Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Could molecular pathology testing in lung cancer be more cost effective?

Kathy Walsh, Yuan Kheng, Anca Oniscu, David James Harrison, William Wallace

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Aims: EGFR and ALK analysis is routinely undertaken prior to targeted treatment of non-squamous non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC). Increasingly limited resources require molecular pathology services to be cost effective without detriment to patient care.
Methods: Data from an audit of molecular pathology testing in the South East of Scotland Cancer network has been used to explore different testing strategies with the aim of reducing costs; including investigation of TTF1 expression as a negative predictor for EGFR mutations.
Results: TTF1 immunohistochemistry had a high negative predictive value for EGFR mutations (99%). Reflex testing all non-squamous NSCLC had the highest costs whereas limiting testing to those who might be considered for treatment would save 7.5%; the serial model could save 32.7%.
Conclusions: Testing only patients being considered for EGFR and ALK inhibitors represented small savings; more significant savings would be achievable if testing algorithms utilized known associations between clinical biomarkers.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)938-941
JournalJournal of Clinical Pathology
Volume69
Issue number10
Early online date7 Jul 2016
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Oct 2016

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

  1. SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being
    SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Could molecular pathology testing in lung cancer be more cost effective?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this