Top 25 Hospital Outreach Labs 2023

Top 25 Hospital Outreach Labs 2023

Top 25 Hospital Outreach Labs 2023

The table below lists the top 25 Hospitals by total Medicare CLFS and PFS payments for 2023.  The top 25 hospitals totaled over $150 million in CLFS payments and PFS payments totaling just under $30 million. The top hospital this year was Northwestern Medicine in Winfield, Illinois totaling just under $17 million total payments. In second was the University of Texas MD Anderson located in Houston, Texas. UT totaled $12.5 million in total payments.

Top 25 Fastest-Growing Labs by Medicare Part B Volume of Services
Publicly Traded Lab Revenue Up 5% In First-Half 2024

Publicly Traded Lab Revenue Up 5% In First-Half 2024

Publicly Traded Lab Revenue Up 5% In First-Half 2024

On a combined basis, 21 publicly traded labs reported revenue growth of 5% to reach $15 billion during the first six months of 2024 (after adjusting for acquisitions), according to financial reports collected by Laboratory Economics.

Among four national clinical labs (Quest Diagnostics, Labcorp, Sonic Healthcare USA and BioReference), combined revenue grew by 2.6% (after adjusting for acquisitions).

Meanwhile, among 17 specialty and genetic testing labs, combined pro-forma revenue increased by 21%.

Revenue growth was fastest at Castle Biosciences (Friendswood, TX), up 74% to $160 million. Castle’s lead product is its DecisionDx-Melanoma test for cutaneous melanoma (CPT 81529 at a Medicare rate of $7,193). Reported test results for DecisionDx-Melanoma increased by 11% to 17,969 tests in the six months ended June 30, 2024. Castle’s fastest-growing test was its TissueCypher Barrett’s Esophagus test (CPT 0108U at a Medicare rate of $4,950). Reported test result volume for TissueCypher was up 190% to 8,211 tests.

Next-Gen Sequencing Database

Next-Gen Sequencing Database

Next-Gen Sequencing Database

Laboratory Economics is offering a database of all 149 independent labs, 181 hospitals and 8 pathologists and other providers that perform Next-Gen Sequencing for 31 CPT and PLA procedure codes (e.g., 81432, 81433, 81435, 81437, 81450, etc.). The database includes annual Medicare Part B test volumes and allowed payments by test code for each provider (for calendar-year 2022). The database comes in easy-to-use and searchable Excel spreadsheets.

  • The data is in a user-friendly-excel spreadsheet that includes:
    • National Provider Identifier (NPI)
    • Provider Name & Complete Address + Phone
    • Specific Annual Medicare Part B Test Volume for 31 NGS CPT Codes for all Independent Labs, Hospitals,
    • Pathologists and Other Providers (2022)
    • Specific Annual Medicare Part B Allowed Payments for 31 NGS CPT Codes for all Independent Labs, Hospitals,
    • Pathologists and Other Providers (2022)
    • Overall Annual Next-Gen Sequencing Test Volume and Revenue Estimates for each Provider (2023)

 

  • Provide your sales rep with the data they need to succeed!
    • Data for all 50 states and Puerto Rico
    • Find NGS labs, hospitals and pathologists who can become your clients
    • Locate new NGS lab clients to grow your sales
    • Create targeted lists by location or specialty to focus on your best opportunities
    • Identify underserved markets for geographic expansion
    • Save time and money by using accurate, complete and consistent data

Is Alzheimer’s Testing the Next Big Lab Market?

Is Alzheimer’s Testing the Next Big Lab Market?

Is Alzheimer’s Testing the Next Big Lab Market?

The FDA cleared the Alzheimer’s drug Leqembi (lecanemab) in July 2023. The drug marked the first treatment for slowing Alzheimer’s progression and cognitive decline to make it through the agency’s traditional pathway. But Leqembi, which was developed by Eisai (Tokyo) and Biogen (Cambridge, MA), has fallen far short of its goals for patient prescriptions. That’s partly because the current methods for diagnosing Alzheimer’s—ex- pensive brain imaging scans and invasive cerebral spinal fluid (CSF) tests— are acting as bottlenecks. However, new blood tests for Alzheimer’s are
being introduced that could give more patients access to treatment.

An estimated 6.9 million Americans aged 65 and older are currently living with Alzheimer’s disease, according to the Alzheimer’s Association (Chicago, IL). And an estimated 500,000 new cases of Alzheimer’s will be diagnosed this year. The new Alzheimer’s treatment Leqembi has a list price of $26,500 per year.

In addition, the FDA recently cleared Eli Lilly’s Alzheimer’s drug Kisunla (donanemab), which has a list price of $32,000 per year. Both drugs are intravenous infusions that attack a protein (amyloid) that clumps into plaques in the brains of people with Alzheimer’s. Both drugs slow disease progression (e.g., memory loss or other cognitive problems) but do not stop or reverse it. In addition, at least nine pharmaceutical companies have clinical trials underway for new Alzheimer’s drugs. Those in late-stage trials for oral pill treatments include BioVie (NE3107) and AB Science (masitinib).

But these drugs rely on PET scans and CSF tests to identify Alzheimer’s patients for treatment. “The availability of more affordable and minimally invasive diagnostic tools will help support broad access for the management of Alzheimer’s disease,” according to Eisai’s global Alzheimer’s disease officer, Keisuke Naito.

New blood-based immunoassays that identify the proteins associated with Alzheimer’s are likely to become the new standard for screening and monitoring the disease. The potential lab market could reach $500+ million per year. This estimate assumes 4 blood tests to identify and monitor each of the 500,000 new cases of Alzheimer’s each year at an average reimbursement of $260 per test (for two protein markers per test).

At the June 25th Annual CLFS Meeting with CMS to address rate setting for new codes, ACLA requested a Medicare rate of $130 per Alzheimer’s protein marker. Thus, a two-protein test (e.g., pTau181 & Abeta42) would be reimbursed $260. This level of reimbursement would match the Medicare rate of $260 for Fujirebio’s FDA-cleared Lumipulse test. Coding and final rates will be announced by CMS later this year for an effective date of January 1, 2025.

There are currently at least six Alzheimer’s lab tests on the market (see table). In addition, Danaher’s Beckman Coulter is developing a blood test for its immunoassay analyzers. Beckman is expected to release a two-protein test (pTau217 & Abeta42) in RUO format later this year. Clinical data from the RUO test will be used to support an eventual FDA application.

How to Keep Your Existing LDTs on the Market

How to Keep Your Existing LDTs on the Market

How to Keep Your Existing LDTs on the Market

Labs have some tough decisions to make now that the FDA has issued a final rule giving it authority to regulate LDTs. Labs offering LDTs prior to publication of the final rule on May 6 have three choices: 1) comply with the new FDA regs and keep their LDTs on inhouse test menus; 2) switch to an FDA-cleared test kit (if available); or 3) ignore the FDA regs and risk potential enforcement actions and fines. For expert advice on option 1 from regulatory attorney Christine Bump.

Christine Bump, a regulatory attorney at Penn Avenue Law & Policy (Washington, DC), has been guiding laboratories and test manufacturers through the FDA’s premarket clearance process and post market compliance requirements for 20 years. Below we summarize Bump’s
advice for keeping existing LDTs on the market.

FDA Stage 1 requirements for currently marketed LDTs
Nearly all LDTs, including currently marketed LDTs (prior to May 6, 2024), “unmet need” LDTs performed by “integrated” health systems and NYS CLEP-approved tests, must meet Stage 1 requirements by May 6, 2025.

Stage 1 includes FDA Medical Device Reporting (MDR), which will require laboratories to report adverse events for any LDT that they perform. Under FDA’s regulations, an adverse event is any event that reasonably suggests that a device has or may have caused or contributed to a death or serious injury, or would be likely to cause or contribute to a death or serious injury if the event happens again. An adverse event report would therefore be required for an incorrect test result that has, may, or could cause such consequences. The incorrect test result could be caused by instrument malfunctions as well as mislabeled or contaminated specimens.

An adverse event report must generally be reported to the FDA within 30 days after the lab became aware of the error. The regulations require specific information be included in the report, and labs will also need to file\ a report that describes what corrective action they took, or if they chose to remove that LDT from their test menu.

An adverse event report could prompt the FDA to ask follow-up questions or schedule an on-site inspection.

The FDA is especially sensitive to incorrect test results that delayed patient treatment or caused
unnecessary treatment (or had the potential to do so).

Stage 1 also requires labs to maintain complaint files for each LDT they offer, including the date the complaint was received; the name, address, and phone number of the complainant; the nature and details of the complaint; any corrective action taken, etc. Specific records and reports
must also be maintained and submitted regarding corrections and removals of tests, including for
repairs, adjustments, relabeling, etc.

FDA Stage 2 requirements for currently marketed LDTs
Once again, Stage 2 requirements apply to nearly all LDTs and become effective May 6, 2026.

Stage 2 requires each laboratory to be registered with the FDA and list all of the LDTs they perform.

Stage 2 also requires labs to submit labeling for each LDT they offer. Labeling includes test performance information and a summary of supporting validation. As part of its review of labeling, the FDA plans to look closely at claims of superior performance and whether those claims are adequately substantiated. This includes any test claims made on a lab’s website, brochures or by sales reps.

Labeling information is typically included as a package insert or affixed to test kit box for FDA-cleared or approved IVD tests. However, since LDTs are not distributed in boxed test kits, it is unclear exactly where the label for an LDT will need to be placed. Labels might be required on the LDT test requisition form, but this hasn’t been confirmed yet. We’re waiting for the FDA to issue more guidance on label requirements.

FDA Stage 3 requirements for currently marketed LDTs

By May 6, 2027, currently marketed as well as “unmet need” LDTs developed and used within “integrated” health systems need to be in compliance with the records requirements of the quality system regulation. These records relate to the device master record, the device history record, and the quality system record. (Note: Complaint file record requirements are already covered under Stage 1.)

The device master records must include information about device specifications, production process specifications, quality assurance procedures and specifications, packaging and labeling specifications, and procedures and methods for installation, maintenance, and servicing.

The device history records must include information about the dates and quantity manufactured, the quantity released for distribution, acceptance records, information to identify each production unit and device identifiers.

Labs must have the required information compiled, documented, and in a records system that is accessible and readily available to FDA investigators during inspections.

FDA On-site Inspections
All registered lab facilities performing LDTs are subject to scheduled on-site inspections by the FDA every two years. FDA inspections are completely different than and are independent of CMS CLIA and CAP inspections. FDA inspectors will be focused on reviewing LDT test records and files. However, the reality is that the FDA already lacks the resources to perform regularly scheduled on-site inspections of existing test kit manufacturers. The agency may have difficulty keeping up with the thousands of new lab facilities that fall under its purview as a result of its final rule.