testing Largest Difference in Cost/Services Rendered
Within the healthy volunteer group, patients who based treatment decisions solely on their family medical history averaged $2,989 in medical costs over the next six months. Those who received WGS incurred $3,670 in costs.
Services also remained relatively consistent between both groups. The WGS group averaging 5.5 outpatient lab tests and 8.4 doctor visits across the period, while the family history group averaged 4.4 outpatient lab tests and 6.9 doctor visits.
Within the cardiology patient group, however, the dynamic flipped. WGS recipients averaged $8,109 in spending, while the family history group averaged $9,670. Study authors attribute this to the possibility of treatments while being hospitalized for concerns unrelated to the study.
When removing hospitalizations from the data set, the WGS group averaged $5,392, while the family history group averaged $4,962—a result similar to that of the healthy group.
Utilization of services was also similar. The WGS group averaged 7.8 doctor visits, while the family history group averaged 7.2 visits. However, the outpatient lab testing spread was wider than any other group in the study. WGS patients averaged 9.5 tests compared to the 6.5 of the family history group.
Unanswered Questions
In their report, the study’s authors acknowledged a range of questions still unanswered by their initial research.
First, the project took place at a facility in which physicians were educated in genetics, had contacts familiar with genetics, and had the support of a genome resource center. The level of experience with genetics may also have prevented additional spending by tempering responses to results.
Although the whole-genome sequencing that took place during the project uncovered genetic variants known to or likely to cause disease within the healthy population, this did not trigger the wave of testing or panic many opponents of genetic sequencing predicted.
Authors also acknowledge that a longer, larger study would offer more conclusive results. Researchers are planning for a longer 5-year study to verify their initial findings. However, study co-author Robert Green, MD, Director of the Genomes2People Research Program at BWH told STAT, “… downstream medical costs of sequencing may be far more modest than the common narrative suggests.”
Further Research Needed
The BWH researchers acknowledged that monetary cost is only one facet of the impact of genetic sequencing results. “Patient time costs were not assessed,” the study authors pointed out. “Nor were the effects of disclosure on participants’ family members, precluding a complete analysis from a societal perspective.”
Lastly, they noted that while the sample size sufficed to verify their results, diversity was lacking. In particular, they mentioned that the participant pool was “more educated and less ethnically diverse than the general population.”
The cost of genetic sequencing and similar technologies continue to drop as automation and innovation make the process more accessible to clinicians and healthcare providers. This could further impact longer studies of the overall cost of sequencing and other genetics-based tools.
For medical laboratories, these results offer proof to both payers and physicians on the value of services in relation to the overall cost of care—a critical concern, as margins continue to shrink and regulations focus on efficiency across a broad spectrum of healthcare-related service industries.
