Medical policy: Investigational Miscellaneous Genetic and Molecular Tests

Policy number: MP 2.277

Effective date: 2/1/2026

Policy

All of the tests listed in this policy are considered investigational and are grouped according to the categories of genetic testing as outlined in MP 2.326 General Approach to Genetic Testing:

• Testing of an affected (symptomatic) individual’s germline to benefit the individual (excluding reproductive testing)
• Diagnostic testing
• Prognostic testing
• Therapeutic testing
• Testing an asymptomatic individual to determine future risk of disease

There is insufficient evidence to support a general conclusion concerning the health outcomes or benefits associated with these tests.

Policy guidelines

Genetic testing is considered investigational when criteria are not met, including when there is insufficient evidence to determine whether the technology improves health outcomes.

Genetic counseling

Genetic counseling is primarily aimed at patients who are at risk for inherited disorders, and experts recommend formal genetic counseling in most cases when genetic testing for an inherited condition is considered. The interpretation of the results of genetic tests and understanding of risk factors can be very difficult and complex. Therefore, genetic counseling will assist individuals in understanding the possible benefits and limitations of genetic testing, including the possible impact of the information on the individual’s family. Genetic counseling may alter the utilization of genetic testing substantially and may reduce inappropriate testing. Genetic counseling should be performed by an individual with experience and expertise in genetic medicine and genetic testing methods.

Cross-references:

• MP 2.326 General Approach to Genetic Testing
• MP 4.002 Experimental and Investigational Procedures

Product variations

This policy is only applicable to certain programs and products administered by Capital Blue Cross and subject to benefit variations. Please see additional information below.

FEP PPO - Refer to FEP Medical Policy Manual.

Description/Background

There are numerous commercially available genetic and molecular diagnostic, prognostic, and therapeutic tests for individuals with certain diseases or asymptomatic individuals with future risk. This evidence review evaluates miscellaneous genetic and molecular tests not addressed in a separate review. If a separate evidence review exists, then conclusions reached there supersede conclusions here. The main criterion for inclusion in this review is the limited evidence on the clinical validity for the test. As a result, these tests do not have clinical utility, and the evidence is insufficient to determine that the technology results in an improvement in the net health outcome.

Tests addressed in this medical policy

Tests assessed in this medical policy are listed in Table 1. All coding information is also found in this Table. Three types of tests are related to testing of an affected (symptomatic) individual’s germline to benefit the individual (excluding reproductive testing): diagnostic testing, prognostic testing, and therapeutic testing. The fourth type of test reviewed is testing of an asymptomatic individual to determine future risk of disease.

Table 1. Genetic and molecular tests in this medical policy

All tests listed in this table are considered investigational and therefore not covered.

*ARUP, Quest, Clinical Genomics and Epigenomics.

Note: Some genetic tests identified above do not have specific codes (i.e., GI Effects, Prometheus^® Celiac, etc.); therefore, identification of a code in this section does not denote coverage. When several or all of the codes listed are used to identify these tests, they are considered investigational. The list of codes may not be all-inclusive and are subject to change at any time. Eligibility is determined by the terms of member benefit information. In addition, not all covered services are eligible for separate reimbursement.

Rationale

Summary of evidence

The literature review was not comprehensive, but sufficient to establish lack of clinical utility. If it is determined that enough evidence has accumulated to reevaluate its potential clinical utility, the test will be removed from this evidence review and addressed separately. The lack of demonstrated clinical utility of these tests is based on the following factors: (1) there is no or extremely limited published data addressing the test; and/or (2) there is insufficient evidence demonstrating the clinical validity of the test.

Definitions

N/A

Disclaimer

Capital Blue Cross’ medical policies are used to determine coverage for specific medical technologies, procedures, equipment, and services. These medical policies do not constitute medical advice and are subject to change as required by law or applicable clinical evidence from independent treatment guidelines. Treating providers are solely responsible for medical advice and treatment of members. These policies are not a guarantee of coverage or payment. Payment of claims is subject to a determination regarding the member’s benefit program and eligibility on the date of service, and a determination that the services are medically necessary and appropriate. Final processing of a claim is based upon the terms of contract that applies to the member’s benefit program, including benefit limitations and exclusions. If a provider or a member has a question concerning this medical policy, please contact Capital Blue Cross’ Provider Services or Member Services.

References

1. Pfeifer JD, Zenhauer B, Payton J. The changing spectrum of DNA-based specimen provenance testing in surgical pathology. Am J Clin Pathol. Jan 2011; 135(1): 132–138. PMID 21173135
2. Beauvais W, Fournie G, Jones BA, et al. Modelling the expected rate of laboratory biosafety breakdowns involving rinderpest virus in the post-eradication era. Prev Vet Med. Nov 01 2013; 112(3–4): 248–256. PMID 24029703
3. Pallavi K, Kabbani T, Tariq S, et al. Clinical utility of celiac disease-associated HLA testing. Dig Dis Sci. Sep 2014; 59(9): 2199–2206. PMID 24705698
4. Ludvigsson JF, Leffler DA, Bai JC, et al. The Oslo definitions for coeliac disease and related terms. Gut. Jan 2013; 62(1): 43–52. PMID 22345659
5. Prometheus Laboratories. Celiac PLUS. Accessed May 20, 2024.
6. Pietzak MM, Schofield TC, McGinniss MJ, et al. Stratifying risk for celiac disease in a large at-risk United States population by using HLA alleles. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. Sep 2009; 7(9): 966–971. PMID 19500688
7. Ford AC, Quigley EMM, Lacy BE, et al. Efficacy of prebiotics, probiotics, and synbiotics in irritable bowel syndrome and chronic idiopathic constipation: systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Gastroenterol. Oct 2014; 109(10): 1547–1561. PMID 25000757
8. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Irritable bowel syndrome in adults: diagnosis and management (CG61). Accessed June 2, 2024.
9. McKenzie YA, Alder A, Anderson W, et al. British Dietetic Association evidence-based guidelines for the dietary management of irritable bowel syndrome in adults. J Hum Nutr Diet. Jun 2012; 25(3): 260–274. PMID 22489905
10. Weinberg DS, Smalley W, Heidelbaugh JJ, et al. American Gastroenterological Association Institute Guideline on the pharmacological management of irritable bowel syndrome. Gastroenterology. Nov 2014; 147(5): 1146–1148. PMID 25224526
11. Hill C, Guarner F, Reid G, et al. Expert consensus document: The International Scientific Association for Probiotics and Prebiotics consensus statement on the scope and appropriate use of the term probiotic. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. Aug 2014; 11(8): 506–514. PMID 24982386
12. Trinkley KE, Nahata MC. Treatment of irritable bowel syndrome. J Clin Pharm Ther. Jun 2011; 36(3): 275–282. PMID 21545610
13. Hungin AP, Mulligan C, Pot B, et al. Systematic review: probiotics in the management of lower gastrointestinal symptoms in clinical practice—an evidence-based international guide. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. Oct 2013; 38(8): 864–886. PMID 23981066
14. Ortiz-Lucas M, Tobias A, Saz P, et al. Effect of probiotic species on irritable bowel syndrome symptoms: a bring up to date meta-analysis. Rev Esp Enferm Dig. Jan 2013; 105(1): 19–36. PMID 23548070
15. Whalen K. Probiotics and prebiotics in the management of irritable bowel syndrome: a review of recent clinical trials and systematic reviews. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care. Nov 2011; 14(6): 581–587. PMID 21892075
16. Stevenson C, Blaauw R, Fredericks E, et al. Randomized clinical trial: effect of Lactobacillus plantarum 299 v on symptoms of irritable bowel syndrome. Nutrition. Oct 2014; 30(10): 1151–1157. PMID 25194614
17. Shavakhi A, Minakari M, Farzamnia S, et al. The effects of multi-strain probiotic compound on symptoms and quality-of-life in patients with irritable bowel syndrome: a randomized placebo-controlled trial. Adv Biomed Res. 2014; 3: 140. PMID 25161987
18. Ludidi S, Jonkers DM, Koning CJ, et al. Randomized clinical trial on the effect of a multispecies probiotic on visceral hypersensitivity in hypersensitive IBS patients. Neurogastroenterol Motil. May 2014; 26(5): 705–714. PMID 24588932
19. Rogha M, Eshaghian A, Zargarzadeh AH. The efficacy of a synbiotic containing Bacillus coagulans in treatment of irritable bowel syndrome: a randomized placebo-controlled trial. Gastroenterol Hepatol Bed Bench. 2014; 7(3): 156–163. PMID 25120896
20. Urgesi R, Casale C, Pistelli R, et al. A randomized double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trial on efficacy and safety of association of simethicone and Bacillus coagulans (Colinox^®) in patients with irritable bowel syndrome. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2014; 18(9): 1344-53. PMID 24867512
21. Sisson G, Ayis S, Sherwood RA, et al. Randomised clinical trial: a liquid multi-strain probiotics vs. placebo in the irritable bowel syndrome – 12 week double-blind study. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. Jul 2014; 40(1): 51–62. PMID 24815298
22. Genova Diagnostics. GI Effects Comprehensive Profile – Stool. Accessed May 20, 2024.
23. Targan SR, Landers CJ, Yang H, et al. Antibodies to CBir1 flagellin define a unique response that is associated independently with complicated Crohn’s disease. Gastroenterology. Jun 2005; 128(7): 2020–2028. PMID 15940634
24. Ippoliti A, Devlin S, Miel L, et al. Combination of innate and adaptive immune alterations increased the likelihood of fistulizing Crohn’s disease. Inflamm Bowel Dis. Aug 2010; 16(8): 1279–1285. PMID 20027650
25. Abreu MT, Taylor KD, Lin YC, et al. Mutations in NOD2 are associated with fibrostenosing disease in patients with Crohn’s disease. Gastroenterology. Sep 2002; 123(3): 679–688. PMID 12198692
26. Genova Diagnostics. Immunogenomic Profile. Accessed May 19, 2024.
27. Pfeifer JD, Singleton MN, Gregory MH, et al. Development of a decision-analytic model for the application of STR-based provenance testing of transrectal prostate biopsy specimens. Value Health. 2012; 15(6): 860–867. PMID 22999136
28. Rubio-Tapia A, Hill ID, Kelly CP, et al. ACG clinical guidelines: diagnosis and management of celiac disease. Am J Gastroenterol. May 2013; 108(5): 656–676; quiz 677. PMID 23609613
29. Ranaway P. Ask the experts. Explore (NY). May 2006; 2(3): 284. PMID 16781657
30. Prometheus Laboratories. IBD sgi Diagnostic. Accessed May 10, 2024.
31. Shirts B, Von Roon AC, Tebbutt A, et al. The entire predictive value of the prometheus IBD sgi diagnostic product may be due to the three least expensive and most available components. Am J Gastroenterol. Nov 2012; 107(11): 1760–1761. PMID 23160303
32. Conrad K, Roggenbuck D, Laass MW. Diagnosis and classification of ulcerative colitis. Autoimmun Rev. 2014; 13(4–5): 463–469. PMID 24424198
33. Laass MW, Roggenbuck D, Conrad K. Diagnosis and classification of Crohn’s disease. Autoimmun Rev. 2014; 13(4–5): 467–471. PMID 24424189
34. Ordás I, Eckmann L, Talamini M, et al. Ulcerative colitis. Lancet. Nov 03 2012; 380(9853): 1606–1619. PMID 22914296
35. Kornbluth A, Sachar DB. Ulcerative colitis practice guidelines in adults: American College of Gastroenterology, Practice Parameters Committee. Am J Gastroenterol. Mar 2010; 105(3): 501–523; quiz 524. PMID 20068560
36. Baumgart DC, Sandborn WJ. Crohn’s disease. Lancet. Nov 03 2012; 380(9853): 1590–1605. PMID 22914299
37. Lichtenstein GR, Hanauer SB, Sandborn WJ, et al. Management of Crohn’s disease in adults. Am J Gastroenterol. Feb 2009; 104(2): 465–483; quiz 484. PMID 19174807
38. Reese GE, Constantinides VA, Simillis C, et al. Diagnostic precision of anti-Saccharomyces cerevisiae antibodies and perinuclear antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibodies in inflammatory bowel disease. Am J Gastroenterol. Oct 2006; 101(10): 2410–2422. PMID 16952282
39. National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN). NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: Colon Cancer. Version 2.2024. Accessed May 20, 2024.
40. Singh S, Ananthakrishnan AN, Nguyen NH, et al. AGA Clinical Practice Guideline on the role of biomarkers for the management of ulcerative colitis. Gastroenterology. Mar 2023; 164(3): 344–372. PMID 36822736
41. Lichtenstein GR, Loftus EV, Isaacs KL, et al. ACG Clinical Guideline: Management of Crohn’s Disease in Adults. Am J Gastroenterol. Apr 2018; 113(4): 481–517. PMID 29610508
42. Tommasini KM, Tran KA, Bates J, et al. Veterans Health Administration: implementation of pharmacogenomic clinical decision support with statin medications and the SLCO1B1 gene as an exemplar. Am J Health Syst Pharm. Aug 04 2023; 80(16): 1082–1089. PMID 37210707
43. Alaryan TH, Youssef L. The impact of SLCO1B1 single nucleotide polymorphism and non-genetic factors on statin-induced myopathy. Cardiovasc Res. 2024; 120(Suppl 1).
44. Shah M, Shrestha K, Tseng C, Goyal A, Liewluck T, Gupta L. Statin-associated muscle symptoms: a comprehensive exploration of epidemiology, pathophysiology, diagnosis, and clinical management strategies. Int J Rheum Dis. 2024; 27(9).
45. Gougeon A, Aribi I, Guernouche S, et al. Publication bias in pharmacogenetics of statin-associated muscle symptoms, an umbrella review with a meta-epidemiological study. Atherosclerosis. Oct 2024; 118624.