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

Australia’s NSW Health Chooses Epic for its Statewide Patient EHR

Five clinical laboratory information systems are part of the transition that will create a single statewide EMR for all New South Wales patients

In a massive project, Australia’s New South Wales Ministry of Health (NSW Health) has selected health information system developer Epic to unify its five pathology laboratory information management systems (LIMS), nine electronic medical record systems (EMR), and six patient administration systems (PAS) into a statewide single digital patient record (SDPR).

According to ITnews, providers in New South Wales currently use LIMS systems by Citadel Health and Integrated Software Solutions OMNI-Lab, EMR systems by Oracle Cerner and Orion Health, and patient administration systems from Oracle Cerner and DXC.

“The SDPR will consolidate geographically fragmented EMR, PAS, and LIMS systems to create a detailed lifelong patient record and deliver cost savings,” NSW Health said in a news release.

NSW Health is the largest public health system in Australia with more than 220 public hospitals, 16 Local Health Districts, and three Specialty Networks. NSW Health Pathology operates more than 60 pathology laboratories (clinical laboratories in the US) and has 150 patient service centers.

Andrew Montague

“While this initiative will provide untold benefits to all the patients of NSW, we are excited about its potential for improving the health outcomes of our regional patients,” said Andrew Montague (above), former Chief Executive, Central Coast Local Health District in a press release. “By enabling greater collaboration across all local health districts and specialty health networks, the Single Digital Patient Record will provide clinicians with even better tools to keep the patient at the center of everything we do.” This project is more market evidence of the trend to bring clinical laboratory test results from multiple lab sites into a single data repository. (Photo copyright: Coast Community News.)

Cloud-based Realtime Access to Patient Records

Australia has a population of about 26 million and New South Wales, a state on the east coast, is home to more than eight million people. Though the scale of healthcare in Australia is much smaller than in the US, this is still a major project to pull patient data together from all the NSW hospitals, physicians’ offices, and other healthcare providers such as clinical laboratories and pathology practices.

With the change, NSW clinicians will benefit from a cloud–based system offering up real-time access to patients’ medical records, NSW Health Pathology Chief Executive Tracey McCosker told ITnews.

“Patients and our busy staff will benefit from clinical insights gained from the capture of important new data. Our work in pathology is vital to the diagnostic process and developing a statewide laboratory information management system will ensure we provide the best possible services,” McCosker told ITnews.

The KLAS Research report, “US Hospital Market Share 2022,” states that Epic, located in Verona, Wisconsin, has the largest US electronic health record (EHR) market share, Healthgrades noted. According to KLAS:

NSW Health’s decision to engage Epic came after a process involving 350 clinicians, scientists, and technical experts, Zoran Bolevich, MD, Chief Executive of eHealth NSW and NSW Health’s Chief Information Officer, told ITnews.  

NSW Health’s Goal for Statewide Digital Patient Record

It was in December 2020 when NSW Health announced its plan to create the SDPR. 

“Our vision is to be able to provide a single, holistic, statewide view of every patient—and for that information to be readily accessible to anyone involved in the patient’s care,” Bolevich said in the news release.

The SDPR, according to NSW Health, will address the following:    

Challenges:

  • Current systems not connected statewide.
  • Inaccessible patient data.
  • Duplicative data collection.
  • Gaps in decision-making.

Goals:

  • Improve health outcomes.
  • Create patient centricity.
  • Leverage insights.

NSW’s government has already invested more than $106 million in the SDPR, Healthcare IT News reported.

Other Large EHR Rollouts

NSW Health is not the only large organization to take on such an ambitious project of creating a large-scale digital patient record. And not always to a successful conclusion.

The US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)—also intent on EHR modernization—recently announced it is suspending roll-out of the Oracle Cerner EHR at VA centers until June 2023 to address technical issues affecting appointments, referrals, and test results.

Four VA centers in Washington, Oregon, and Ohio already went live with the system in 2022.

“We are delaying all future deployments of the new EHR while we fully assess performance and address every concern. Veterans and clinicians deserve a seamless, modernized health record system, and we will not rest until they get it,” said Deputy Secretary of Veterans Affairs Donald Remy, JD, in a news release.

For its part, Oracle Cerner wrote federal lawmakers noting the importance of continuing the project, which will move the VA away from its former VistA health information system. 

“Modernization requires change and some short-term pain for the long-term benefits of a modern technology infrastructure,” noted Oracle Cerner Executive Vice President Ken Glueck in the letter, Becker’s Health IT reported. “A modernization project of this scale and scope necessarily involves time to untangle the decades of customized processes established in support of VistA, which inevitably involves challenges.”

NSW Health’s goal is to build a single repository of health information—including lab test results from multiple clinical laboratory sites. When finished NSW Health expects that sharing patient data will contribute to producing better healthcare outcomes.

However, the VA’s experience—and several other similar attempts at large-scale electronic patient record installations—suggest the work ahead will not be easy. But for NSW Health, it may be worth the effort.   

—Donna Marie Pocius

Related Information:

NSW Health Taps Epic for Statewide, Single Digital Patient Record

Single Digital Patient Record Set to Deliver Vastly Improved Patient Experience

NSW Health to Partner with Epic in the Next Step Towards its Digital Healthcare System

US Hospital Market Share 2022: Strong Purchasing Energy across Large, Small, and Standalone Hospitals

EHR Market Share 2021: 10 Things to Know About Major Players Epic, Cerner, Meditech and Allscripts

Single Digital Patient Record (SDPR)

New South Wales Invests $106 Million in Single EMR System

OIG Report Finds Management Deficiencies at VA Hospital Kept Alcohol-Impaired Pathologist on the Job

VA Office of Inspector General recommends changes in management processes after doctor is sentenced to long federal prison term

In a compelling report, the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Office of Inspector General (OIG) found that a host of management failures and “deficiencies in the facility’s quality management processes” at an Arkansas VA hospital contributed to “thousands of diagnostic errors” throughout the tenure of the facility’s Chief of Pathology and Laboratory Medical Services Robert Morris Levy, MD.

Levy oversaw pathology and medical laboratory services at the Fayetteville VA Medical Center from 2005 until 2018. The hospital is part of the Veterans Health Care System of the Ozarks.

The OIG’s report, titled, “Pathology Oversight Failures at the Veterans Health Care System of the Ozarks in Fayetteville, Arkansas,” pointed to “deficiencies in quality management processes” and a “failure to foster a culture of accountability,” which allowed Levy to practice at the facility despite staff concerns that he appeared to be impaired by alcohol while on duty.

“Any one of these breakdowns could cause harmful results,” the report states. “Occurring together and over an extended period of time, the consequences were devastating, tragic, and deadly.”

The OIG report’s findings on how hospital and laboratory administrators dealt with Levy over the years of his employment at the Fayetteville VA Medical Center demonstrate why clinical and pathology lab leaders need to be constantly vigilant in how various quality and compliance procedures are administered in their laboratories. When people and processes are not meeting acceptable standards, it is patients who are at risk of being harmed.

In January, the federal court in Arkansas sentenced Levy to “240 months in federal prison, followed by three years of supervised release and ordered [him] to pay $497,745.70 in restitution for one count each of mail fraud and involuntary manslaughter,” according to court documents.

Robert Morris Levy, MD

In its coverage of the federal case against Robert Morris Levy, MD (above in a jailhouse photo), former Chief of Pathology and Laboratory Medical Services at the Fayetteville VA Medical Center, The Washington Post wrote, “Levy’s supervisors failed to heed early warnings that he was endangering patients and then were slow to act, according to internal VA documents, court filings, and interviews with 20 congressional officials, veterans and current and former VA employees.” Clinical laboratory managers and hospital pathologists would be well advised to study the VA’s conclusions in its recent report. (Photo copyright: The Washington Post.)

VA Pathologist Received Multiple Suspensions, then Termination

Following his removal in April 2018, the OIG assembled a team of pathologists to review nearly 34,000 cases interpreted by Levy since he began working at the VA hospital. They identified more than 3,000 errors, of which 589 were classified as “major diagnostic discrepancies” potentially having a negative impact on patient care.

Of the 589, 34 were deemed serious enough to require institutional disclosures, defined as a discussion with the patient or the patient’s representative revealing “that an adverse event has occurred during the patient’s care that resulted in or is reasonably expected to result in death or serious injury.”

The OIG report cited at least two deaths likely resulting from misdiagnoses.

Levy’s hospital privileges were initially suspended in March 2016 following a blood alcohol test indicating he was legally intoxicated while at work. He was reinstated about six months later after completing a treatment program and agreeing to submit to random drug testing.

His privileges were suspended again in October 2017 after he showed signs of impairment during a hospital committee meeting. He was terminated in April 2018 after he was arrested for allegedly driving while intoxicated (DWI) during work hours.

Federal Court Indicts Levy on Multiple Counts

Shortly after the OIG team began reviewing Levy’s cases, a separate OIG group launched a criminal investigation. Levy admitted to investigators that he had been an alcoholic for 30 years, the report stated, and that he had “purchased a substance, 2-methyl-2-butanol (2M2B), online that could be ingested, was similar to alcohol but more potent, and was not detectable using routine drug and alcohol testing methods.”

Citing the federal indictment, the OIG report noted that Levy passed 42 drug and alcohol tests following his reinstatement at the hospital in 2016.

In August 2019, federal authorities charged Levy with three counts of involuntary manslaughter along with multiple counts of wire fraud, mail fraud, and making false statements. The wire and mail fraud charges were related to his 2M2B purchases.

Levy pleaded guilty in June 2020 and was sentenced on January 22, 2021. In addition to the 20-year prison term, he was ordered to pay approximately $498,000 in restitution to VA. The OIG report noted that Levy has appealed the sentence.

In “Pathologist, Neurosurgeon, and Critical Care Specialist Face Criminal Charges in the Deaths of Dozens of Patients,” which covered the Levy case, Dark Daily asked, “At what point might criminal investigators hold medical laboratories accountable for not notifying authorities about lab test utilization patterns by physicians who could be reasonably understood to be putting their patients at risk of harm?”

And in “Arkansas Pathologist Faces Three Manslaughter Charges,” Dark Daily’s sister publication, The Dark Report, noted that “The outcome of [the Levy] case could be a precedent that gives other prosecutors the confidence that they can file criminal charges in cases where evidence shows that a pathologist’s actions contributed to diagnostic errors that directly contributed to the death of one or more patients.”

Michael J. Missal

“This sentence should send a strong message that those who abuse their positions of trust in caring for veterans will be held accountable,” said VA Inspector General Michael J. Missal in a federal Department of Justice (DOJ) press release. “Our thoughts are with all those harmed by Dr. Levy’s actions, and we hope they find some small measure of comfort from what happened here today.” (Photo copyright: Military Times.)

OIG Finds Numerous ‘Deficiencies in Quality Management’

In its report, OIG found deficiencies in quality management going back to Levy’s original appointment as Pathology and Laboratory Medical Services Chief.

He was initially hired in September 2005 as a locum tenens (temporary) provider and appointed as full-time service chief a month later. This was despite a DWI conviction from 1996 and a stay of only eight months with his previous employer.

Neither would have barred the doctor as a potential candidate; however, the OIG report states, “the OIG is concerned that a rigorous process was not in place to better evaluate his clinical competency at the time he was hired.”

And that was just the beginning.

In his role as service chief, Levy was responsible for the Path and Lab quality management program with assistance from a subordinate staff pathologist, “which made the process susceptible to subversion,” the report states.

The VHA requires a second pathologist to review certain findings, such as diagnosis of a new cancer malignancy. But in some cases, “it was determined that Dr. Levy was entering concurrence statements into some patients’ electronic health records (EHR) when a second pathologist had not agreed with the interpretation or diagnosis,” the OIG report states.

In addition, second reads sometimes “were communicated by sticky notes, which provided Dr. Levy the opportunity to alter or ignore the results,” the OIG reported.

Inherent Conflict of Interest, Fear of Reprisals, and OIG Recommendations

The periodic privileging process, which grants ongoing hospital privileges, was based in part on a “10% peer review” conducted by the staff pathologist. “The involvement of a subordinate in the peer review process of a supervisor creates an inherent conflict of interest,” the OIG report stated. And in some cases, appraisals of the doctor’s competence came from non-pathologists.

The OIG report suggested that the Veteran’s Health Administration (VHA) re-examine its guidance on the peer review, which requires cases to be randomly selected. Instead, the report suggests that targeting specific kinds of cases, such as those with higher risk of interpretation error, could be more effective in analyzing a pathologist’s performance.

The OIG report also noted failures in dealing with the doctor’s impairment and fostering a “culture of accountability.” Hospital staff, apparently, reported signs of impairment as early as 2014, including incidents when the doctor smelled of alcohol and displayed hand tremors. But hospital leadership failed to “vigorously address allegations of impairment,” the OIG report states. And in interviews with the OIG, some staffers expressed fear of reprisal if they reported what they saw.

The OIG report offers 10 recommendations to the VA, including practices related to hiring processes, the 10% peer review, and alcohol and drug testing. It makes two additional recommendations to the director of the Ozarks VA health system: one related to the credentialing processes and the other aimed at ensuring staff and patients can report concerns without fear of reprisal.

Clinical laboratory managers and hospital pathologists may want to review these recommendations and consider the value of applying them in their own practices.

—Stephen Beale

Related Information

Pathology Oversight Failures at the Veterans Health Care System of the Ozarks in Fayetteville, Arkansas

VA Hospital Allowed Alcoholic Pathologist to Go Unchallenged, Resulting in Patient Deaths: Watchdog

Convicted VA Pathologist Oversaw Himself, Federal Study Concludes

Fayetteville Doctor Sentenced to 20 Years in Federal Prison for Mail Fraud and Involuntary Manslaughter

Ex-VA Doctor Who Misdiagnosed Patient Sentenced to Prison

Fayetteville Doctor Arrested on Charges of Wire Fraud, Mail Fraud, Making False Statements, and Involuntary Manslaughter

Pathologist, Neurosurgeon, and Critical Care Specialist Face Criminal Charges in the Deaths of Dozens of Patients

Arkansas Pathologist Faces Three Manslaughter Charges

VA’s ‘Million Veterans Program’ Research Study Receives Its 100,000th Human Genome Sequence

With improved genetic sequencing comes larger human genome databases that could lead to new diagnostic and therapeutic biomarkers for clinical laboratories

As the COVID-19 pandemic grabbed headlines, the human genome database at the US Department of Veterans Affairs Million Veterans Program (MVP) quietly grew. Now, this wealth of genomic information—as well as data from other large-scale genomic and genetic collections—is expected to produce new biomarkers for clinical laboratory diagnostics and testing.

In December, cancer genomics company Personalis, Inc. (NASDAQ:PSNL) of Menlo Park, Calif., achieved a milestone and delivered its 100,000th whole human genome sequence to the MVP, according to a news release, which also states that Personalis is the sole sequencing provider to the MVP.

The VA’s MVP program, which started in 2011, has 850,000 enrolled veterans and is expected to eventually involve two million people. The VA’s aim is to explore the role genes, lifestyle, and military experience play in health and human illness, notes the VA’s MVP website.

Health conditions affecting veterans the MVP is researching include:

The VA has contracted with Personalis through September 2021, and has invested $175 million, Clinical OMICS reported. Personalis has earned approximately $14 million from the VA. That’s about 76% of the company’s revenue, according to 2nd quarter data, Clinical OMICS noted.

John West and wife Judy West of Personalis headshots
“The VA MVP is the largest whole genome sequencing project in the United States, and this is a significant milestone for both the program and for Personalis,” said John West (above with wife Judy), Founder and CEO of Personalis, in the news release. “Population-scale sequencing projects of this nature represent a cornerstone in our effort to accelerate the advancement of precision medicine across a wide range of disease areas,” he added. (Photo copyright: MIT Technology Review.)

Database of Veterans’ Genomes Used in Current Research

What has the VA gained from their investment so far? An MVP fact sheet states researchers are tapping MVP data for these and other veteran health-related studies: 

  • Gene variations associated with different tumor structures in patients with non-small-cell lung carcinoma.
  • Differentiating between prostate cancer tumors that require treatment and others that are slow-growing and not life-threatening.
  • How genetics drives obesity, diabetes, and heart disease.
  • How data in DNA translates into actual physiological changes within the body.
  • Gene variations and patients’ response to Warfarin.

NIH Research Program Studies Effects of Genetics on Health

Another research program, the National Institutes of Health’s All of Us study, recently began returning results to its participants who provided blood, urine, and/or saliva samples. The NIH aims to aid research into health outcomes influenced by genetics, environment, and lifestyle, explained a news release. The program, launched in 2018, has biological samples from more than 270,000 people with a goal of one million participants.

NIH’s All of Us program partners include:

Dr. Josh Denny CEO of NIH All of Us program headshot
“We’re changing the paradigm for research. Participants are our most important partners in this effort, and we know many of them are eager to get their genetic results and learn about the science they’re making possible,” said Josh Denny, MD, CEO of the NIH’s All of Us research program in the news release. Denny, a physician scientist, was Professor of Biomedical Informatics and Medicine, Director of the Center for Precision Medicine and Vice President for Personalized Medicine at Vanderbilt University Medical Center prior to joining the NIH. (Photo copyright: National Institutes of Health.)

Inclusive Data Could Aid Precision Medicine

The news release notes that more than 80% of biological samples in the All of Us database come from people in communities that have been under-represented in biomedical research.

“We need programs like All of Us to build diverse datasets so that research findings ultimately benefit everyone,” said Brad Ozenberger, PhD, All of Us Genomics Program Director, in the news release.

Precision medicine designed for specific healthcare populations is a goal of the All of Us program.

“[All of Us is] beneficial to all Americans, but actually beneficial to the African American race because a lot of research and a lot of medicines that we are taking advantage of today, [African Americans] were not part of the research,” Chris Crawford, All of US Research Study Navigator, told the Birmingham Times. “As [the All of Us study] goes forward and we get a big diverse group of people, it will help as far as making medicine and treatment that will be more precise for us,” he added.

Large Databases Could Advance Care

Genome sequencing technology continues to improve. It is faster, less complicated, and cheaper to sequence a whole human genome than ever before. And the resulting sequence is more accurate.

Thus, as human genome sequencing databases grow, researchers are deriving useful scientific insights from the data. This is relevant for clinical laboratories because the new insights from studying bigger databases of genomic information will produce new diagnostic and therapeutic biomarkers that can be the basis for new clinical laboratory tests as well as useful diagnostic assays for anatomic pathologists.

—Donna Marie Pocius

Related Information:

Personalis Announces Delivery of the 100,000th Genome to the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Million Veteran Program

VA Extends Personalis Contract for Million Veterans Project With $31M Task Order

Million Veteran Program Research Projects

All of Us Research Program Returns First Genetic Results to Participants

All of Us Research: Why Some Get Sick and Others Are in Great Health

Sudden Shutdown of Claritas Genomics After Five Years as A Leading Source of Pediatric Genetic Testing Surprises Clinical Laboratory Industry

Operations ended last week after reports suggested the end came as a result of misalignment of goals among investors in a lab company many considered to be successful

One contributing factor the surprise announcement that the owners of Claritas Genomics were closing the clinical laboratory company may have been the struggle to get payers to reimburse its genetics test claims. If true, it is the latest market sign of how health insurers are making it difficult for labs to get paid for proprietary molecular diagnostic assays and genetic tests.

With no official announcement, Claritas Genomics quietly ended operations effective on Friday, Jan. 19. That evening, a spokeswoman for Claritas Genomics’ majority owner, Boston Children’s Hospital (BCH), confirmed for Dark Daily that the lab was closed and said no reason was given for the closing. More details may be forthcoming this week, she added.

As of the close of business on Tuesday, there was still no word from the genetics testing company founded in 2013. GenomeWeb was the first to report that Claritas Genomic’s diagnostic laboratories no longer do any testing. According to GenomeWeb, Brian Quirbach, former Clinical Testing Coordinator at Claritas Genomics, and part of the lab’s client services team, confirmed that the last day of business was Friday, Jan. 19. The BCH spokeswoman said the GenomeWeb article was accurate.

Asked if there had been a precipitating event at Claritas, if the company had experienced any serious business trouble, if it had struggled to get paid, or if payers were slow in paying, the spokeswoman declined to comment. Instead, she referred to the GenomeWeb article, saying it was mostly accurate.

Claritas Genomics a Casualty of Clinical Laboratory Price Wars

According GenomeWeb, Claritas was like other genetic testing laboratories that have long struggled to get health insurers to pay for rare disease tests. Also, Claritas and other genetic and molecular testing labs suffer financially as a direct result of the ongoing price wars among competing genetic testing lab companies.

“As a small company, it also wasn’t able to offer testing that did not come with potential patient payment obligations, which larger laboratories with better resources or payer contracts can do,” the GenomeWeb article noted.

According to GenomeWeb’s sources, Claritas had a reputation for delivering highly-accurate test results. The reason for this level of performance, the article noted, was Claritas’ use of two sequencing platforms, which lowered false-positive rates. The testing lab combined low false-positive rates with interpretations from WuXi NextCode. The clinical expertise available at BCH gave Claritas the best diagnostic exome in the industry in terms of technical quality and diagnostic power, one source told GenomeWeb.

The decision to close the company, the source noted, was a result of misalignment between investors at WuXi NextCode and BCH. Other sources speculated that Claritas and WuXi NextCode were considering a merger, which did not happen, GenomeWeb reported.

Ultimately, the source stated, BCH held the controlling interest and made the business decision to close the clinical laboratory company. And that the decision was unrelated to the lab’s quality.

Claritas’ clients were told, according to GenomeWeb, to download all test results and data by Thursday, Jan. 18, and that the lab’s operations manager would be available for a few weeks to answer customers’ questions.

Genetic Tests Developer for Pediatrics and Hereditary Disorders

Claritas, which was headquartered in Cambridge, Mass., had about 30 employees. When it was founded as a partnership between BCH and Life Technologies, its goal was to develop genetic and genomics-based diagnostic tests, primarily for pediatric patients with hereditary disorders.

By the middle of 2014, the company had grown to about 60 employees, moved into a new building with a CLIA-certified laboratory in Cambridge, Mass., and launched the ClariView Exome for Pediatric Neurology, GenomeWeb reported. Four months later, Thermo Fisher Scientific acquired Life Technologies.

In 2014, Dark Daily’s sister print publication The Dark Report (TDR) reported on the development of Claritas Genomics as an in-hospital lab that became independent. For 15 years, the lab operated as the genetic diagnostic laboratory at 396-bed BCH, we reported. (See The Dark Report, “Claritas Is Example of New Lab Business Model,” June 13, 2014.)

“As one of the hospital’s CLIA-certified laboratories, it provided the advanced molecular diagnostic testing services used by the hospital,” said Patrice M. Milos, PhD, who was Claritas Genomic’s CEO at the time.

At the 2014 Executive War College in New Orleans, Patrice Milos, PhD, then President and CEO, Claritas Genomics, spoke with Adam Slone, CEO, Slone Partners, about her path to becoming CEO of Claritas Genomics, how to foster a strong company culture, and what traits she looks for in a leadership team. Click on the photo above to watch the video interview. (Video copyright: Sloan Partners.)

In the early days of Claritas Genomics, BCH was challenged to provide the capital and resources needed for the molecular lab to grow, Milos said. “This was due to the rapid pace of genetic discovery, ongoing advances in gene sequencing technologies, and the difficult financial environment in healthcare,” she recalled. “Thus, to make it easier for the lab to grow, the hospital spun out the lab and created Claritas Genomics in February 2013.”

Informatics Tools to Support Clinical Use of Genetic Data

As an independent lab, Claritas had early success winning a role to do testing for the Million Veteran Program (MVP), a $9-million project of the US Department of Veterans Affairs. In October 2013, the lab company reported that it would do exome sequencing of samples from veterans. At the time, it was one of the largest sequencing initiatives in the nation. (The VA has since reported in 2016 that the program was the largest genomic database in the world.)

Further, this MVP was significant because Claritas benefited by generating cash flow, which it could use to acquire the gene sequencing system and staff expertise in next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies. And, it developed the informatics infrastructure needed to collect, store, and analyze large volumes of genetic data, TDR reported.

Two months later, in December 2013, Claritas entered into a partnership with Cerner Corp. of Kansas City, Mo., to build the tools and connectivity systems needed to integrate NGS-based diagnostic testing into healthcare data systems. Specifically, the companies said they would develop a system “for molecular diagnostics that is tailored to NGS workflows, which are more complex and generate much more data than traditional molecular diagnostic tests.”

At the time, Milos explained the role that Claritas would play in this partnership. “In terms of this collaboration, one barrier to the use of genomics in medicine is the challenge of integrating the complex information derived from large-scale genomic measurements into a patient’s medical record and clinical practice,” he said. “Our mutual goal is to develop the informatics tools that support clinical use of genetic data.”

Claritas also was working with other pediatric institutions, such as Cincinnati Children’s Hospital, to advance clinical knowledge in a number of ways. “For example, we are facilitating a research network by connecting patients with experts who can provide care and by licensing assays from the hospitals where the discoveries that lead to diagnostic tests are made,” Milos said. “Also, in this business model, we can receive investment from outside sources, such as we have from two of our Series A investors, Life Technologies and Cerner.”

The abrupt closure of Claritas Genomics makes this clinical laboratory company the latest to disappear from the marketplace. The mystery factor in this case is why a company viewed by many as establishing a credible reputation for itself came to such a sudden end.

Joseph Burns

Related Information:

Claritas Genomics Shuts Down Operations

Boston Childrens Hospital and Life Technologies Launch Claritas Genomics

Million Veteran Program is Now Largest Genomic Database in the World

Cerner, Claritas Join Forces to Build Gene-Based Diagnostic Testing Tools

Claritas Is Example of New Lab Business Model

2018 Executive War College for senior lab execs, administrators, and pathologists

After 4 Years and $1 Billion, the VA and DoD Abandon Plans for a Fully Integrated EHR

DoD/VA public relations debacle could provide valuable lessons for laboratory organizations looking to implement large-scale IT or operational innovations

Even as the federal government is incentivizing hospitals, physicians, and all types of healthcare providers to adopt and use electronic health records (EHRs), it has admitted failure in its own attempt to integrate EHRs that serve two of the nation’s largest health benefits programs.

Those two programs, the Veterans Administration (VA) and the Department of Defense (DoD), provide healthcare to millions of individuals. In recent years, the two agencies have spent hundreds of millions of dollars to interface and integrate their respective EHR systems. (more…)

;