Background: Although precision medicine using genetic information offers significant promise, its uptake and eventual clinical and economic impacts are uncertain. Health care payers will play an important role in evaluating evidence and costs to develop coverage and reimbursement policies.
Objective: To elicit U.S. health care payer preference for genomic precision medicine to better understand trade-offs among clinical benefits, uncertainty, and cost.
Methods: Using key informant interviewer discussions (N = 6 payers), we identified 6 key attributes of genetic tests important to payers: type of information the test provides (screening vs. treatment prediction), probability that the member has an informative genetic marker, expert agreement on changing medical care based on the marker, quality-of-life gains, life expectancy gains (with statistical uncertainty), and cost to the plan. We designed a stated preference discrete choice experiment using these attributes and administered a web survey to a sample of U.S. health care payers. We used effects coding and analyzed the data using an error component mixed logit modeling approach.
Results: The survey response rate was 58% (150 participants completed the survey). Approximately 53% of respondents had previous experience evaluating genetic tests for reimbursement, and 85% had more than 5 years of health care decision-making experience. Payers valued improvements in quality of life the most (marginal willingness to pay [mWTP] of $1,513-$6,076), followed by medical expert agreement on the treatment change (mWTP of $2,881-$3,489). Payers placed a relatively lower value for genetic tests with lower marker probability (mWTP of $2,776 for highest marker probability to $423 for lowest marker probability). Payers mWTP was lowest for resolving uncertainty in quality of life (mWTP of $1,513-$2,031) and life expectancy gains ($536-$1,537).
Conclusions: Payers exhibited a strong preference for genetic tests that improved quality of life, had high expert agreement on changing medical care, and increased life expectancy. These findings suggest that payers will need evidence of clinical utility to support coverage and reimbursement of genomic precision medicine.
Disclosures: This study was supported by a grant from the NIH Common Fund and NIA (1U01AG047109-01) via the Personalized Medicine Economics Research (PriMER) project. Unrelated to this study, Veenstra reports consulting fees from Bayer and Halozyme; Basu reports consulting fees from Salutis Consulting; and Reiger reports consulting fees from Roche. Carlson reports grants from Institute for Clinical and Economic Review, during the conduct of this study, and consulting fees from Bayer, Adaptive Biotechnologies, Allergan, Galderma, and Vifor Pharma, unrelated to this study.