Description of Procedure or Service

Myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) are a heterogeneous group of clonal disorders characterized by overproduction of one or more differentiated myeloid lineages. These include polycythemia vera (PV), essential thrombocythemia (ET), and primary myelofibrosis (PMF). The majority of MPN result from somatic mutations in the three driver genes, JAK2, CALR, and MPL, which represent major diagnostic criteria in combination with hematologic and morphological abnormalities.

Terms such as male and female are used when necessary to refer to sex assigned at birth.

Related policies:

AHS-M2182 Genomic Testing for Hematopoietic Neoplasms

***Note: This Medical Policy is complex and technical. For questions concerning the technical language and/or specific clinical indications for its use, please consult your physician.

Policy

BCBSNC will provide coverage for mutation analysis in myeloproliferative neoplasms when it is determined to be medically necessary because the medical criteria and guidelines shown below are met.

Benefits Application

This medical policy relates only to the services or supplies described herein. Please refer to the Member's Benefit Booklet for availability of benefits. Member's benefits may vary according to benefit design; therefore, member benefit language should be reviewed before applying the terms of this medical policy.

When Mutation Analysis in Myeloproliferative Neoplasms is covered

1. For the diagnosis of individuals presenting with clinical, laboratory, or pathological findings suggesting classic forms of myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) (e.g. polycythemia vera [PV], essential thrombocythemia [ET], or primary myelofibrosis [PMF]), JAK2, CALR or MPL mutation testing is considered medically necessary in any the following situations: 
   1. For individuals suspected to have PV, who meet at least one of the following testing criteria:
      1. Hemoglobin greater than 16.5 g/dL in men; or greater than 16.0 g/dL in women; or hematocrit greater than 49% in men or greater than 48% in women; or increased red cell mass (more than 25% above mean normal predicted value), and no other known cause of erythrocytosis, when measured on two separate occasions. 
      2. A bone marrow (BM) biopsy showing hypercellularity for age with trilineage hyperplasia including prominent erythroid, granulocytic, and megakaryocytic proliferation with pleomorphic, mature megakaryocytes (differences in size).
   2. For individuals suspected to have ET who meet at least one of the following testing criteria:
      1.  Platelet count greater than or equal to 450 × 109/L that has persisted for more than three months.
      2. A BM biopsy showing proliferation mainly of the megakaryocyte lineage with increased numbers of enlarged, mature megakaryocytes with hyper-lobulated nuclei. No significant increase or left shift in neutrophil granulopoiesis or erythropoiesis and very rarely minor (grade 1) increase in reticulin fibers.
   3. For individuals suspected to have PMF, who meet at least one of the following testing criteria:
      1. The individual has demonstrated leukocytosis of greater or equal to 11 x 109 on two separate occasions in the absence of other conditions that can cause leukocytosis. 
      2. The individual has an enlarged spleen. 
      3. A BM biopsy shows megakaryocytic proliferation and atypia, BM fibrosis Grade <2, increased age-adjusted BM cellularity, and granulocytic proliferation, and may show erythropoiesis.
      4. A BM biopsy shows presence of megakaryocytic proliferation and atypia, accompanied by either reticulin and/or collagen fibrosis grades 2 or 3.
2. To exclude a diagnosis of chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) for individuals with a suspected MPN, fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) or reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing on a peripheral blood sample to detect BCR: ABL1 transcripts is considered medically necessary. 
3. For individuals with a clinical suspicion of prePMF or overt PMF who have already tested negative for mutations in JAK2, CALR, or MPL and who do not meet the WHO criteria for BCR-ABL1+ CML, PV, ET, myelodysplastic syndromes, or other myeloid neoplasms, screening for mutations in  ASXL1, CBL, DNMT3A, EZH2, IDH1/IDH2, RAS, SRSF2, SFS3B1, TET2, TP53, and U2AF1 (See Note 1) is considered medically necessary.
4. For individuals diagnosed with Budd-Chiari Syndrome, JAK2, CALR, or MPL mutation testing is considered medically necessary. 
5. For individuals with normal blood counts and unexplained splanchnic vein thrombosis, screening for JAK2 V617F is considered medically necessary. 
6. For individuals suspected to have chronic neutrophilic leukemia, testing for CSF3R mutations is considered medically necessary. 
7. For individuals with a clinical suspicion of mastocytosis, screening for KIT D816V is considered medically necessary.

NOTE 1: For two or more gene tests being run on the same platform, please refer to AHS-R2162 Reimbursement Policy.

When Mutation Analysis in Myeloproliferative Neoplasms is not covered

For all other situations not described above, JAK2 tyrosine kinase, CALR, and MPL mutation testing is considered investigational.

Policy Guidelines

Scientific Background

Myeloproliferative neoplasms, including PV, essential thrombocythemia (ET), and primary myelofibrosis (PMF), arise from somatic mutation in hematopoietic stem cell (HSC) that clonally expand resulting in single or multilineage hyperplasia. They are relatively rare, affecting 0.84 (PV), 1.03 (ET), and 0.47 (PMF) people per 100,000 people worldwide; however, these may not be reflective of its true incidence due to the high heterogeneity of MPN.

Myeloproliferative neoplasms share features of bone marrow hypercellularity, increased incidence of thrombosis or hemorrhage, and an increased rate of progression to acute myeloid leukemia. Abnormalities in cytokine signaling pathways are common and usually lead to increased JAK-STAT signaling. PV is characterized by erythrocytosis with suppressed endogenous erythropoietin production, bone marrow panmyelosis, and JAK2 mutation leading to constitutive activation. ET is defined by thrombocytosis, bone marrow megakaryocytic proliferation, and presence of JAK2, CALR, or MPL mutation. PMF is characterized by bone marrow megakaryocytic proliferation, reticulin and/or collagen fibrosis, and presence of JAK2, CALR, or MPL mutation. Mutations in other genes involved in signal transduction (CBL, LNK/SH2B3), chromatin modification (TET2, EZH2, IDH1/2, ASXL1, DNM3TA), RNA splicing (SF3B1, SRSF2, U2AF1), and tumor suppressor function (TP53) have also been reported and are considered “high-risk.”

The gene, JAK2, which stands for “Janus Kinase 2”, is a gene whose mutation is responsible for a significant amount of MPNs. It is a mutation that causes hypersensitivity of hematopoietic progenitor cells to other cytokines, and this mutation typically appears on red blood cells or bone marrow cells. This mutation is often found on exon 12 or 14, and the exon 14 mutation results in a cytokine-independent activation of several regulatory pathways. JAK2 mutations contribute to at least 95% of PV cases, about 50-65% of ET cases, and 60-65% of PMF cases.

The gene, MPL, which encodes a thrombopoietin receptor, also contributes to MPNs. MPL mutations result in a similar phenotype to JAK2 mutations; both result in cytokine-independent growth of their targets. However, MPL mutations are not nearly as common as JAK2 and CALR mutations, casting doubt on the clinical utility for testing. MPL mutations comprise up to 4% of ET cases and 5% of PMF cases.

The gene, CALR encodes calreticulin (or calregulin), which is a Ca2+ binding protein. The mutation typically involves the creation of the incorrect Ca2+ binding region, thereby not allowing the protein to perform its regular duties such as maintaining calcium homeostasis. This results in a similar phenotype to the JAK2 mutation, which is the cytokine-independent activation of regulatory pathways. CALR mutations contribute to approximately 15-25% of ET cases and 20-25% of PMF cases, and about 70% of ET or PMF patients without a JAK2 or MPL mutation have this mutation.

The significance of JAK2, MPL, CALR and other mutations in the genesis of the MPNs as well as their roles in determining phenotype are unclear. However, integrated genomic analyses suggest that regardless of diagnosis or JAK2 mutational status, MPNs are characterized by upregulation of JAK-STAT target genes, demonstrating the central importance of this pathway in the pathogenesis. This may lead to development of novel JAK2 therapeutics. Thus, mutation analysis at the time of diagnosis has value for determining prognosis as well as individual risk assessment and guide treatment-making decisions.

Neutrophilia, an increase in peripheral blood neutrophils at least two standard deviations above the mean, can be associated with any of the MPNs. In chronic neutrophilic leukemia (CNL), CSF3R mutations have been discovered in most patients with CNL. A study released in 2013 reported 16 of 27 patients with CNL or atypical chronic myeloid leukemia (aCML) had activating mutations in CSF3R (Maxson et al., 2013). SETBP1 has also been used as a part of comprehensive mutation profiling in distinguishing aCML and chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML). A 2019 NGS study reports significant differences in the profiles of patients with aCML or CMML when comparing TET2, SETBP1, and CSF3R. The researchers conclude, “differential mRNA expression could be detected between both cohorts in a subset of genes (FLT3, CSF3R, and SETBP1 showed the strongest correlation). However, due to high variances in the mRNA expression, the potential utility for the clinic is limited.”

Dharmawickreme and Witharana (2023) published a 2023 review of allele burden as a valuable biomarker to incorporate in the diagnostic workflow for diagnosis of MPNs. Allele burden refers to the proportion of cells that have a mutation and reflects the ratio of mutant to wild-type JAK2 alleles, providing key insights into disease phenotype and progression. Additionally, the level of JAK2 allele burden differs significantly across the MPN subtypes. For example, a low allele burden is common in ET, and correlates with milder disease phenotypes. A high allele burden is frequently observed in PV and PMF and is associated with more aggressive disease and higher myeloproliferative activity. The presence of a JAK2 mutation and the measurement of allele burden may also help differentiate PV from secondary polycythemia (SE), and ET from reactive thrombocytosis (RT).

Allele burden serves as a promising indicator for prognosis and outcomes for patients. Measuring allele burden can help differentiate between MPN subtypes early, often before clinical manifestation. For example, higher allele burdens are linked to phenotypic expression such as elevated hemoglobin and white blood cells counts, increased spleen size, and more pronounced symptoms in PV and a risk of evolution to post-PV myelofibrosis, PMF or acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Additionally, high allele burden can stratify the risk of thrombosis, as it is associated with a greater risk of thrombotic complications, which are a major cause of mortality in MPNs. Allele burden can also serve as a predictive factor for disease progression and the likelihood of relapse after stem cell transplantation. Thus, measuring allele burden can help serve as a marker to assess measurable residual disease (MRD) following treatment with interferon or hematopoietic cell transplantation.

Mutation analysis can be completed with equivalent sensitivity and specificity through use of either peripheral blood granulocytes or bone marrow. Currently, qPCR is the most widely used method for allele burden measurement as it offers high-sensitivity. Droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) is emerging as a potentially more precise quantification method. NGS also detects JAK2 and other potential pathogenic mutations.

Proprietary Testing

In 2017 the FDA approved ipsogen® JAK2 RGQ PCR Kit (FDA, 2017b) to detect Janus Tyrosine Kinase 2 (JAK2) gene mutation G1849T (V617F) with an allele-specific, quantitative, PCR using an amplification refractory mutation system (ARMS). The device marketing authorization was based on data from a clinical study of 473 suspected patients with MPNs, 276 with suspected PV, 98 with suspected ET, and 99 with suspected PMF. The study compared results from the ipsogen JAK2 RGQ PCR Kit to results obtained with independently validated bi-directional sequencing. The study found that the ipsogen JAK2 RGQ PCR Kit test was in 96.8% agreement with the reference method, 100% in positive agreement, and 95.1% in negative agreement, with 458 samples in agreement out of 473. The concordance with each condition was also high; agreement of 90.8% within the ET samples (89/98), 94.9% agreement within the PMF samples (94/99), and 99.6% within the PV samples (275/276). All three conditions had positive agreements of 100%. The authors went on to note that the 15 samples with disagreeing results had mutation levels under the detection capability of bi-directional sequencing. To validate these 15 samples, an independently validated NGS panel was used to compare results with the kit, and all 15 samples were found to test positive, thereby agreeing with the kit. The authors concluded that the kit was accurate for any mutation levels at or above 1%.

Other proprietary tests are available for mutational analysis in MPN. IntelliGEN® Myeloid is a NGS assay that analyzes fifty genes for somatic mutations that could be useful in providing diagnostic or prognostic information for patients with MDS, AML, or MPN. The LeukoVantage® Myeloid Neoplasm Mutation Panel detects myeloid neoplasm-associated mutations in 48 genes associated with AML, MDS, and MPN. The LeukoVantage AML panel can be used to assess AML subclass and prognosis based on genetic abnormalities in NPM1, CEBPA, and RUNX1. NeoGenomics offers tests such as the MPN Reflex Test, a sequential testing panel for qualitative detection of JAK2 V617F, JAK2 Exon 12-14, CALR exon 9, and MPL exon. Centogene has released a Myeloid Tumor Panel which targets 35 genes that are associated with myeloid malignancies which also include AML, MPN, MDS, CML, CMML, and JMML.

Analytical Validity

Poluben et al. (2019) analyzed the characteristics of myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) in patients exposed to ionizing radiation (IR) from the 1986 Chernobyl accident. 281 patients (90 exposed to radiation, 181 unexposed) were included. JAK2, MPL, and CALR mutations were identified. IR-exposed patients had several different genetic features compared to the unexposed cohort: lower rate of JAK2 V617F mutations (58.4% vs 75.4%), higher rate of type 1-like CALR mutations (12.2% vs 3.1%), higher rate of triple-negative cases (27.8% vs 16.2%), and higher rate of “potentially pathogenic” sequence variants (4.8 vs 3.1). The authors suggested IR-exposed patients as a cohort with “distinct” genomic characteristics.

Rosenthal et al. (2021) studied the analytical validity of a 48-gene NGS panel for detecting mutations in myeloid neoplasms. The panel detects detect single nucleotide variations (SNVs), insertions/deletions, and FLT3 internal tandem duplications (FLT3-ITD). 184 samples were analyzed using the 48-gene panel and compared to those identified by a 35-gene hematologic neoplasms panel using an additional 137 samples. Analytical validation yielded 99.6% sensitivity and 100% specificity. Concordance of variants detected by the 2 tested panels was 100%. “Among patients with suspected myeloid neoplasms, 54.5% patients had at least one clinically significant mutation: 77% in AML patients, 48% in MDS, and 45% in MPN.” The authors conclude that "the assay can identify mutations associated with diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment options of myeloid neoplasms even in technically challenging genes."

Clinical Utility and Validity

An Argentinean study focusing on establishing the frequency of JAK2, MPL, and CALR mutations and comparing their clinical and hematological features corroborates this importance. Mutations of JAK2V617F, JAK2 exon 12, MPL W515L/K and CALR were analyzed in 439 patients with BCR-ABL1- negative MPN, and it was demonstrated that these mutations were present in 94.9% of the cases of PV, 85.5% in patients with essential thrombocythemia (ET), and 85.2% with primary myelofibrosis, leading the researchers to conclude that “the combined genetic tests of these driver mutations are essential for accurate diagnoses of BCR-ABL1-negative MPN.”

Guidelines and Recommendations

International Consensus Classification for Myeloproliferative Neoplasms 

In 2022, a new International Consensus Classification (ICC) was introduced for myeloid neoplasms and acute leukemias by experts involved in prior editions of the WHO classification. The group attempted to refine the diagnostic criteria to show a distinction between the subtypes. They proposed the following criteria for the diagnosis of PV, ET and PMF with subtypes of each.

Criteria for PV

Diagnosis of PV requires meeting either all three major criteria, or the first two major criteria and the minor criterion:

Major Criteria

1. Hemoglobin >16.5 g/dL in men; Hemoglobin >16.0 g/dL in women, or Hematocrit >49% in men; Hematocrit >48% in women, or Increased red cell mass (More than 25% above mean normal predicted value) 
2. Bone marrow biopsy showing hypercellularity for age with trilineage growth (panmyelosis) including prominent erythroid, granulocytic, and megakaryocytic proliferation with pleomorphic, mature megakaryocytes (differences in size) 
3. Presence of JAK2V617F or JAK2 exon 12 mutation 

Minor Criteria

Subnormal serum erythropoietin level

Criteria for Post-PV myelofibrosis (MF) 

Diagnosis of Post-PV MF requires meeting all required criteria and at least two additional criteria: 

Major Criteria 

1. A prior diagnosis of PV 
2. Bone marrow fibrosis Grade 2/3 

Additional Criteria 

1. Anemia or a reduced need for either phlebotomy or cytoreductive treatment to manage erythrocytosis. 
2. Presence of leukoerthyroblastosis (immature white and red blood cells in the bloodstream) 
3. An increase in palpable splenomegaly of more than 5 cm from baseline or development of a newly palpable spleen. 
4. Development of at least 2 (or all 3) of the following constitutional symptoms: weight loss greater than 10% in 6 months, night sweats, unexplainable fever greater than 37.5 degrees Celsius (99.5 degrees Fahrenheit) 

Criteria for ET

Diagnosis of ET requires meeting all four major criteria or the first three major criteria and the minor criterion:

Major Criteria

1. Platelet count ≥450 × 109 /L 
2. Bone marrow biopsy showing proliferation mainly of the megakaryocyte lineage with increased numbers of enlarged, mature megakaryocytes with hyperlobulated nuclei. No significant increase or left shift in neutrophil granulopoiesis or erythropoiesis. 
3. Not meeting WHO criteria for BCR-ABL1+ CML, PV, PMF, myelodysplastic syndromes, or other myeloid neoplasms.
4. Presence of JAK2, CALR, or MPL mutation

Minor Criteria

Presence of a clonal marker or absence of evidence for reactive thrombocytosis

Criteria for Post-RT MF

Diagnosis of Post-ET MF requires meeting all required criteria and at least 2 additional criteria 

Required Criteria 

1. Previous diagnosis of ET 
2. Bone marrow fibrosis grade 2/3 

Additional criteria 

1. Anemia, with a decrease in hemoglobin (b) concentration of more than 2 g/dL from baseline 
2. Presence of leukoerythroblastosis (immature white and red blood cells in the bloodstream) 
3. An increase in palpable splenomegaly of more than 5 cm from baseline or the development of a newly palpable spleen 
4. Elevated LDH levels 
5. Development of at least 2 (or all 3) of the following constitutional symptoms: weight loss greater than 10% in 6 months, night sweats, unexplainable fever greater than 37.5 degrees Celsius (99.5 degrees Fahrenheit) 

Criteria for PMF, early/prefibrotic stage

Diagnosis of prePMF requires meeting all three major criteria, and at least one minor criterion:

Major Criteria

1. Megakaryocytic proliferation and atypia, BM fibrosis Grade 2, increased age-adjusted BM cellularity, granulocytic proliferation, and may show decreased erythropoiesis.
2. Not meeting the WHO criteria for BCR-ABL1+ CML, PV, ET, myelodysplastic syndromes, or other myeloid neoplasms
3. Presence of JAK2, CALR, or MPL mutation or in the absence of these mutations, presence of another clonal marker (e.g., ASXL1, EZH2, TET2, IDH1/IDH2, SRSF2, SF3B1), or absence of minor reactive BM reticulin fibrosis

Minor Criteria

1. Anemia not attributed to a comorbid condition.
2. Leukocytosis ≥11 × 10⁹/L
3. Palpable splenomegaly
4. LDH increased to above upper normal limit of institutional reference range.

Criteria for overt fibrotic stage PMF

Diagnosis of overt PMF requires meeting all three major criteria, and at least one minor criterion(confirmed in 2 consecutive determinations).

Major Criteria

1. Presence of megakaryocytic proliferation and atypia, accompanied by either reticulin and/or collagen fibrosis grades 2 or 3
2. Not meeting WHO criteria for ET, PV, BCR-ABL1+ CML, myelodysplastic syndromes, or other myeloid neoplasms
3. Presence of JAK2, CALR, or MPL mutation or in the absence of these mutations, presence of another clonal marker (e.g., ASXL1, EZH2, TET2, IDH1/IDH2, SRSF2, SF3B1), or absence of reactive myelofibrosis

Minor Criteria

1. Anemia not attributed to a comorbid condition.
2. Leukocytosis ≥11 × 109/L
3. Palpable splenomegaly
4. LDH increased to above upper normal limit of institutional reference range.
5. Leukoerythroblastosis

These guidelines also list additional “clinicopathologic entities” for MPNs: “neutrophilic leukemia (CNL), chronic eosinophilic leukemia, and MPN, unclassifiable (MPN-U)”. 

European LeukemiaNet (ELN)

ELN guidelines also recommend “strict adherence” to these guidelines for the three categories of Philadelphia-negative MPNs, (i.e. ET, PV, and MF).

However, they also recommend “searching” for complementary clonal markers such as ASXL1, EZH2, IDH1/2, and SRSF2 for patients that tested negative for the three driver mutations and have bone marrow features as well as a clinical phenotype consistent with myelofibrosis.

National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN)

The NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2024 for Myeloproliferative Neoplasms recommends “molecular testing for JAK2 V617F mutations as part of an initial workup for all patients molecular testing for CALR and MPL mutations should be performed for patients with suspected ET and MFA, and molecular testing for JAK2 exon 12 should be done for patients who test negative for JAK2 but are suspected of PV. An NGS panel including JAK2, CALR, and MPL may also be used for the workup of all patients.

 The NCCN lists the 2022 edition of the ICC diagnostic criteria. The NCCN does state that NGS “may be useful to establish clonality in selected circumstances (e.g, triple negative non-mutated JAK2, MPL, and CALR).  They include a list of somatic mutations with prognostic significance in individuals with MPN that includes the ASXL1, EZH2, RAS, IDH1/2, SRSF2, TP53, U2AF1, DNMT3A, and CBL. 

For individuals suspected of MPN, the NCCN recommends excluding a diagnosis of chronic myeloid leukemia: “Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) or a multiplex reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), if available, on peripheral blood to detect BCR: ABL1 transcripts and exclude the diagnosis of CML is especially recommended for patients with left-shifted leukocytosis and/or thrombocytosis with basophilia.”

Currently, the NCCN reports that “at the present time, the utility of JAK2 V617F allele burden reduction as a predictor of treatment efficacy remains unclear. . . Therefore, measurement of the JAK2 V617F allele burden is not currently recommended for use in routine clinical practice to guide treatment decisions.”

British Society for Hematology (BSH)

The BSH recommends testing for CALR for patients suspected of ET and PMR, as CALR mutations account for most patients without either a JAK2 or MPL mutation. The authors found that as many as one third of ET and PMF patients had a mutation in exon 9 of the CALR gene (Harrison et al., 2014).

The BSH also published guidelines on the diagnosis of polycythemia vera. In it, they divide PV into JAK2-positive and JAK2-negative PV. For JAK2-positive PV, the only two diagnostic criteria are as follows:

• “High hematocrit (>0·52 in men, >0·48 in women) OR raised red cell mass (>25% above predicted)” 
• “Mutation in JAK2” 

For JAK2-negative PV, the diagnostic criteria are as follows (requiring A1-A4, as well as another “A” criteria or two “B” criteria). 

• “A1 Raised red cell mass (>25% above predicted) OR hematocrit ≥0·60 in men, ≥0·56 in women.”
• “A2 Absence of mutation in JAK2”
• “A3 No cause of secondary erythrocytosis”
• “A4 Bone marrow histology consistent with polycythemia vera”
• “A5 Palpable splenomegaly”
• “A6 Presence of an acquired genetic abnormality (excluding BCR‐ABL1) in the hematopoietic cells.” 
• “B1 Thrombocytosis (platelet count >450 × 109 /l)” 
• “B2 Neutrophil leucocytosis (neutrophil count >10 × 109 /l in non‐smokers, ≥12.5 × 109 /l in smokers)” 
• “B3 Radiological evidence of splenomegaly” 
• “B4 Low serum erythropoietin”

The guidelines also note that investigation of erythrocytosis should be undertaken to properly identify the diagnosis. The BSH remarks that EPO receptor mutations may be a primary cause for erythrocytosis and that EGNL1, VHL, and EPAS1 mutations may be a secondary cause. Other hemoglobinopathies caused by mutations in genes such as HBA1, HBA2, HBB, or BGPM may also be a factor.

In 2021, the BSH published guidelines on the use of genetic tests to diagnose and manage patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms. The following recommendations were made:

1. “Molecular screening for JAK2, CALR and MPL variants as appropriate is recommended in patients with persistent erythrocytosis or thrombocytosis (GRADE 1B). 
2. Screening for JAK2 V617F is recommended in cases with normal blood counts and unexplained splanchnic vein thrombosis (GRADE 1B) and may be considered in selected patients with unexplained cerebral vein thrombosis (GRADE 2C). 
3. Screening for CALR variants may be considered in patients with splanchnic vein thrombosis or cerebral vein thrombosis (GRADE 2C). 
4. Screening for JAK2, CALR and MPL variants should be considered for patients with arterial or unprovoked venous thrombosis who have a mildly or variably elevated hematocrit or platelet count that persists for 2–3 months (GRADE 2C). 
5. BCR–ABL1 should be excluded in cases with persistent thrombocytosis negative for JAK2, CALR and MPL variants or with atypical features (GRADE 1B). 
6. Younger patients (e.g. under 60 years) with bone marrow histology typical of ET [or myeloproliferative neoplasm, unclassifiable (MPN-U) or suspected prefibrotic MF] where confirmation of a clonal disorder would be useful in view of the patient’s likely long-term disease course and ideally where a broad panel that covers non-canonical variants in JAK2 and MPL and a range of other driver genes is available. 
7. Patients with significant thrombocytosis (e.g., platelet count > 600 × 109 /l), no reactive cause and borderline bone marrow histology, where cytoreduction would be indicated if there was convincing evidence of a clonal disorder. Examples would include those with an unexplained thrombotic event, particularly younger patients. For older patients without thrombosis, testing may be considered but results must be interpreted with caution in view of the possibility of incidental CH. 
8. A myeloid gene panel and cytogenetic analysis (or equivalent) is recommended for patients with bone marrow histology and clinical features consistent with PMF (+/− suggestive features of MDS or MDS/MPN) who test negative for JAK2/CALR/MPL (GRADE 1B).
9. A myeloid gene panel and cytogenetic analysis (or equivalent) is not recommended for most patients with JAK2/CALR/MPL-negative erythrocytosis or thrombocytosis but may be considered in individual cases (GRADE 2C). 
10. Myeloid gene panel testing is recommended for MPN cases who test positive for JAK2/CALR/MPL mutations and have additional cytopenias(s) at diagnosis, unexplained ring sideroblasts or other dysplasia, increased blasts (including blastic transformation), peripheral blood monocytosis or atypical clinical features (GRADE 1B). 
11. Myeloid gene panel testing, and conventional karyotyping are recommended for all patients with PMF, post-PV or post-ET MF who are candidates for allogeneic stem cell transplant (GRADE 1B). 
12. Myeloid gene panel testing should be considered for other patients if the additional genomic data will guide clinical management (GRADE 2C). 
13. High-sensitivity assays of mutant allele burden are recommended following post-allogeneic stem cell transplant to monitor for residual disease (GRADE 1C). 
14. Quantitative assays of mutant allele burden are not recommended for most MPN patients but may be considered where demonstration of molecular response would influence clinical management (GRADE 2C).
15. Patients with persistent eosinophilia should be investigated initially for FIP1L1–PDGFRA by FISH and/or nested RT-PCR (GRADE 1B). 
16. BM cytogenetics or FISH is recommended to screen for other fusion genes, which must then be confirmed by molecular methods (GRADE 1B). 
17. Myeloid gene panel and KIT D816V testing should be considered for patients with persistent unexplained eosinophilia who test negative for fusion genes (GRADE 2B). 
18. Testing for CSF3R variants, preferably as part of wider myeloid panel, is recommended for all patients with suspected CNL (Grade 2B). 
19. Sensitive testing for KIT D816V is recommended for all patients with a clinical suspicion of mastocytosis (GRADE 1B). 
20. If negative for KIT D816V, screening for other KIT mutations should be considered for adults (but is recommended for children) (GRADE 1B). 
21. Myeloid panel analysis is recommended for patients with advanced SM who are candidates for allogeneic stem cell transplantation (GRADE 1B).
22. Myeloid panel analysis may be considered for other SM patients if the apparent aggressiveness of the disease might influence options for therapy (GRADE 2B). 
23. Myeloid panel and/or BM cytogenetics should be considered to characterize the AHN component of SM-AHN (GRADE 2B).
24. BCR–ABL1 should be excluded in all cases of suspected MDS/MPN, and rearrangements associated with MLN-eo should be excluded in cases with eosinophilia (GRADE 1B). 
25. Myeloid gene panel analysis and BM cytogenetics or SNP array is recommended for patients diagnosed with MDS/MPN and for cases with suspected MDS/MPN but with indeterminate morphology (GRADE 1B)."

European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL)

For myeloproliferative neoplasms, the EASL recommends testing for JAK2 V617F mutations in splanchnic vein thrombosis patients, as well as patients with normal peripheral blood cell counts. If the JAK2 mutation test is negative, a calreticulin mutation test should be performed, and if both are negative, a bone marrow histology analysis should be performed.

European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO)

The ESMO recommends that anyone with a suspected MPN be tested for the three driver mutations (JAK2, CALR, MPL) and that genotyping should be obtained at diagnosis. However, the ESMO states that it is not recommended to repeat testing in follow-up or assessing response to treatment, except for “allogeneic stem-cell transplantation and possibly interferon treatment”. For these two assessments a detection limit of ≤1% is recommended. The ESMO also notes that conventional sequencing methods (PCR, melting analysis) may be used for detecting mutations.

State and Federal Regulations, as applicable

Food and Drug Administration (FDA)

On July 28, 2017 the FDA approved ipsogen® JAK2 RGQ PCR Kit to detect Janus Tyrosine Kinase 2 (JAK2) gene mutation G1849T (V617F) with an allele-specific, quantitative, PCR using an amplification refractory mutation system. This is the first FDA-authorized test intended to help physicians in evaluating patients for suspected PV. However, the FDA specifically states that this test is not intended for a stand-alone diagnosis of an MPN, nor can it detect less common mutations for MPN such as an exon 12 mutation.

Many labs have developed specific tests that they must validate and perform in house. These laboratory-developed tests (LDTs) are regulated by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) as high-complexity tests under the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988 (CLIA ’88). As an LDT, the U. S. Food and Drug Administration has not approved or cleared this test; however, FDA clearance or approval is not currently required for clinical use.

Billing/Coding/Physician Documentation Information

This policy may apply to the following codes. Inclusion of a code in this section does not guarantee that it will be reimbursed. For further information on reimbursement guidelines, please see Administrative Policies on the Blue Cross Blue Shield of North Carolina web site at www.bcbsnc.com. They are listed in the Category Search on the Medical Policy search page.

Applicable service codes: 81120, 81121, 81175, 81176, 81206, 81207, 81208, 81219, 81236, 81237, 81270, 81273, 81275, 81276, 81279, 81311, 81338, 81339, 81347, 81348, 81351, 81352, 81353, 81357, 81403, 81405, 81432, 81442, 81450, 81455, 81479, 0017U, 0027U

BCBSNC may request medical records for determination of medical necessity. When medical records are requested, letters of support and/or explanation are often useful, but are not sufficient documentation unless all specific information needed to make a medical necessity determination is included.

Scientific Background and Reference Sources

For Policy Titled: JAK2, CALR, MPL Mutation Analysis in Myeloproliferative Neoplasms

1. Grinfeld J, Nangalia J, Green AR. Molecular determinants of pathogenesis and clinical phenotype in myeloproliferative neoplasms. Haematologica. 2017;102(1):7-17. doi:10.3324/haematol.2014.113845
2. Rumi E, Cazzola M. Diagnosis, risk stratification, and response evaluation in classical myeloproliferative neoplasms. Blood. Feb 9 2017;129(6):680-692. doi:10.1182/blood-2016-10-695957
3. Vainchenker W, Kralovics R. Genetic basis and molecular pathophysiology of classical myeloproliferative neoplasms. Blood. Feb 9 2017;129(6):667-679. doi:10.1182/blood-2016-10-695940
4. Titmarsh GJ, Duncombe AS, McMullin MF, et al. How common are myeloproliferative neoplasms? A systematic review and meta-analysis. American journal of hematology. Jun 2014;89(6):581-7. 
5. NCCN. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines: Myeloproliferative Neoplasms v2.2024. NCCN. https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/mpn.pdf
6. Tefferi A. Clinical manifestations and diagnosis of primary myelofibrosis. Updated September 13, 2022. https://www.uptodate.com/contents/clinical-manifestations-and-diagnosis-of-primary-myelofibrosis
7. Tefferi A. Clinical manifestations and diagnosis of polycythemia vera. Updated November 27, 2024. https://www.uptodate.com/contents/clinical-manifestations-and-diagnosis-of-polycythemia-vera
8. Tefferi A. Clinical manifestations, pathogenesis, and diagnosis of essential thrombocythemia. Updated January 9, 2023. https://www.uptodate.com/contents/diagnosis-and-clinical-manifestations-of-essential-thrombocythemia
9. Tefferi A. Overview of the myeloproliferative neoplasms. Updated September 13, 2022. https://www.uptodate.com/contents/overview-of-the-myeloproliferative-neoplasms
10. Rampal R, Al-Shahrour F, Abdel-Wahab O, et al. Integrated genomic analysis illustrates the central role of JAK-STAT pathway activation in myeloproliferative neoplasm pathogenesis. Blood. May 29 2014;123(22):e123-33. doi:10.1182/blood-2014-02-554634
11. Silvennoinen O, Hubbard SR. Molecular insights into regulation of JAK2 in myeloproliferative neoplasms. Blood. May 28 2015;125(22):3388-92. doi:10.1182/blood-2015-01-621110
12. Hussein K, Granot G, Shpilberg O, Kreipe H. Clinical utility gene card for: familial polycythaemia vera. Eur J Hum Genet. 2013;21(6)doi:10.1038/ejhg.2012.216
13. Coates TD. Approach to the patient with neutrophilia. Updated June 28, 2024. https://www.uptodate.com/contents/approach-to-the-patient-with-neutrophilia
14. Tuteja S, Glick H, Matthai W, et al. Prospective CYP2C19 Genotyping to Guide Antiplatelet Therapy Following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Pragmatic Randomized Clinical Trial. Circ Genom Precis Med. Jan 12 2020;doi:10.1161/circgen.119.002640
15. Suchowersky O. Huntington disease: Management. Updated December 18, 2024. https://www.uptodate.com/contents/huntington-disease-management
16. Ahern TP, Hertz DL, Damkier P, et al. Cytochrome P-450 2D6 (CYP2D6) Genotype and Breast Cancer Recurrence in Tamoxifen-Treated Patients: Evaluating the Importance of Loss of Heterozygosity. American journal of epidemiology. Jan 15 2017;185(2):75-85. doi:10.1093/aje/kww178
17. Kelly LE, Rieder M, van den Anker J, et al. More codeine fatalities after tonsillectomy in North American children. Pediatrics. May 2012;129(5):e1343-7. doi:10.1542/peds.2011-2538
18. Krishnamurthi S, Kamath S. Clinical presentation and risk factors for chemotherapy-associated diarrhea, constipation, and intestinal perforation. Updated May 30, 2024. https://www.uptodate.com/contents/clinical-presentation-and-risk-factors-for-chemotherapy-associated-diarrhea-constipation-and-intestinal-perforation
19. Castro-Rojas CA, Esparza-Mota AR, Hernandez-Cabrera F, et al. Thymidylate synthase gene variants as predictors of clinical response and toxicity to fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy for colorectal cancer. Drug metabolism and personalized therapy. Dec 20 2017;32(4):209-218. doi:10.1515/dmpt-2017-0028
20. van der Wouden CH, van Rhenen MH, Jama WOM, et al. Development of the PGx-Passport: A Panel of Actionable Germline Genetic Variants for Pre-Emptive Pharmacogenetic Testing. Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics. Oct 2019;106(4):866-873. doi:10.1002/cpt.1489
21. Myriad. What is the difference between traditional “single-gene” testing and the GeneSight® test’s proprietary CPGx® approach? https://s3.amazonaws.com/myriad-web/Managed+Care/CPGx-approach.pdf
22. Myriad. GeneSight. https://s3.amazonaws.com/myriad-web/Managed+Care/GeneSight-ExecutiveSummary.pdf
23. Myriad. Myriad Genetics Announces Upgrades to the GeneSight® Test. https://investor.myriad.com/news-releases/news-release-detail/24211/
24. Mayo. Focused Pharmacogenomics Panel, Varies. https://www.mayocliniclabs.com/test-catalog/Overview/610057
25. Sema4. Comprehensive Pharmacogenetic Genotyping Panel. https://sema4.com/products/test-catalog/comprehensive-pharmacogenetic-genotyping-panel/#
26. Benitez J, Cool CL, Scotti DJ. Use of combinatorial pharmacogenomic guidance in treating psychiatric disorders. Personalized medicine. Nov 2018;15(6):481-494. doi:10.2217/pme-2018-0074
27. FDA. 510(k) SUBSTANTIAL EQUIVALENCE DETERMINATION DECISION SUMMARY ASSAY ONLY TEMPLATE. https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/reviews/K043576.pdf
28. OneOme. The RightMed® Test. https://oneome.com/rightmed-test/#genes-covered
29. Aka I, Bernal CJ, Carroll R, Maxwell-Horn A, Oshikoya KA, Van Driest SL. Clinical Pharmacogenetics of Cytochrome P450-Associated Drugs in Children. J Pers Med. Nov 2 2017;7(4)doi:10.3390/jpm7040014
30. Ting S, Schug S. The pharmacogenomics of pain management: prospects for personalized medicine. J Pain Res. 2016;9:49-56. doi:10.2147/jpr.s55595 
31. Kapur BM, Lala PK, Shaw JL. Pharmacogenetics of chronic pain management. Clinical biochemistry. Sep 2014;47(13-14):1169-87. doi:10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2014.05.065 
32. Sherva R, Kowall NW. Genetics of Alzheimer disease. Updated May 19, 2022. https://www.uptodate.com/contents/genetics-of-alzheimer-disease 
33. Myers RH, Schaefer EJ, Wilson PW, et al. Apolipoprotein E epsilon4 association with dementia in a population-based study: The Framingham study. Neurology. Mar 1996;46(3):673-7. doi:10.1212/wnl.46.3.673 
34. Cacabelos R, Martinez R, Fernandez-Novoa L, et al. Genomics of Dementia: APOE- and CYP2D6-Related Pharmacogenetics. Int J Alzheimers Dis. 2012;2012:518901. doi:10.1155/2012/518901 
35. FDA. FDA Converts Novel Alzheimer’s Disease Treatment to Traditional Approval. https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-converts-novel-alzheimers-disease-treatment-traditional-approval 
36. Tantry U, Hennekens C, Zehnder J, Gurbel P. Clopidogrel resistance and clopidogrel treatment failure. Updated September 19, 2024. https://www.uptodate.com/contents/clopidogrel-resistance-and-clopidogrel-treatment-failure 
37. Tuteja S, Glick H, Matthai W, et al. Prospective CYP2C19 Genotyping to Guide Antiplatelet Therapy Following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Pragmatic Randomized Clinical Trial. Circ Genom Precis Med. Jan 12 2020;doi:10.1161/circgen.119.002640 
38. Suchowersky O. Huntington disease: Management. Updated December 18, 2024. https://www.uptodate.com/contents/huntington-disease-management 
39. Ahern TP, Hertz DL, Damkier P, et al. Cytochrome P-450 2D6 (CYP2D6) Genotype and Breast Cancer Recurrence in Tamoxifen-Treated Patients: Evaluating the Importance of Loss of Heterozygosity. American journal of epidemiology. Jan 15 2017;185(2):75-85. doi:10.1093/aje/kww178 
40. Kelly LE, Rieder M, van den Anker J, et al. More codeine fatalities after tonsillectomy in North American children. Pediatrics. May 2012;129(5):e1343-7. doi:10.1542/peds.2011-2538 
41. Krishnamurthi S, Kamath S. Clinical presentation and risk factors for chemotherapy-associated diarrhea, constipation, and intestinal perforation. Updated May 30, 2024. https://www.uptodate.com/contents/clinical-presentation-and-risk-factors-for-chemotherapy-associated-diarrhea-constipation-and-intestinal-perforation
42. GTR. OneOme RightMed pharmacogenomic test. Updated 07/24/2017. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/gtr/tests/552110.3/performance-characteristics/ 
43. Greden JF, Parikh SV, Rothschild AJ, et al. Impact of pharmacogenomics on clinical outcomes in major depressive disorder in the GUIDED trial: A large, patient- and rater-blinded, randomized, controlled study. Journal of Psychiatric Research. 2019/01/04/ 2019;doi:10.1016/j.jpsychires.2019.01.003 
44. Kekic A, Seetharam M, Singh P, et al. Integrating pharmacogenomics panel testing for supportive care medications in patients with solid tumors. Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2020;38(15_suppl):e24114-e24114. doi:10.1200/JCO.2020.38.15_suppl.e24114 
45. Plumpton CO, Pirmohamed M, Hughes DA. Cost-Effectiveness of Panel Tests for Multiple Pharmacogenes Associated With Adverse Drug Reactions: An Evaluation Framework. Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics. Jun 2019;105(6):1429-1438. doi:10.1002/cpt.1312 
46. Braten LS, Haslemo T, Jukic MM, Ingelman-Sundberg M, Molden E, Kringen MK. Impact of CYP2C19 genotype on sertraline exposure in 1200 Scandinavian patients. Neuropsychopharmacology. Feb 2020;45(3):570-576. doi:10.1038/s41386-019-0554-x 
47. Roscizewski L, Henneman A, Snyder T. Effect of pharmacogenomic testing on pharmacotherapy decision making in patients with symptoms of depression in an interprofessional primary care clinic. J Am Pharm Assoc (2003). Nov 3 2021;doi:10.1016/j.japh.2021.10.033 
48. Stevenson JM, Alexander GC, Palamuttam N, Mehta HB. Projected Utility of Pharmacogenomic Testing Among Individuals Hospitalized With COVID-19: A Retrospective Multicenter Study in the United States. Clin Transl Sci. Jan 2021;14(1):153-162. doi:10.1111/cts.12919 
49. Galli M, Benenati S, Capodanno D, et al. Guided versus standard antiplatelet therapy in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: a systematic review and meta-analysis. The Lancet. 2021;397(10283):1470-1483.  
50. Oslin DW, Lynch KG, Shih MC, et al. Effect of Pharmacogenomic Testing for Drug-Gene Interactions on Medication Selection and Remission of Symptoms in Major Depressive Disorder: The PRIME Care Randomized Clinical Trial. Jama. Jul 12 2022;328(2):151-161. doi:10.1001/jama.2022.9805 
51. Ghanbarian S, Wong GWK, Bunka M, et al. Cost-effectiveness of pharmacogenomic-guided treatment for major depression. Cmaj. Nov 14 2023;195(44):E1499-e1508. doi:10.1503/cmaj.221785 
52. Swen JJ, van der Wouden CH, Manson LE, et al. A 12-gene pharmacogenetic panel to prevent adverse drug reactions: an open-label, multicentre, controlled, cluster-randomised crossover implementation study. Lancet. Feb 4 2023;401(10374):347-356. doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(22)01841-4 
53. CPIC. What is CPIC? https://cpicpgx.org/ 
54. Karnes JH, Rettie AE, Somogyi AA, et al. Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) Guideline for CYP2C9 and HLA-B Genotypes and Phenytoin Dosing: 2020 Update. Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics. 2021;109(2):302-309. doi:10.1002/cpt.2008 
55. Caudle KE, Rettie AE, Whirl-Carrillo M, et al. Clinical pharmacogenetics implementation consortium guidelines for CYP2C9 and HLA-B genotypes and phenytoin dosing. Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics. Nov 2014;96(5):542-8. doi:10.1038/clpt.2014.159 
56. Johnson JA, Caudle KE, Gong L, et al. Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) Guideline for Pharmacogenetics-Guided Warfarin Dosing: 2017 Update. Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics. Sep 2017;102(3):397-404. doi:10.1002/cpt.668 
57. Theken KN, Lee CR, Gong L, et al. Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium Guideline (CPIC) for CYP2C9 and Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs. Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics. Aug 2020;108(2):191-200. doi:10.1002/cpt.1830 
58. Hicks JK, Sangkuhl K, Swen JJ, et al. Clinical pharmacogenetics implementation consortium guideline (CPIC) for CYP2D6 and CYP2C19 genotypes and dosing of tricyclic antidepressants: 2016 update. Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics. Jul 2016;102(1):37-44. doi:10.1002/cpt.597 
59. Crews KR, Monte AA, Huddart R, et al. Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) guideline for CYP2D6, OPRM1, and COMT genotype and select opioid therapy. Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics. 2021;n/a(n/a)doi:10.1002/cpt.2149 
60. Bousman CA, Stevenson JM, Ramsey LB, et al. Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) Guideline for CYP2D6, CYP2C19, CYP2B6, SLC6A4, and HTR2A Genotypes and Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitor Antidepressants. Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics. Jul 2023;114(1):51-68. doi:10.1002/cpt.2903 
61. Bell GC, Caudle KE, Whirl-Carrillo M, et al. Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) guideline for CYP2D6 genotype and use of ondansetron and tropisetron. Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics. Aug 2016;102(2):213-218. doi:10.1002/cpt.598 
62. Goetz MP, Sangkuhl K, Guchelaar HJ, et al. Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) Guideline for CYP2D6 and Tamoxifen Therapy. Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics. May 2018;103(5):770-777. doi:10.1002/cpt.1007 
63. Brown JT, Bishop JR, Sangkuhl K, et al. Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium Guideline for Cytochrome P450 (CYP)2D6 Genotype and Atomoxetine Therapy. Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics. Jul 2019;106(1):94-102. doi:10.1002/cpt.1409 
64. Desta Z, Gammal RS, Gong L, et al. Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) Guideline for CYP2B6 and Efavirenz-Containing Antiretroviral Therapy. Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics. Oct 2019;106(4):726-733. doi:10.1002/cpt.1477 
65. Lee CR, Luzum JA, Sangkuhl K, et al. Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium Guideline for CYP2C19 Genotype and Clopidogrel Therapy: 2022 Update. Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics. Jan 16 2022;doi:10.1002/cpt.2526 
66. Moriyama B, Obeng AO, Barbarino J, et al. Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) Guidelines for CYP2C19 and Voriconazole Therapy. Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics. Jul 2017;102(1):45-51. doi:10.1002/cpt.583 
67. Lima JJ, Thomas CD, Barbarino J, et al. Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) Guideline for CYP2C19 and Proton Pump Inhibitor Dosing. Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics. Aug 8 2020;doi:10.1002/cpt.2015 
68. Relling MV, Schwab M, Whirl-Carrillo M, et al. Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) guideline for thiopurine dosing based on TPMT and NUDT15 genotypes: 2018 update. Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics. Nov 17 2018;doi:10.1002/cpt.1304 
69. Martin MA, Hoffman JM, Freimuth RR, et al. Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium Guidelines for HLA-B Genotype and Abacavir Dosing: 2014 update. Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics. May 2014;95(5):499-500. doi:10.1038/clpt.2014.38 
70. Hershfield MS, Callaghan JT, Tassaneeyakul W, et al. Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium guidelines for human leukocyte antigen-B genotype and allopurinol dosing. Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics. Feb 2013;93(2):153-8. doi:10.1038/clpt.2012.209 
71. Saito Y, Stamp LK, Caudle KE, et al. Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) guidelines for human leukocyte antigen B (HLA-B) genotype and allopurinol dosing: 2015 update. Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics. Jan 2016;99(1):36-7. doi:10.1002/cpt.161 
72. Phillips EJ, Sukasem C, Whirl-Carrillo M, et al. Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium Guideline for HLA Genotype and Use of Carbamazepine and Oxcarbazepine: 2017 Update. Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics. Apr 2018;103(4):574-581. doi:10.1002/cpt.1004 
73. Gammal RS, Court MH, Haidar CE, et al. Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) Guideline for UGT1A1 and Atazanavir Prescribing. Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics. Apr 2016;99(4):363-9. doi:10.1002/cpt.269 
74. CPIC. Genes-Drugs. Updated 06/15/2021. Accessed 02/05/2023, https://cpicpgx.org/genes-drugs/ 
75. Clancy JP, Johnson SG, Yee SW, et al. Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) guidelines for ivacaftor therapy in the context of CFTR genotype. Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics. Jun 2014;95(6):592-7. doi:10.1038/clpt.2014.54 
76. Gammal RS, Pirmohamed M, Somogyi AA, et al. Expanded Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium Guideline for Medication Use in the Context of G6PD Genotype. Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics. May 2023;113(5):973-985. doi:10.1002/cpt.2735 
77. Cooper-DeHoff RM, Niemi M, Ramsey LB, et al. The Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium Guideline for SLCO1B1, ABCG2, and CYP2C9 genotypes and Statin-Associated Musculoskeletal Symptoms. Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics. May 2022;111(5):1007-1021. doi:10.1002/cpt.2557 
78. Birdwell KA, Decker B, Barbarino JM, et al. Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) Guidelines for CYP3A5 Genotype and Tacrolimus Dosing. Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics. Jul 2015;98(1):19-24. doi:10.1002/cpt.113 
79. Muir AJ, Gong L, Johnson SG, et al. Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) guidelines for IFNL3 (IL28B) genotype and PEG interferon-alpha-based regimens. Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics. Feb 2014;95(2):141-6. doi:10.1038/clpt.2013.203 
80. Gonsalves SG, Dirksen RT, Sangkuhl K, et al. Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) Guideline for the Use of Potent Volatile Anesthetic Agents and Succinylcholine in the Context of RYR1 or CACNA1S Genotypes. Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics. Jun 2019;105(6):1338-1344. doi:10.1002/cpt.1319 
81. Holmes DR, Jr., Dehmer GJ, Kaul S, Leifer D, O'Gara PT, Stein CM. ACCF/AHA clopidogrel clinical alert: approaches to the FDA "boxed warning": a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Task Force on clinical expert consensus documents and the American Heart Association endorsed by the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. Jul 20 2010;56(4):321-41. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2010.05.013 
82. Franklin GM. Opioids for chronic noncancer pain: a position paper of the American Academy of Neurology. Neurology. Sep 30 2014;83(14):1277-84. doi:10.1212/wnl.0000000000000839 
83. AACC. Using Clinical Laboratory Tests to Monitor Drug Therapy in Pain Management Patients. Updated 01/01/2017. https://www.aacc.org/science-and-practice/practice-guidelines/using-clinical-laboratory-tests-to-monitor-drug-therapy-in-pain-management-patients 
84. Chang KL, Weitzel K, Schmidt S. Pharmacogenetics: Using Genetic Information to Guide Drug Therapy. Am Fam Physician. Oct 1 2015;92(7):588-94.  
85. Lunenburg C, van der Wouden CH, Nijenhuis M, et al. Dutch Pharmacogenetics Working Group (DPWG) guideline for the gene-drug interaction of DPYD and fluoropyrimidines. Eur J Hum Genet. Nov 19 2020;doi:10.1038/s41431-019-0540-0 
86. FDA. Table of Pharmacogenetic Associations. Updated 11/08/2021. https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/precision-medicine/table-pharmacogenetic-associations 
87. ISPG. A Statement from the International Society of Psychiatric Genetics. Updated 3/11/2019. https://ispg.net/genetic-testing-statement/ 
88. AACAP. Clinical Use of Pharmacogenetic Tests in Prescribing Psychotropic Medications for Children and Adolescents. Updated 03/2020. https://www.aacap.org/aacap/Policy_Statements/2020/Clinical-Use-Pharmacogenetic-Tests-Prescribing-Psychotropic-Medications-for-Children-Adolescents.aspx 
89. Pratt VM, Del Tredici AL, Hachad H, et al. Recommendations for Clinical CYP2C19 Genotyping Allele Selection: A Report of the Association for Molecular Pathology. The Journal of Molecular Diagnostics. 2018/05/01/ 2018;20(3):269-276. doi:10.1016/j.jmoldx.2018.01.011 
90. Pratt VM, Cavallari LH, Del Tredici AL, et al. Recommendations for Clinical <em>CYP2C9</em> Genotyping Allele Selection: A Joint Recommendation of the Association for Molecular Pathology and College of American Pathologists. The Journal of Molecular Diagnostics. 2019;21(5):746-755. doi:10.1016/j.jmoldx.2019.04.003 
91. Pratt VM, Cavallari LH, Del Tredici AL, et al. Recommendations for Clinical Warfarin Genotyping Allele Selection: A Report of the Association for Molecular Pathology and the College of American Pathologists. J Mol Diagn. Jul 2020;22(7):847-859. doi:10.1016/j.jmoldx.2020.04.204 
92. Pratt VM, Cavallari LH, Del Tredici AL, et al. Recommendations for Clinical CYP2D6 Genotyping Allele Selection: A Joint Consensus Recommendation of the Association for Molecular Pathology, College of American Pathologists, Dutch Pharmacogenetics Working Group of the Royal Dutch Pharmacists Association, and the European Society for Pharmacogenomics and Personalized Therapy. J Mol Diagn. Sep 2021;23(9):1047-1064. doi:10.1016/j.jmoldx.2021.05.013 
93. Pratt VM, Cavallari LH, Fulmer ML, et al. <em>TPMT</em> and <em>NUDT15</em> Genotyping Recommendations: A Joint Consensus Recommendation of the Association for Molecular Pathology, Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium, College of American Pathologists, Dutch Pharmacogenetics Working Group of the Royal Dutch Pharmacists Association, European Society for Pharmacogenomics and Personalized Therapy, and Pharmacogenomics Knowledgebase. The Journal of Molecular Diagnostics. 2022;24(10):1051-1063. doi:10.1016/j.jmoldx.2022.06.007 
94. Pratt VM, Cavallari LH, Fulmer ML, et al. <em>CYP3A4</em> and <em>CYP3A5</em> Genotyping Recommendations: A Joint Consensus Recommendation of the Association for Molecular Pathology, Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium, College of American Pathologists, Dutch Pharmacogenetics Working Group of the Royal Dutch Pharmacists Association, European Society for Pharmacogenomics and Personalized Therapy, and Pharmacogenomics Knowledgebase. The Journal of Molecular Diagnostics. 2023;25(9):619-629. doi:10.1016/j.jmoldx.2023.06.008 
95. Pratt VM, Cavallari LH, Fulmer ML, et al. <em>DPYD</em> Genotyping Recommendations: A Joint Consensus Recommendation of the Association for Molecular Pathology, American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics, Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium, College of American Pathologists, Dutch Pharmacogenetics Working Group of the Royal Dutch Pharmacists Association, European Society for Pharmacogenomics and Personalized Therapy, Pharmacogenomics Knowledgebase, and Pharmacogene Variation Consortium. The Journal of Molecular Diagnostics. 2024;26(10):851-863. doi:10.1016/j.jmoldx.2024.05.015 
96. EMA. Test before fluorouracil, capecitabine, tegafur or flucytosine therapy. Reactions Weekly. 2020/05/01 2020;1804(1):6-6. doi:10.1007/s40278-020-78435-3
97. FDA. Nucleic Acid Based Tests. https://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/ProductsandMedicalProcedures/InVitroDiagnostics/ucm330711.htm
98. FDA. Table of Pharmacogenomic Biomarkers in Drug Labeling. https://www.fda.gov/drugs/science-and-research-drugs/table-pharmacogenomic-biomarkers-drug-labeling
99. FDA. Supplemental Approval. https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/appletter/2016/020839Orig1s062,s064ltr.pdf
100. FDA. Xenazine: Highlights of Prescribing Information. https://www.lundbeck.com/upload/us/files/pdf/Products/Xenazine_PI_US_EN.pdf
101. FDA. Coumadin: Highlights of Prescribing Information. https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2011/009218s107lbl.pdf
102. FDA. Cerdelga: Highlights of Prescribing Information. https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2018/205494s003lbl.pdf

For Policy Titled: Mutation Analysis in Myeloproliferative Neoplasms

Medical Director review 5/2019

Medical Director review 8/2019

Specialty Matched Consultant Advisory Panel review- 11/2019

Medical Director review 11/2019

Medical Director review 4/2020

Specialty Matched Consultant Advisory Panel review- 11/2020

Medical Director review 11/2020

Medical Director review 4/2021

Specialty Matched Consultant Advisory Panel review- 8/2021

Medical Director review 4/2023

Medical Director review 4/2024

Medical Director review 4/2025

Policy Implementation/Update Information

For Policy Titled: JAK2, CALR, MPL Mutation Analysis in Myeloproliferative Neoplasms

1/1/2019 New policy developed. BCBSNC will provide coverage for JAK2, CALR, MPL mutation analysis in myeloproliferative neoplasms when it is determined to be medically necessary, and criteria are met. Medical Director review 1/1/2019. Policy noticed 1/1/2019 for effective date 4/1/2019. (lpr)

For Policy Titled: Mutation Analysis in Myeloproliferative Neoplasms

5/14/19 Reviewed by Avalon 1st Quarter 2019 CAB. Added related policies section. Under When Not Covered Section B., removed statement: should first be tested for JAK2 mutations; if testing is negative, further testing to detect CALR and MPL mutation and for patient suspected to have ET.” Under When Not Covered Section C, removed statement: should first be tested JAK2 mutations; if testing is negative further testing to detect CALR and MPL mutations, for patient suspected to have PMF.” Under When Not Covered section, added statement: “If testing five or more genes, refer to policy AHS-M2109 Molecular Panel Testing of Cancers to Identify Targeted Therapy.” Updated Policy Guidelines section. Added PLA codes 0017U and 0027U to Billing/Coding section. Title changed from “JAK2, CALR, MPL Mutation Analysis in Myeloproliferative Neoplasms” to “Mutation Analysis in Myeloproliferative Neoplasms.” Medical Director review 5/2019. (lpr)

10/1/19 Reviewed by Avalon 2nd Quarter 2019 CAB. Under “When Covered” section added: NOTE: For 5 or more gene tests being run on the same platform, such as multi-gene panel next generation sequencing, please refer to AHS-R2162 Reimbursement Policy. Deleted coding table from Billing/Coding section. Medical Director review 8/2019. (lpr)

12/31/19 Specialty Matched Consultant Advisory Panel review 11/20/2019. No change to policy statement. (lpr)

5/12/20 Reviewed by Avalon 1st Quarter 2020 CAB. Medical Director review 4/2020. Updated Description, Policy Guidelines, References. (lpr)

12/8/20 Specialty Matched Consultant Advisory Panel review 11/18/2020. No change to policy statement. (lpr)

5/4/21 Reviewed by Avalon 1st Quarter 2021 CAB. Medical Director review 4/2021. Under “When Covered” section, removed statements: “Patients suspected to have polycythemia vera (PV) should first be tested for the most common finding JAK2V617F; and If testing for PV is negative, further testing to detect other JAK2 tyrosine kinase mutations, eg. in exon 12”; added CALR and MPL testing indication for Budd-Chiari Syndrome and PV. Under Billing/Coding section, removed CPT codes 81402, 81403; added CPT codes 81279, 81338, 81339. Updated Policy Guidelines and references. (lpr)

9/7/21 Specialty Matched Consultant Advisory Panel review 8/18/2021. No change to policy statement. (lpr)

5/17/22 Reviewed by Avalon 1st Quarter 2022 CAB. Medical Director review 4/2022. Under “When Covered” section: added coverage criteria #2 and #4-7. Added CPT codes 81120, 81121, 81236, 81237, 81348, 81479 to Billing/Coding section. Updated policy guidelines and references. (lpr)

5/16/23 Reviewed by Avalon 1st Quarter 2023 CAB. Medical Director review 4/2023. Deleted related policies section. Updated policy guidelines and references. Edited “When covered” section for clarity. Added Note 1. (lpr)

5/15/24 Reviewed by Avalon Q1 2024 CAB. Medical Director review 4/2024. Added related policies section. Under “when covered” section, added new coverage criteria #2 “To exclude a diagnosis of chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) for individuals with a suspected MPN, fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) or reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing on a peripheral blood sample to detect BCR: ABL1 transcripts is considered medically necessary.” Added additional genes to screen for in coverage criteria #3. Updated policy guidelines and references. Under Billing/Coding section, added CPT codes: 81206, 81207, 81208, 81273, 81275, 81276, 81311, 81347, 81351, 81352, 81353, 81357, 81403, 81405, 81432, 81442. Removed CPT code 81350. (lpr)

7/1/25 Reviewed by Avalon 2nd Quarter 2025 CAB. Medical Director review 4/2025. Updated policy guidelines, guidelines and recommendations and references. Under “When covered” section, Item C.3. edited to state “BM fibrosis Grade <2.”  Note 1 edited to two gene tests per AHS-R2162 Reimbursement policy.(lpr)