Cancer Testing

Tennessee SB1626 requires health insurance plans to cover genetic testing for individuals who have a personal or family history of cancer. It also mandates coverage for cancer imaging tests for those at higher risk, following specific guidelines from a recognized national organization.

TN SB1626 is a senate bill in the Tennessee 114th General Assembly, sponsored by Richard Briggs (R), currently “Introduced” since January 13, 2026.

We track 9,160 Tennessee bills this session, 137 of them sponsored by Richard Briggs.

Supporters of SB1626 argue that this bill is a crucial step in improving cancer prevention and early detection. By ensuring coverage for genetic testing and imaging, it empowers individuals to take proactive measures in managing their health, potentially saving lives and reducing healthcare costs in the long run.

Critics of SB1626 may contend that mandating coverage for these tests could lead to increased insurance premiums for all policyholders. They might also argue that such requirements could place undue burdens on insurers and limit their flexibility in designing health plans that meet the needs of their customers.

The bill SB1626 focuses on requiring health plans to cover clinical genetic testing and evidence-based cancer imaging for individuals at risk of cancer. The sponsor, Richard Briggs, is a cardiothoracic surgeon, which places him in the healthcare field; however, there are no direct financial interests that would benefit him from this specific legislation. His role as a surgeon does not imply ownership or financial stakes in the companies providing genetic testing or imaging services, nor does it suggest he would gain financially from the increased coverage mandated by this bill.

Additionally, while Briggs is affiliated with various organizations and employers in the healthcare and government sectors, none of these roles indicate a direct financial conflict with the provisions of the bill. The absence of ownership in relevant businesses or direct financial ties to the industries affected by the legislation further reduces the risk of a conflict of interest. Therefore, the analysis concludes that there is a low risk of personal financial gain influencing the sponsorship of this bill.

Unlike federal analysis based on campaign donations, state analysis examines legislators' personal financial interests — their jobs, businesses, and investments.

Items marked "AI-researched" are generated from public sources but have not been independently verified. Verified data is sourced from official legislature websites and disclosure filings.