Dataset Information

Which BRCA genetic testing programs are ready for implementation in health care? A systematic review of economic evaluations.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

There is considerable evidence regarding the efficacy and effectiveness of BRCA genetic testing programs, but whether they represent good use of financial resources is not clear. Therefore, we aimed to identify the main health-care programs for BRCA testing and to evaluate their cost-effectiveness.

Methods

We performed a systematic review of full economic evaluations of health-care programs involving BRCA testing.

Results

Nine economic evaluations were included, and four main categories of BRCA testing programs were identified: (i) population-based genetic screening of individuals without cancer, either comprehensive or targeted based on ancestry; (ii) family history (FH)-based genetic screening, i.e., testing individuals without cancer but with FH suggestive of BRCA mutation; (iii) familial mutation (FM)-based genetic screening, i.e., testing individuals without cancer but with known familial BRCA mutation; and (iv) cancer-based genetic screening, i.e., testing individuals with BRCA-related cancers.

Conclusions

Currently BRCA1/2 population-based screening represents good value for the money among Ashkenazi Jews only. FH-based screening is potentially very cost-effective, although further studies that include costs of identifying high-risk women are needed. There is no evidence of cost-effectiveness for BRCA screening of all newly diagnosed cases of breast/ovarian cancers followed by cascade testing of relatives, but programs that include tools for identifying affected women at higher risk for inherited forms are promising. Cost-effectiveness is highly sensitive to the cost of BRCA1/2 testing.Genet Med 18 12, 1171-1180.

SUBMITTER: D'Andrea E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5159446 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Which BRCA genetic testing programs are ready for implementation in health care? A systematic review of economic evaluations.

D'Andrea Elvira E Marzuillo Carolina C De Vito Corrado C Di Marco Marco M Pitini Erica E Vacchio Maria Rosaria MR Villari Paolo P Villari Paolo P

Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics 20160414 12

<h4>Purpose</h4>There is considerable evidence regarding the efficacy and effectiveness of BRCA genetic testing programs, but whether they represent good use of financial resources is not clear. Therefore, we aimed to identify the main health-care programs for BRCA testing and to evaluate their cost-effectiveness.<h4>Methods</h4>We performed a systematic review of full economic evaluations of health-care programs involving BRCA testing.<h4>Results</h4>Nine economic evaluations were included, and ...[more]

PMID: 27906166

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivePoint-of-care testing (POCT) has become an essential diagnostic technology for optimal patient care. Its implementation, however, still falls behind. This paper reviews the available evidence on the health economic impact of introducing POCT to assess if poor POCT uptake may be related to lacking evidence.Study designThe Scopus and PubMed databases were searched to identify publications describing a health economic evaluation of a point-of-care (POC) test. Data were extracted from the included publications, including general and methodological characteristics as well as the study results summarized in either cost, effects or an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Results were sorted into six groups according to the POC test's purpose (diagnosis, screening or monitoring) and care setting (primary care or secondary care). The reporting quality of the publications was determined using the CHEERS checklist.ResultsThe initial search resulted in 396 publications, of which 44 met the inclusion criteria. Most of the evaluations were performed in a primary care setting (n = 31; 70.5%) compared with a secondary care setting (n = 13; 29.5%). About two thirds of the evaluations were on POC tests implemented with a diagnostic purpose (n = 28; 63.6%). More than 75% of evaluations concluded that POCT is recommended for implementation, although in some cases only under specific circumstances and conditions. Compliance with the CHEERS checklist items ranged from 20.8% to 100%, with an average reporting quality of 72.0%.ConclusionThere were very few evaluations in this review that advised against the implementation of POCT. However, the uptake of POCT in many countries remains low. Even though the evaluations included in this review did not always include the full long-term benefits of POCT, it is clear that health economic evidence across a few dimensions of value already indicate the benefits of POCT. This suggests that the lack of evidence on POCT is not the primary barrier to its implementation and that the low uptake of these tests in clinical practice is due to (a combination of) other barriers. In this context, aspects around organization of care, support of clinicians and quality management may be crucial in the widespread implementation of POCT.

Project description:ObjectiveThe main objective of this study was to identify, describe, classify and analyze the scientific health economic evidence of VL-related technologies.MethodsA web search of combinations of free text and Mesh terms related to the economic evaluation of visceral leishmaniasis was conducted on scientific publication databases (Web of Science, Scopus, Medline via the Pubmed and Lilacs). A manual search of references lists of articles previously identified by the authors was also included. Articles written in English, Portuguese, Spanish or French were considered suitable for inclusion. Articles that matched the inclusion criteria were screened by at least two researchers, who extracted information regarding the epidemiologic scenario and methodological issues on a standardized form.ResultsThe initial search retrieved 107 articles, whose abstracts were inspected according to the inclusion criteria leading to a first selection of 49 (46%) articles. After the elimination of duplicates, the list was reduced to 21 (20%) articles. After careful reading and application of exclusion criteria, 14 papers were eligible according to the description, classification and analysis process proposed by the study. When classified by type of economic evaluation, articles were 7 (50%) cost-effectiveness, 5 (36%) cost-minimization, 1(7%) cost-benefit, and 1(7%) budget impact. When classified by methodology, studies were mainly nested to clinical-trials ("piggy back") 8(57%). Discount rates for outcomes and costs were present in 3 (43%) of the cost-effectiveness studies, and according to WHO's recommendations, the discount rate of 3% was used in all studies.ConclusionsThis article showed that health economic evaluations on visceral leishmaniasis used a wide range of technologies and methods. Nevertheless it is important to point out the geographic concentration of studies, which makes their transferability uncertain to different epidemiological scenarios, especially those concerning visceral leishmaniasis caused by Leishmania infantum.

Project description:BackgroundNearly 56% of at-risk carriers are not identified and missed as a result of the current family-history (FH) screening for genetic testing. The present study aims to review the economic evaluation studies on BRCA genetic testing strategies for screening and early detection of breast cancer.MethodsThis systematic literature review is conducted within the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, ProQuest, and EMBASE databases. In this paper, the relevant published economic evaluation studies are identified by following the standard Cochrane Collaboration methods and adherence to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement reporting some recommendations for articles up to March 2020. Thereafter, the inclusion and exclusion criteria are applied to screen the articles. Disagreements are resolved through a consensus meeting. The Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist is used in the evaluation of quality. Finally, a narrative synthesis is performed. To compare the different levels of incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), the net present value is calculated based on a discount rate of 3% in 2019.ResultsAmong 788 initially retrieved citations, 12 studies were included. More than 60% of the studies were originated from high-income countries and were published after 2016. It is noteworthy that most of the studies evaluated the payer perspective. Moreover, the robustness of the results were analyzed through one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses in nearly 66% of these studies. Nearly, 25% of the studies are focused and defined population-based and family history BRCA tests as comparators; afterwards, the cost-effectiveness of the former was confirmed. The highest and lowest absolute values for the ICERs were $65,661 and $9 per quality adjusted life years, respectively. All studies met over 70% of the CHEERs criteria checklist, which was considered as 93% of high quality on average as well.ConclusionsThe genetic BRCA tests for the general population as well as unselected breast cancer patients were cost-effective in high and upper-middle income countries and those with prevalence of gene mutation while population-based genetic tests for low-middle income countries are depended on the price of the tests.

Project description:Provision of reproductive health (RH) services is a minimum standard of health care in humanitarian settings; however access to these services is often limited. This systematic review, one component of a global evaluation of RH in humanitarian settings, sought to explore the evidence regarding RH services provided in humanitarian settings and to determine if programs are being evaluated. In addition, the review explored which RH services receive more attention based on program evaluations and descriptive data. Peer-reviewed papers published between 2004 and 2013 were identified via the Ovid MEDLINE database, followed by a PubMed search. Papers on quantitative evaluations of RH programs, including experimental and non-experimental designs that reported outcome data, implemented in conflict and natural disaster settings, were included. Of 5,669 papers identified in the initial search, 36 papers describing 30 programs met inclusion criteria. Twenty-five papers described programs in sub-Saharan Africa, six in Asia, two in Haiti and three reported data from multiple countries. Some RH technical areas were better represented than others: seven papers reported on maternal and newborn health (including two that also covered family planning), six on family planning, three on sexual violence, 20 on HIV and other sexually transmitted infections and two on general RH topics. In comparison to the program evaluation papers identified, three times as many papers were found that reported RH descriptive or prevalence data in humanitarian settings. While data demonstrating the magnitude of the problem are crucial and were previously lacking, the need for RH services and for evaluations to measure their effectiveness is clear. Program evaluation and implementation science should be incorporated into more programs to determine the best ways to serve the RH needs of people affected by conflict or natural disaster. Standard program design should include rigorous program evaluation, and the results must be shared. The papers demonstrated both that RH programs can be implemented in these challenging settings, and that women and men will use RH services when they are of reasonable quality.

Project description:ObjectiveSmoking cessation and relapse prevention during and after pregnancy reduces the risk of adverse maternal and infant health outcomes, but the economic evaluations of such programs have not been systematically reviewed. This study aims to critically assess economic evaluations of smoking cessation and relapse prevention programs for pregnant women.MethodsAll relevant English-language articles were identified using PubMed (January 1966-2003), the British National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database, and reference lists of key articles. Economic evaluations of smoking cessation and relapse prevention among pregnant women were reviewed. Fifty-one articles were retrieved, and eight articles were included and evaluated. A single reviewer extracted methodological details, study designs, and outcomes into summary tables. All studies were reviewed, and study quality was judged using the criteria recommended by the Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine and the British Medical Journal (BMJ) checklist for economic evaluations.ResultsThe search retrieved 51 studies. No incremental cost-effectiveness studies or cost-utility studies were found. A narrative synthesis was conducted on the eight studies thatmet the inclusion criteria. Roughly one-third employed cost-benefit analyses (CBA). Those conducting CBA have found favorable benefit-cost ratios of up to 3:1; for every dollar invested $3 are saved in downstream health-related costs.ConclusionsCBA suggests favorable cost-benefit ratios for smoking cessation among pregnant women, although currently available economic evaluations of smoking cessation and relapse prevention programs for pregnant women provide limited evidence on cost-effectiveness to determine optimal resource allocation strategies. Although none of these studies had been performed in accordance with Panel recommendations or BMJ guidelines, they are, however, embryonic elements of a more systematic framework. Existing analyses suggest that the return on investment will far outweigh the costs for this critical population. There is significant potential to improve the quality of economic evaluations of such programs; therefore, additional analyses are needed. The article concludes with ideas on how to design and conduct an economic evaluation of such programs in accordance with accepted quality standards.

Project description:BackgroundGenetic testing has potential roles in identifying whether an individual would have risk of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) from a particular medicine. Robust cost-effectiveness results on genetic testing would be useful for clinical practice and policy decision-making on allocating resources effectively. This study aimed to update a systematic review on economic evaluations of pharmacogenetic testing to prevent ADRs and critically appraise the quality of reporting and sources of evidence for model input parameters.MethodsWe searched studies through Medline via PubMed, Scopus and CRD's NHS Economic Evaluation up to October 2019. Studies investigating polymorphism-based pharmacogenetic testing, which guided drug therapies to prevent ADRs, using economic evaluation methods were included. Two reviewers independently performed data extraction and assessed the quality of reporting using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) guidelines and the quality of data sources using the hierarchy of evidence developed by Cooper et al. RESULTS: Fifty-nine economic evaluations of pharmacogenetic testing to avoid drug-induced ADRs were found between 2002 and 2018. Cost-utility and cost-effectiveness analyses were the most common methods of economic evaluation of pharmacogenetic testing. Most studies complied with the CHEERS checklist, except for single study-based economic evaluations which did not report uncertainty analysis (78%). There was a lack of high-quality evidence not only for estimating the clinical effectiveness of pharmacogenetic testing, but also baseline clinical data. About 14% of the studies obtained clinical effectiveness data of testing from a meta-analysis of case-control studies with direct comparison, which was not listed in the hierarchy of evidence used.ConclusionsOur review suggested that future single study-based economic evaluations of pharmacogenetic testing should report uncertainty analysis, as this could significantly affect the robustness of economic evaluation results. A specific ranking system for the quality of evidence is needed for the economic evaluation of pharmacogenetic testing of ADRs. Differences in parameters, methods and outcomes across studies, as well as population-level and system-level differences, may lead to the difficulty of comparing cost-effectiveness results across countries.

Dataset Information

Which BRCA genetic testing programs are ready for implementation in health care? A systematic review of economic evaluations.

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Which BRCA genetic testing programs are ready for implementation in health care? A systematic review of economic evaluations.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure