VP36 Cost-Effectiveness Of Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing For Down Syndrome

2017 ◽  
Vol 33 (S1) ◽  
pp. 165-166
Author(s):  
Estibalitz Orruño ◽  
Juan Carlos Bayón ◽  
Isabel Portillo ◽  
José Asua
Keyword(s):  
Down Syndrome ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Prenatal Screening ◽  
Prenatal Testing ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Non Invasive ◽  
Cell Free Fetal Dna ◽  
Primary Test ◽  
The Cost

INTRODUCTION:The analysis of cell-free fetal DNA in maternal blood, also called Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing (NIPT), represents an emerging technology and a possible alternative/complement to current prenatal screening based on biochemical and sonographic markers for Down Syndrome (DS) detection.The aim of the study was to compare the application of NIPT with the prenatal diagnosis/screening procedures currently applied in the Basque Country.METHODS:An analytical decision model was developed to assess the costs and consequences, comparing current prenatal screening, NIPT as a contingency test in high-risk cases and NIPT as a first-line screening test. An economic analysis was conducted to determine which strategy was more cost-effective. Sensitivity analyses were performed (1).RESULTS:For a population of 97,074 pregnant women in gestational week 14 and a cut-off point of 1:270, NIPT as a contingent test was not cost-effective, detecting two cases less of DS and causing a lower number of miscarriages related to invasive-testing (4 versus 23) at a slightly lower cost (EUR8,111,351 versus EUR8,901,872).For risk cut-off points of 1:500 or 1:1000 for contingent NIPT, the number of DS cases detected increased, as did the cost. It could be cost-effective compared with current prenatal screening, (EUR61,763 or EUR256,123 per extra DS case detected, respectively).Using the NIPT as a primary test detected more DS cases (296 versus 271) and caused less miscarriages (5 versus 23), at a substantially higher cost (EUR41,395,645 versus EUR8,901,872). Cost-effectiveness analysis indicated that it was more expensive and more effective.Univariant sensitivity-analysis showed that when the price of the NIPT as primary test was EUR76, it was dominant compared with current prenatal screening. It was also cost-effective compared with the NIPT as a contingent test (EUR9,869 per extra DS case detected).CONCLUSIONS:The study shows that NIPT had higher detection rates for DS in different scenarios, but the cost constitutes a limiting factor for implementation in the Basque Health System.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Non-invasive Prenatal Testing for Down Syndrome in China

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (03) ◽  
pp. 237-242 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yan Xu ◽  
Yan Wei ◽  
Jian Ming ◽  
Na Li ◽  
Ningze Xu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Down Syndrome ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Pregnant Women ◽  
Universal Screening ◽  
Prenatal Testing ◽  
Screening Strategy ◽  
Decision Analytic Model ◽  
Cost Effectiveness Ratio ◽  
Non Invasive ◽  
The Cost

AbstractObjectivesThere is little evidence in China regarding the cost-effectiveness of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for Down syndrome (DS). This study aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of NIPT and provide evidence to inform decision-making.MethodsTo determine the cost-effectiveness of NIPT for DS, a decision-analytic model was developed using the TreeAge Pro software from a societal perspective in a simulated cohort of 10 000 pregnant women. Main indicators were based on field surveys from sampled hospitals in four locations in China and a literature review.ResultsThe conventional maternal serum screening (CMSS) strategy, contingent screening strategy (NIPT delivered to high risk pregnant women after CMSS), and universal screening strategy could prevent 3.02, 7.53, and 9.97 DS births, respectively. NIPT would decrease unnecessary invasive procedures, resulting in fewer procedure-related miscarriages. The cost-effectiveness ratio of the contingent screening strategy was the lowest. When compared with the CMSS strategy, the incremental cost per DS birth averted by the contingent screening strategy and universal screening strategy were USD 20,160 and 352,388, respectively. One-way sensitivity analysis showed that, if the cost of NIPT could be decreased to USD 76.92, the cost-effectiveness ratio of the universal screening strategy would be lower than the CMSS strategy.ConclusionsAlthough NIPT has the merits of greater effectiveness and safety, CMSS is unlikely to be replaced by NIPT at this time because of NIPT's higher cost. Contingent screening may be an appropriate strategy to balance the effectiveness and cost factors of the new genetic testing technology.

scholarly journals Introducing the non-invasive prenatal testing for detection of Down syndrome in China: a cost-effectiveness analysis

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (7) ◽  
pp. e046582
Author(s):  
Wenru Shang ◽  
Yang Wan ◽  
Jianan Chen ◽  
Yanqiu Du ◽  
Jiayan Huang
Keyword(s):  
Down Syndrome ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Incremental Cost ◽  
Real World ◽  
Maternal Age ◽  
Unit Cost ◽  
Prenatal Testing ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Non Invasive ◽  
Referral Strategy

ObjectiveThis study aimed to compare the health economic value of a non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) strategy against a second-trimester triple screening (STS) strategy for the detection of Down syndrome based on real-world data from China.DesignA decision-analytical model was developed to compare the cost-effectiveness of five strategies from a societal perspective. Cost and probability input data were obtained from the real-world surveys and published sources.SettingChina.ParticipantsWomen with a singleton pregnancy.InterventionsThe five strategies for screening were: (A) maternal age with STS (no NIPT); (B) STS plus NIPT screening; (C) age-STS plus NIPT screening (the currently referral strategy in China); (D) maternal age with NIPT screening and (E) universal NIPT screening.Main outcome measuresIncremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) per additional Down syndrome case terminated, univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analysis and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves were obtained.ResultsStrategy A detected the least number of Down syndrome cases. Compared with the cheapest Strategy B, Strategy D had the lowest ICER (incremental cost, US$98 944.85 per additional Down syndrome case detected). Strategy D had the highest probability of being cost-effective at the willingness-to-pay level between US$110 000.00 and US$535 000.00 per additional Down syndrome case averted. Strategy E would not be cost-effective unless the unit cost of the NIPT could be decreased to US$60.50.ConclusionIntroducing NIPT screening strategies was beneficial over the use of STS strategy alone. Evaluating maternal age in combination with the NIPT screening strategy performs better than China’s currently referral strategy in terms of cost-effectiveness and safety. Lowering the price of NIPT and optimising payment methods are effective measures to promote universal NIPT strategies in China.

scholarly journals Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing: Current Perspectives and Future Challenges

Genes ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 15
Author(s):  
Luigi Carbone ◽  
Federica Cariati ◽  
Laura Sarno ◽  
Alessandro Conforti ◽  
Francesca Bagnulo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prenatal Screening ◽  
Prenatal Testing ◽  
Non Invasive ◽  
Fetal Dna ◽  
Cell Free Fetal Dna ◽  
Common Causes ◽  
Future Challenges ◽  
Neurodevelopmental Impairment ◽  
Fetal Aneuploidies ◽  
Made In

Fetal aneuploidies are among the most common causes of miscarriages, perinatal mortality and neurodevelopmental impairment. During the last 70 years, many efforts have been made in order to improve prenatal diagnosis and prenatal screening of these conditions. Recently, the use of cell-free fetal DNA (cff-DNA) testing has been increasingly used in different countries, representing an opportunity for non-invasive prenatal screening of pregnant women. The aim of this narrative review is to describe the state of the art and the main strengths and limitations of this test for prenatal screening of fetal aneuploidies.

scholarly journals Cladribine tablets are a cost-effective strategy in high-disease activity relapsing multiple sclerosis patients in Iran

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nayyereh Ayati ◽  
Lora Fleifel ◽  
Mohammad Ali Sahraian ◽  
Shekoufeh Nikfar
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Sclerosis ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
High Disease Activity ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Multiple Sclerosis Patients ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis

Background: Cladribine tablets are the foremost oral immune-reconstitution therapy for high disease activity relapsing multiple sclerosis (HDA-RMS). We aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of cladribine tablets compared to natalizumab in patients with HDA-RMS in Iran. Methods: A 5-year cohort-based Markov model was developed with 11 expanded disability status score (EDSS) health states, including patients with HDA-RMS as on and off-treatment. All costs were identified from the literature and expert opinion and were measured in Iranian Rial rates, changed to the 2020 USD rate and were discounted by 7.2%. Quality adjusted life years (QALY), discounted by 3.5%, and life years gained (LYG) were adopted to measure efficacy. The final results were presented as incremental cost-effectiveness ratio that was compared to a national willingness to pay (WTP) threshold of 1 to 3 gross domestic product (GDP) per capita. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (D/PSA) were employed to evaluate uncertainty. Results: Cladribine tablets dominated natalizumab and yielded 6,607 USD cost-saving and 0.003 additional QALYs per patient. LYG was comparable. The main cost component was drug acquisition cost in both arms. DSA indicated the sensitivity of the results to the cost discount rates and also the patients’ body weight; while they were less sensitive to the main clinical variables. PSA indicated that cladribine tablets were cost-effective in Iran, with a probability of 57.5% and 58.6% at lower and higher limits of threshold, respectively. Conclusion: Cladribine tablets yielded higher QALYs and lower costs compared to natalizumab, in patients with HDA-RMS in Iran.

First-Line Pembrolizumab Plus Chemotherapy for Extensive-Stage Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Youwen Zhu ◽  
Huabin Hu ◽  
Dong Ding ◽  
Shuosha Li ◽  
Mengting Liao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
First Line ◽  
The Us ◽  
Extensive Stage ◽  
The Cost ◽  
First Line Treatment

Abstract Background：The phase III clinical trial Keynote-604 indicated that pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy could generate clinical benefits in Extensive-Stage Small-Cell Lung Cancer (ES-SCLC). We aim to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy as the first-line treatment of ES-SCLC from the United States (US) payers’ perspective.Methods: A synthetical Markov model was used to evaluate cost and effectiveness of pembrolizumab plus platinum-etoposide (EP) versus EP in first-line therapy for ES-SCLC from the data of Keynote-604. Lifetime costs life-years (LYs), quality adjusted LYs (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were estimated. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. In addition, We also considered subgroup cost-effectiveness.Results: Pembrolizumab plus EP resulted in additional 0.18 QALYs (0.32 LYs) and corresponding incremental costs $113,625, resulting an ICER of $647,509 per QALY versus EP. The most influential factor in this model was the cost of pembrolizumab. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed there was 0% probability that pembrolizumab combination chemotherapy was cost-effective at willingness-to-pay (WTP) values of $150,000 per QALY in the US. The results of subgroup probabilistic sensitivity analyses suggested that all subgroups were not cost-effective.Conclusion: From the perspective of the US payer, pembrolizumab plus EP is not a cost-effective option as first-line treatment for patients with ES-SCLC at a WTP threshold of $150,000 per QALY.

P14.41 Cost-effectiveness of FET PET for early treatment response assessment in glioma patients following adjuvant temozolomide chemotherapy

2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. ii46-ii46
Author(s):  
J Rosen ◽  
G Ceccon ◽  
E K Bauer ◽  
J M Werner ◽  
C Kabbasch ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Response Assessment ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Tree Model ◽  
Fet Pet ◽  
Conventional Mri ◽  
Adjuvant Temozolomide ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Temozolomide Chemotherapy

Abstract BACKGROUND In light of increasing healthcare costs, higher medical expenses should be justified socio-economically. Therefore, we calculated the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of PET using the radiolabeled amino acid O-(2-[18F]-fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine (FET) compared to conventional MRI for early identification of responders to adjuvant temozolomide chemotherapy. A recent study in IDH-wildtype glioma patients suggested that after two cycles, FET-PET parameter changes predicted a significantly longer survival while MRI changes were not significant. MATERIALS AND METHODS To determine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of serial FET-PET imaging, we analyzed published clinical data and calculated the associated costs in the context of the German healthcare system.Based on a decision-tree model, FET-PET and MRI’s effectiveness was calculated, i.e., the probability to correctly identify a responder as defined by an overall survival ≥15 months. To determine the cost-effectiveness, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated, i.e., the cost for each additionally identified responder by FET-PET who would have remained undetected by MRI. The robustness of the results was tested by deterministic and probabilistic (Monte Carlo simulation) sensitivity analyses. RESULTS Compared to MRI, FET-PET increases the rate of correctly identified responders to chemotherapy by 26%; thus, four patients need to be examined by FET-PET to identify one additional responder. Considering the respective cost for serial FET-PET and MRI, the ICER resulted in €4,396.83 for each additional correctly identified responder by FET-PET. The sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the results. CONCLUSION In contrast to conventional MRI, the model suggests that FET PET is cost-effective in terms of ICER values. Concerning the high cost of temozolomide, the integration of FET-PET has the potential to avoid premature chemotherapy discontinuation at a reasonable cost.

scholarly journals Modelling the cost-effectiveness of person-centred care for patients with acute coronary syndrome

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (9) ◽  
pp. 1317-1327 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura Pirhonen ◽  
Hanna Gyllensten ◽  
Andreas Fors ◽  
Kristian Bolin
Keyword(s):  
Monte Carlo ◽  
Acute Coronary Syndrome ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Time Perspective ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Coronary Syndrome ◽  
The Cost

Abstract Background Person-centred care has been shown to be cost-effective compared to usual care for several diseases, including acute coronary syndrome, in a short-term time perspective (< 2 years). The cost-effectiveness of person-centred care in a longer time perspective is largely unknown. Objectives To estimate the mid-term cost-effectiveness of person-centred care compared to usual care for patients (< 65) with acute coronary syndrome, using a 2-year and a 5-year time perspective. Methods The mid-term cost-effectiveness of person-centred care compared to usual care was estimated by projecting the outcomes observed in a randomized-controlled trial together with data from health registers and data from the scientific literature, 3 years beyond the 2-year follow-up, using the developed simulation model. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed using Monte Carlo simulation. Results Person-centred care entails lower costs and improved effectiveness as compared to usual care, for a 2-year time and a 5-year perspective. Monte Carlo simulations suggest that the likelihoods of the person-centred care being cost-effective compared to usual care were between 80 and 99% and between 75 and 90% for a 2-year and a 5-year time perspective (using a 500,000 SEK/QALY willingness-to-pay threshold). Conclusions Person-centred care was less costly and more effective compared to usual care in a 2-year and a 5-year time perspective for patients with acute coronary syndrome under the age of 65.

scholarly journals A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Newborn Screening for Severe Combined Immunodeficiency in the UK

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 28 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alice Bessey ◽  
James Chilcott ◽  
Joanna Leaviss ◽  
Carmen de la Cruz ◽  
Ruth Wong
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Severe Combined Immunodeficiency ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Combined Immunodeficiency ◽  
Tree Model ◽  
Life Years ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Cost ◽  
The Impact

Severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID) can be detected through newborn bloodspot screening. In the UK, the National Screening Committee (NSC) requires screening programmes to be cost-effective at standard UK thresholds. To assess the cost-effectiveness of SCID screening for the NSC, a decision-tree model with lifetable estimates of outcomes was built. Model structure and parameterisation were informed by systematic review and expert clinical judgment. A public service perspective was used and lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were discounted at 3.5%. Probabilistic, one-way sensitivity analyses and an exploratory disbenefit analysis for the identification of non-SCID patients were conducted. Screening for SCID was estimated to result in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £18,222 with a reduction in SCID mortality from 8.1 (5–12) to 1.7 (0.6–4.0) cases per year of screening. Results were sensitive to a number of parameters, including the cost of the screening test, the incidence of SCID and the disbenefit to the healthy at birth and false-positive cases. Screening for SCID is likely to be cost-effective at £20,000 per QALY, key uncertainties relate to the impact on false positives and the impact on the identification of children with non-SCID T Cell lymphopenia.

Budget impact of incorporating non-invasive prenatal testing in prenatal screening for Down syndrome in Turkey

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 402-407
Author(s):  
Zeynep Guldem Okem ◽  
Gokcen Orgul ◽  
Berna Tari Kasnakoglu ◽  
Mehmet Cakar ◽  
Mehmet Sinan Beksac
Keyword(s):  
Down Syndrome ◽  
Prenatal Screening ◽  
Budget Impact ◽  
Prenatal Testing ◽  
Non Invasive

Meta-analysis and cost-effectiveness of second-line antiepileptic drugs for status epilepticus

Neurology ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 92 (20) ◽  
pp. e2339-e2348 ◽  
Author(s):  
Iván Sánchez Fernández ◽  
Marina Gaínza-Lein ◽  
Nathan Lamb ◽  
Tobias Loddenkemper
Keyword(s):  
Status Epilepticus ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Antiepileptic Drugs ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Convulsive Status Epilepticus ◽  
Decision Analysis Model ◽  
Analysis Model ◽  
The Cost

ObjectiveCompare the cost and effectiveness of nonbenzodiazepine antiepileptic drugs (non-BZD AEDs) for treatment of BZD-resistant convulsive status epilepticus (SE).MethodsDecision analysis model populated with effectiveness data from a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature, and cost data from publicly available prices. The primary outcome was cost per seizure stopped ($/SS). Sensitivity analyses evaluated the robustness of the results across a wide variation of the input parameters.ResultsWe included 24 studies with 1,185 SE episodes. The most effective non-BZD AED was phenobarbital (PB) with a probability of SS of 0.8 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.69–0.88), followed by valproate (VPA) (0.71 [95% CI: 0.61–0.79]), lacosamide (0.66 [95% CI: 0.51–0.79]), levetiracetam (LEV) (0.62 [95% CI: 0.5–0.73]), and phenytoin/fosphenytoin (PHT) (0.53 [95% CI: 0.39–0.67]). In pairwise comparisons, PB was more effective than PHT (p = 0.002), VPA was more effective than PHT (p = 0.043), and PB was more effective than LEV (p = 0.018). The most cost-effective non-BZD AED was LEV (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio [ICER]: $18.55/SS), followed by VPA (ICER: $94.44/SS), and lastly PB (ICER: $847.22/SS). PHT and lacosamide were not cost-effective compared to the other options. Sensitivity analyses showed marked overlap in cost-effectiveness, but PHT was consistently less cost-effective than LEV, VPA, and PB.ConclusionVPA and PB were more effective than PHT for SE. There is substantial overlap in the cost-effectiveness of non-BZD AEDs for SE, but available evidence does not support the preeminence of PHT, neither in terms of effectiveness nor in terms of cost-effectiveness.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document