» Articles » PMID: 28558785

Clinical Decisions Surrounding Genomic and Proteomic Testing Among United States Veterans Treated for Lung Cancer Within the Veterans Health Administration

Overview
Publisher Biomed Central
Date 2017 Jun 1
PMID 28558785
Citations 2
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Current clinical guidelines recommend epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutational testing in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) to predict the benefit of the tyrosine kinase inhibitor erlotinib as first-line treatment. Proteomic (VeriStrat) testing is recommended for patients with EGFR negative or unknown status when erlotinib is being considered. Departure from this clinical algorithm can increase costs and may result in worse outcomes. We examined EGFR and proteomic testing among patients with NSCLC within the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). We explored adherence to guidelines and the impact of test results on treatment decisions and cost of care.

Methods: Proteomic and EGFR test results from 2013 to 2015 were merged with VA electronic health records and pharmacy data. Chart reviews were conducted. Cases were categorized based on the appropriateness of testing and treatment.

Results: Of the 69 patients with NSCLC who underwent proteomic testing, 33 (48%) were EGFR-negative and 36 (52%) did not have documented EGFR status. We analyzed 138 clinical decisions surrounding EGFR/proteomic testing and erlotinib treatment. Most decisions (105, or 76%) were concordant with clinical practice guidelines. However, for 24 (17%) decisions documentation of testing or justification of treatment was inadequate, and 9 (7%) decisions represented clear departures from guidelines.

Conclusion: EGFR testing, the least expensive clinical intervention analyzed in this study, was significantly underutilized or undocumented. The records of more than half of the patients lacked information on EGFR status. Our analysis illustrated several clinical scenarios where the timing of proteomic testing and erlotinib diverged from the recommended algorithm, resulting in excessive costs of care with no documented improvements in health outcomes.

Citing Articles

Understanding Molecular Testing Uptake Across Tumor Types in Eight Countries: Results From a Multinational Cross-Sectional Survey.

Chambers P, Man K, Lui V, Mpima S, Nasuti P, Forster M JCO Oncol Pract. 2020; 16(8):e770-e778.

PMID: 32160136 PMC: 7427415. DOI: 10.1200/JOP.19.00507.


Clinical Molecular Marker Testing Data Capture to Promote Precision Medicine Research Within the Cancer Research Network.

Burnett-Hartman A, Udaltsova N, Kushi L, Neslund-Dudas C, Rahm A, Pawloski P JCO Clin Cancer Inform. 2019; 3:1-10.

PMID: 31487201 PMC: 6874000. DOI: 10.1200/CCI.19.00026.

References
1.
Young H, Maillard J, Levine P, Simmens S, Mahan C, Kang H . Investigating the risk of cancer in 1990-1991 US Gulf War veterans with the use of state cancer registry data. Ann Epidemiol. 2010; 20(4):265-272.e1. DOI: 10.1016/j.annepidem.2009.11.012. View

2.
Ettinger D, Akerley W, Borghaei H, Chang A, Cheney R, Chirieac L . Non-small cell lung cancer, version 2.2013. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2013; 11(6):645-53. DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2013.0084. View

3.
Ettinger D, Wood D, Aisner D, Akerley W, Bauman J, Chirieac L . Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer, Version 5.2017, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2017; 15(4):504-535. DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2017.0050. View

4.
Sun W, Yuan X, Tian Y, Wu H, Xu H, Hu G . Non-invasive approaches to monitor EGFR-TKI treatment in non-small-cell lung cancer. J Hematol Oncol. 2015; 8:95. PMC: 4521383. DOI: 10.1186/s13045-015-0193-6. View

5.
van der Wekken A, Hiltermann T, Groen H . The value of proteomics in lung cancer. Ann Transl Med. 2015; 3(3):29. PMC: 4356852. DOI: 10.3978/j.issn.2305-5839.2015.01.10. View