Dr. Pennell on the Economic Impact of Next-Generation Sequencing

Nathan Pennell, MD, PhD
Published: Tuesday, Jun 26, 2018



Nathan Pennell, MD, PhD, director, Lung Cancer Medical Oncology Program, Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Institute, discusses the economic impact of next-generation sequencing (NGS) for patients with non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

The study, which was presented at the 2018 ASCO Annual Meeting, took a hypothetical cohort of 1 million patients from a payer perspective, identifying how many were likely to get metastatic NSCLC and how many would be covered by Medicare or Medicaid versus private insurance. Researches calculated the costs of single-gene tests versus NGS and then compared what it would cost all of them using 3 other strategies.

For those under national insurance programs, NGS represented savings of $1,393,678 versus exclusionary mutation, $1,530,869 versus sequential testing and $2,140,795 versus panel testing. NGS saved commercial payers up to $3,809 versus exclusionary and up to $250,842 versus panel testing.

Pennell explained that NGS was also faster, and a higher percentage of patients with genetic alterations who could benefit from treatment identified with the trial’s strategy.


Nathan Pennell, MD, PhD, director, Lung Cancer Medical Oncology Program, Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Institute, discusses the economic impact of next-generation sequencing (NGS) for patients with non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

The study, which was presented at the 2018 ASCO Annual Meeting, took a hypothetical cohort of 1 million patients from a payer perspective, identifying how many were likely to get metastatic NSCLC and how many would be covered by Medicare or Medicaid versus private insurance. Researches calculated the costs of single-gene tests versus NGS and then compared what it would cost all of them using 3 other strategies.

For those under national insurance programs, NGS represented savings of $1,393,678 versus exclusionary mutation, $1,530,869 versus sequential testing and $2,140,795 versus panel testing. NGS saved commercial payers up to $3,809 versus exclusionary and up to $250,842 versus panel testing.

Pennell explained that NGS was also faster, and a higher percentage of patients with genetic alterations who could benefit from treatment identified with the trial’s strategy.



View Conference Coverage
Online CME Activities
TitleExpiration DateCME Credits
Community Practice Connections™: ALK-Positive NSCLC: Emerging Strategies to Inform Sequencing, Optimize Outcomes, and Address Unmet Clinical Needs Along the Disease ContinuumAug 29, 20181.5
Community Practice Connections™: Oncogenic Tumor Board in Advanced NSCLC: Leveraging Actionable Mutations Along the Disease Continuum to Optimize Patient OutcomesAug 30, 20182.0
Publication Bottom Border
Border Publication
x