OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost-effectiveness of a strategy employing genomic-based tumor testing to guide therapy for platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. METHODS: A decision model was created to compare standard of care (SOC) cytotoxic chemotherapy to a genomic-based treatment strategy. The genomic arm included tumor testing with treatment directed at targets identified. Overall survival was assumed to be similar between strategies; quality of life (QOL) was assumed superior during targeted therapy compared to chemotherapy. Pertinent uncertainties (cost of targeted therapy and genomic testing, response to targeted therapy, probability of a tumor having a targetable alteration, and impact on QOL) were evaluated in a series of one-and two-way sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: The genomic testing strategy was more expensive ($90,271 vs. $74,926) per patient than SOC. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of the genomic strategy was $479,303 per quality-adjusted life year saved (QALY). Model results were insensitive to the cost of genomic testing, differences in QOL, and the probability of identifying a targetable alteration. However, the model was sensitive to the cost of targeted therapy. For example, when the cost of targeted therapy was reduced to 56% of its current cost (or $6400/cycle), the genomic strategy became more cost-effective with an ICER of $96,612/QALY. CONCLUSIONS: Genomic-based tumor testing and targeted therapy in patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer is not cost-effective compared with SOC. However, reducing the cost of targeted therapy (independently, or in combination with reducing the cost of the genomic test) provides opportunities for improved value in cancer care.