Economic modeling of risk-adapted screen-and-treat strategies in women at high risk for breast or ovarian cancer

Cancer genetic counselling for hereditary breast cancer in the era of precision oncology

A relevant percentage of breast cancers (BCs) are tied to pathogenetic (P)/likely pathogenetic (LP) variants in predisposing genes. The knowledge of P/LP variants is an essential element in the management of BC patients since the first diagnosis because it influences surgery and subsequent oncological treatments and follow-up. Moreover, patients with metastatic BCs can benefit from personalized treatment if carriers of P/LP in BRCA1/2 genes. Multigene panels allow the identification of other predisposing genes with an impact on management. Cascade genetic testing for healthy family members allows personalized preventive strategies. Here, we review the advances and the challenges of Cancer Genetic Counseling (CGC). We focus on the area of oncology directed to hereditary BC management describing the peculiar way to lead CGC and how CGC changes over time. The authors describe the impact of genetic testing by targeted approach or universal approach on the management of BC according to the stage at diagnosis. Moreover, they describe the burden of CGC and testing and future perspectives to widely offer testing. A new perspective is needed for models of service delivery of CGC and testing, beyond formal genetic counselling. A broader genetic test can be quickly usable in clinical practice for comprehensive BC management and personalized prevention in the era of precision oncology.

Economic evaluations of predictive genetic testing: A scoping review

Predictive genetic testing can provide information about whether or not someone will develop or is likely to develop a specific condition at a later stage in life. Economic evaluation can assess the value of money for such testing. Studies on the economic evaluation of predictive genetic testing have been carried out in a variety of settings, and this research aims to conduct a scoping review of findings from these studies. We searched the PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane databases with combined search terms, from 2019 to 2022. Relevant studies from 2013 to 2019 in a previous systematic review were also included. The study followed the recommended stages for undertaking a scoping review. A total of 53 studies were included, including 33 studies from the previous review and 20 studies from the search of databases. A significant number of studies focused on the US, UK, and Australia (34%, 23%, and 11%). The most frequently included health conditions were cancer and cardiovascular diseases (68% and 19%). Over half of the studies compared predictive genetic testing with no genetic testing, and the majority of them concluded that at least some type of genetic testing was cost-effective compared to no testing (94%). Some studies stated that predictive genetic testing is becoming more cost-effective with the trend of lowering genetic testing costs. Studies on predictive genetic testing covered various health conditions, particularly cancer and cardiovascular diseases. Most studies indicated that predictive genetic testing is cost-effective compared to no testing.

Decision-analytic evaluation of the comparative effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of strategies to prevent breast and ovarian cancer in German women with BRCA-1/2 mutations

BACKGROUND

Women with inherited mutations in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes have increased lifetime risks for developing breast and/or ovarian cancer and may develop these cancers around the age of 30 years. Therefore, prevention of breast and ovarian cancer in these women may need to start relatively early in life. In this study we systematically evaluate the long-term effectiveness and cost effectiveness of different prevention strategies for breast and ovarian cancer in women with BRCA-1/2 mutation in Germany.

METHODS

A decision-analytic Markov model simulating lifetime breast and ovarian cancer development in BRCA-1/2 carriers was developed. Different strategies including intensified surveillance (IS), prophylactic bilateral mastectomy (PBM), and prophylactic bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (PBSO) alone or in combination at different ages were evaluated. German clinical, epidemiological, and economic (in 2022 Euro) data were used. Outcomes included cancer incidences, mortality, life years (LYs), quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and discounted incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER). We adopted the German health-care system perspective and discounted costs and health effects with 3% annually.

RESULTS

All intervention strategies are more effective and less costly than IS alone. Prevention with PBM plus PBSO at age 30 maximizes life expectancy with 6.3 LYs gained, whereas PBM at age 30 with delayed PBSO at age 35 improves quality of life with 11.1 QALYs gained, when compared to IS alone. A further delay of PBSO was associated with lower effectiveness. Both strategies are cost effective with ICERs significantly below 10,000 EUR/LYG or QALY.

CONCLUSION

Based on our results, PBM at age 30 plus PBSO between age 30 and 40 prolongs life and is cost effective in women with BRCA-1/2 mutations in Germany. Serial preventive surgeries with delayed PBSO potentially improve quality of life for women. However, delaying PBM and/or PBSO further may lead to increased mortality and reduced QALYs.

Hereditary Ovarian Cancer: Towards a Cost-Effective Prevention Strategy

Ovarian cancer (OC) is the most lethal gynaecological malignancy. The search for a widely affordable and accessible screening strategy to reduce mortality from OC is still ongoing. This coupled with the late-stage presentation and poor prognosis harbours significant health-economic implications. OC is also the most heritable of all cancers, with an estimated 25% of cases having a hereditary predisposition. Advancements in technology have detected multiple mutations, with the majority affecting the BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 genes. Women with BRCA mutations are at a significantly increased lifetime risk of developing OC, often presenting with a high-grade serous pathology, which is associated with higher mortality due to its aggressive characteristic. Therefore, a targeted, cost-effective approach to prevention is paramount to improve clinical outcomes and mortality. Current guidelines offer multiple preventive strategies for individuals with hereditary OC (HOC), including genetic counselling to identify the high-risk women and risk-reducing interventions (RRI), such as surgical management or chemoprophylaxis through contraceptive medications. Evidence for sporadic OC is abundant as compared to the existing dearth in the hereditary subgroup. Hence, our review article narrates an overview of HOC and explores the RRI developed over the years. It attempts to compare the cost effectiveness of these strategies with women of the general population in order to answer the crucial question: what is the most prudent clinically and economically effective strategy for prevention amongst high-risk women?

Cost-Effectiveness of BRCA 1/2 Genetic Test and Preventive Strategies: Using Real-World Data From an Upper-Middle Income Country

Although BRCA1/2 genetic testing in developed countries is part of the reality for high-risk patients for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC), the same is not true for upper-middle-income countries. For that reason, this study aimed to evaluate whether the BRCA1/2 genetic test and preventive strategies for women at high risk for HBOC are cost-effective compared to not performing these strategies in an upper-middle-income country. Adopting a payer perspective, a Markov model with a time horizon of 70 years was built to delineate the health states for a cohort of healthy women aged 30 years that fulfilled the BRCA1/2 testing criteria according to the guidelines. Transition probabilities were calculated based on real-world data of women tested for BRCA1/2 germline mutations in a cancer reference hospital from 2011 to 2020. We analyzed 275 BRCA mutated index cases and 356 BRCA mutation carriers that were first- or second-degree relatives of the patients. Costs were based on the Brazilian public health system reimbursement values. Health state utilities were retrieved from literature. The BRCA1/2 genetic test and preventive strategies result in more quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and costs with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of R$ 11,900.31 (U$ 5,504.31)/QALY. This result can represent a strong argument in favor of implementing genetic testing strategies for high-risk women even in countries with upper-middle income, considering not only the cancer prevention possibilities associated with the genetic testing but also its cost-effectiveness to the health system. These strategies are cost-effective, considering a willingness-to-pay threshold of R$ 25,000 (U$ 11,563.37)/QALY, indicating that the government should consider offering them for women at high risk for HBOC. The results were robust in deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.

Uptake Rates of Risk-Reducing Surgeries for Women at Increased Risk of Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer Applied to Cost-Effectiveness Analyses: A Scoping Systematic Review

The cost-effectiveness of genetic screen-and-treat strategies for women at increased risk for breast and ovarian cancer often depends on the women's willingness to make use of risk-reducing mastectomy (RRM) or salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO). To explore the uptake rates of RRM and RRSO applied in health economic modeling studies and the impact of uptake rates on the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER), we conducted a scoping literature review. In addition, using our own model, we conducted a value of information (VOI) analysis. Among the 19 models included in the review, the uptake rates of RRM ranged from 6% to 47% (RRSO: 10% to 88%). Fifty-seven percent of the models applied retrospective data obtained from registries, hospital records, or questionnaires. According to the models' deterministic sensitivity analyses, there is a clear trend that a lower uptake rate increased the ICER and vice versa. Our VOI analysis showed high decision uncertainty associated with the uptake rates. In the future, uptake rates should be given more attention in the conceptualization of health economic modeling studies. Prospective studies are recommended to reflect regional and national variations in women's preferences for preventive surgery.

A systematic review of the methodological quality of economic evaluations in genetic screening and testing for monogenic disorders

PURPOSE

Understanding the value of genetic screening and testing for monogenic disorders requires high-quality, methodologically robust economic evaluations. This systematic review sought to assess the methodological quality among such studies and examined opportunities for improvement.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and Web of Science for economic evaluations of genetic screening/testing (2013-2019). Methodological rigor and adherence to best practices were systematically assessed using the British Medical Journal checklist.

RESULTS

Across the 47 identified studies, there were substantial variations in modeling approaches, reporting detail, and sophistication. Models ranged from simple decision trees to individual-level microsimulations that compared between 2 and >20 alternative interventions. Many studies failed to report sufficient detail to enable replication or did not justify modeling assumptions, especially for costing methods and utility values. Meta-analyses, systematic reviews, or calibration were rarely used to derive parameter estimates. Nearly all studies conducted some sensitivity analysis, and more sophisticated studies implemented probabilistic sensitivity/uncertainty analysis, threshold analysis, and value of information analysis.

CONCLUSION

We describe a heterogeneous body of work and present recommendations and exemplar studies across the methodological domains of (1) perspective, scope, and parameter selection; (2) use of uncertainty/sensitivity analyses; and (3) reporting transparency for improvement in the economic evaluation of genetic screening/testing.

Data on Utility in Cost-Utility Analyses of Genetic Screen-and-Treat Strategies for Breast and Ovarian Cancer

Simple Summary

The prevention of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer involves genetic counselling and several highly preference-sensitive alternatives (i.e., risk-reducing surgeries). In health economics models, data on health preferences applied (i.e., utility values) are heterogeneous. In this methodological analysis, we compared the application of utility values among cost–utility models of targeted genetic testing for the prevention of breast and ovarian cancer. While varying utilities on risk-reducing surgeries and cancer states did not impact the cost–utility ratio, utility losses/gains due to a positive/negative test may strongly affect the cost–utility ratio and should be considered mandatory in future models. Because women’s health preferences may have changed as a result of improved oncologic care and genetic counselling, studies for ascertaining women’s health preferences should be updated.

Abstract

Genetic screen-and-treat strategies for the risk-reduction of breast cancer (BC) and ovarian cancer (OC) are often evaluated by cost–utility analyses (CUAs). This analysis compares data on health preferences (i.e., utility values) in CUAs of targeted genetic testing for BC and OC. Based on utilities applied in fourteen CUAs, data on utility including related assumptions were extracted for the health states: (i) genetic test, (ii) risk-reducing surgeries, (iii) BC/OC and (iv) post cancer. In addition, information about the sources of utility and the impact on the cost-effectiveness was extracted. Utility for CUAs relied on heterogeneous data and assumptions for all health states. The utility values ranged from 0.68 to 0.97 for risk-reducing surgeries, 0.6 to 0.85 for BC and 0.5 to 0.82 for OC. In two out of nine studies, considering the impact of the test result strongly affected the cost–effectiveness ratio. While in general utilities seem not to affect the cost–utility ratio, in future modeling studies the impact of a positive/negative test on utility should be considered mandatory. Women’s health preferences, which may have changed as a result of improved oncologic care and genetic counselling, should be re-evaluated.

Population or family history based BRCA gene tests of breast cancer? A systematic review of economic evaluations

BACKGROUND

Nearly 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.

METHODS

This 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.

RESULTS

Among 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.

CONCLUSIONS

The 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.

Cost-Effectiveness of Targeted Genetic Testing for Breast and Ovarian Cancer: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Targeted genetic testing is a tool to identify women at increased risk of gynaecological cancer.

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review evaluates the results and quality of cost-effectiveness modeling studies that assessed targeted genetic-based screen-and-treat strategies to prevent breast and ovarian cancer.

METHODS

Using MEDLINE and databases of the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, we searched for health economic modeling evaluations of targeted genetic-based screen-and-treat strategies to prevent inheritable breast and ovarian cancer (until August 2020). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were compared. Methodological variations were addressed by evaluating the model conceptualizations, the modeling techniques, parameter estimation and uncertainty, and transparency and validation of the models. Additionally, the reporting quality of each study was assessed.

RESULTS

Eighteen studies met our inclusion criteria. From a payer perspective, the ICERs of (1) BRCA screening for high-risk women without cancer ranged from dominating the no test strategy to an ICER of $21 700/quality-adjusted life years (QALY). In studies that evaluated (2) BRCA cascade screening (ie, screening of women with cancer plus their unaffected relatives) compared with no test, the ICERs were between $6500/QALY and $50 200/QALY. Compared with BRCA alone, (3) multigene testing in women without cancer had an ICER of $51 800/QALY (one study), while for (4) multigene-cascade screening the ICERs were $15 600/QALY, $56.500/QALY, and $69 600/QALY for women in the United Kingdom, Norway, and the United States, respectively (2 studies). More recently published studies showed a higher methodological and reporting quality.

CONCLUSIONS

Targeted BRCA or multiple gene screening is likely to be cost-effective. Methodological variations could be decreased by the development of a reference model, which may serve as a tool for validation of present and future cost-effectiveness models.

A Systematic Review on Cost-effectiveness Studies Evaluating Ovarian Cancer Early Detection and Prevention Strategies

Ovarian cancer imposes a substantial health and economic burden. We systematically reviewed current health-economic evidence for ovarian cancer early detection or prevention strategies. Accordingly, we searched relevant databases for cost-effectiveness studies evaluating ovarian cancer early detection or prevention strategies. Study characteristics and results including quality-adjusted life years (QALY), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were summarized in standardized evidence tables. Economic results were transformed into 2017 Euros. The included studies (N = 33) evaluated ovarian cancer screening, risk-reducing interventions in women with heterogeneous cancer risks and genetic testing followed by risk-reducing interventions for mutation carriers. Multimodal screening with a risk-adjusted algorithm in postmenopausal women achieved ICERs of 9,800-81,400 Euros/QALY, depending on assumptions on mortality data extrapolation, costs, test performance, and screening frequency. Cost-effectiveness of risk-reducing surgery in mutation carriers ranged from cost-saving to 59,000 Euros/QALY. Genetic testing plus risk-reducing interventions for mutation carriers ranged from cost-saving to 54,000 Euros/QALY in women at increased mutation risk. Our findings suggest that preventive surgery and genetic testing plus preventive surgery in women at high risk for ovarian cancer can be considered effective and cost-effective. In postmenopausal women from the general population, multimodal screening using a risk-adjusted algorithm may be cost-effective.

Recommendations for Advancing the Diagnosis and Management of Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer in Brazil

PURPOSE

The objective of this review was to address the barriers limiting access to genetic cancer risk assessment and genetic testing for individuals with suspected hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) through a review of the diagnosis and management steps of HBOC.

METHODS

A selected panel of Brazilian experts in fields related to HBOC was provided with a series of relevant questions to address before the multiday conference. During this conference, each narrative was discussed and edited by the entire group, through numerous drafts and rounds of discussion, until a consensus was achieved.

RESULTS

The authors propose specific and realistic recommendations for improving access to early diagnosis, risk management, and cancer care of HBOC specific to Brazil. Moreover, in creating these recommendations, the authors strived to address all the barriers and impediments mentioned in this article.

CONCLUSION

There is a great need to expand hereditary cancer testing and counseling in Brazil, and changing current policies is essential to accomplishing this goal. Increased knowledge and awareness, together with regulatory actions to increase access to this technology, have the potential to improve patient care and prevention and treatment efforts for patients with cancer across the country.