1
|
Vellekoop H, Versteegh M, Huygens S, Corro Ramos I, Szilberhorn L, Zelei T, Nagy B, Tsiachristas A, Koleva-Kolarova R, Wordsworth S, Rutten-van Mölken M. The Net Benefit of Personalized Medicine: A Systematic Literature Review and Regression Analysis. VALUE IN HEALTH : THE JOURNAL OF THE INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR PHARMACOECONOMICS AND OUTCOMES RESEARCH 2022; 25:1428-1438. [PMID: 35248467 DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2022.01.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/29/2021] [Revised: 12/02/2021] [Accepted: 01/09/2022] [Indexed: 06/14/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Amidst conflicting expectations about the benefits of personalized medicine (PM) and the potentially high implementation costs, we reviewed the available evidence on the cost-effectiveness of PM relative to non-PM. METHODS We conducted a systematic literature review of economic evaluations of PM and extracted data, including incremental quality-adjusted life-years (ΔQALYs) and incremental costs (Δcosts). ΔQALYs and Δcosts were combined with estimates of national cost-effectiveness thresholds to calculate incremental net monetary benefit (ΔNMB). Regression analyses were performed with these variables as dependent variables and PM intervention characteristics as independent variables. Random intercepts were used to cluster studies according to country. RESULTS Of 4774 studies reviewed, 128 were selected, providing cost-effectiveness data for 279 PM interventions. Most studies were set in the United States (48%) and the United Kingdom (16%) and adopted a healthcare perspective (82%). Cancer treatments (60%) and pharmaceutical interventions (72%) occurred frequently. Prognostic tests (19%) and tests to identify (non)responders (37%) were least and most common, respectively. Industry sponsorship occurred in 32%. Median ΔQALYs, Δcosts, and ΔNMB per individual were 0.03, Int$575, and Int$18, respectively. We found large heterogeneity in cost-effectiveness. Regression analysis showed that gene therapies were associated with higher ΔQALYs than other interventions. PM interventions for neoplasms brought higher ΔNMB than PM interventions for other conditions. Nonetheless, average ΔNMB in the 'neoplasm' group was found to be negative. CONCLUSIONS PM brings improvements in health but often at a high cost, resulting in 0 to negative ΔNMB on average. Pricing policies may be needed to reduce the costs of interventions with negative ΔNMB.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Heleen Vellekoop
- Institute for Medical Technology Assessment, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Matthijs Versteegh
- Institute for Medical Technology Assessment, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Simone Huygens
- Institute for Medical Technology Assessment, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Isaac Corro Ramos
- Institute for Medical Technology Assessment, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Tamás Zelei
- Syreon Research Institute, Budapest, Hungary
| | - Balázs Nagy
- Syreon Research Institute, Budapest, Hungary
| | | | | | - Sarah Wordsworth
- Health Economics Research Centre, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Maureen Rutten-van Mölken
- Institute for Medical Technology Assessment, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands; Erasmus School of Health Policy & Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Costa S, Regier DA, Meissner B, Cromwell I, Ben-Neriah S, Chavez E, Hung S, Steidl C, Scott DW, Marra MA, Peacock SJ, Connors JM. A time-and-motion approach to micro-costing of high-throughput genomic assays. ACTA ACUST UNITED AC 2016; 23:304-313. [PMID: 27803594 DOI: 10.3747/co.23.2987] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Genomic technologies are increasingly used to guide clinical decision-making in cancer control. Economic evidence about the cost-effectiveness of genomic technologies is limited, in part because of a lack of published comprehensive cost estimates. In the present micro-costing study, we used a time-and-motion approach to derive cost estimates for 3 genomic assays and processes-digital gene expression profiling (gep), fluorescence in situ hybridization (fish), and targeted capture sequencing, including bioinformatics analysis-in the context of lymphoma patient management. METHODS The setting for the study was the Department of Lymphoid Cancer Research laboratory at the BC Cancer Agency in Vancouver, British Columbia. Mean per-case hands-on time and resource measurements were determined from a series of direct observations of each assay. Per-case cost estimates were calculated using a bottom-up costing approach, with labour, capital and equipment, supplies and reagents, and overhead costs included. RESULTS The most labour-intensive assay was found to be fish at 258.2 minutes per case, followed by targeted capture sequencing (124.1 minutes per case) and digital gep (14.9 minutes per case). Based on a historical case throughput of 180 cases annually, the mean per-case cost (2014 Canadian dollars) was estimated to be $1,029.16 for targeted capture sequencing and bioinformatics analysis, $596.60 for fish, and $898.35 for digital gep with an 807-gene code set. CONCLUSIONS With the growing emphasis on personalized approaches to cancer management, the need for economic evaluations of high-throughput genomic assays is increasing. Through economic modelling and budget-impact analyses, the cost estimates presented here can be used to inform priority-setting decisions about the implementation of such assays in clinical practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S Costa
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Vancouver, BC; Department of Cancer Control Research, BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver, BC
| | - D A Regier
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Vancouver, BC; Department of Cancer Control Research, BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver, BC; School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC
| | - B Meissner
- Centre for Lymphoid Cancer, BC Cancer Agency, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC
| | - I Cromwell
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Vancouver, BC; Department of Cancer Control Research, BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver, BC
| | - S Ben-Neriah
- Centre for Lymphoid Cancer, BC Cancer Agency, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC
| | - E Chavez
- Centre for Lymphoid Cancer, BC Cancer Agency, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC
| | - S Hung
- Centre for Lymphoid Cancer, BC Cancer Agency, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC
| | - C Steidl
- Centre for Lymphoid Cancer, BC Cancer Agency, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC; Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC
| | - D W Scott
- Centre for Lymphoid Cancer, BC Cancer Agency, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC; Department of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC
| | - M A Marra
- Canada's Michael Smith Genome Sciences Centre, BC Cancer Agency, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC; Department of Medical Genetics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC
| | - S J Peacock
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Vancouver, BC; Department of Cancer Control Research, BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver, BC; Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC
| | - J M Connors
- Centre for Lymphoid Cancer, BC Cancer Agency, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC; Department of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Cost-effectiveness of using a gene expression profiling test to aid in identifying the primary tumour in patients with cancer of unknown primary. THE PHARMACOGENOMICS JOURNAL 2016; 17:286-300. [PMID: 27019982 DOI: 10.1038/tpj.2015.94] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/19/2015] [Revised: 10/30/2015] [Accepted: 11/13/2015] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Abstract
We aimed to investigate the cost-effectiveness of a 2000-gene-expression profiling (GEP) test to help identify the primary tumor site when clinicopathological diagnostic evaluation was inconclusive in patients with cancer of unknown primary (CUP). We built a decision-analytic-model to project the lifetime clinical and economic consequences of different clinical management strategies for CUP. The model was parameterized using follow-up data from the Manitoba Cancer Registry, cost data from Manitoba Health administrative databases and secondary sources. The 2000-GEP-based strategy compared to current clinical practice resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $44,151 per quality-adjusted life years (QALY) gained. The total annual-budget impact was $36.2 million per year. A value-of-information analysis revealed that the expected value of perfect information about the test's clinical impact was $4.2 million per year. The 2000-GEP test should be considered for adoption in CUP. Field evaluations of the test are associated with a large societal benefit.
Collapse
|