1
|
Marquina C, Morton JI, Ademi Z. Health economics of detection and treatment of children with familial hypercholesterolemia: to screen or not to screen is no longer the question. Curr Opin Endocrinol Diabetes Obes 2024; 31:84-89. [PMID: 37983310 DOI: 10.1097/med.0000000000000844] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/22/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW Heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (HeFH) is one of the most common monogenic disorders and is safely treatable with lipid-lowering medication. However, most individuals with HeFH remain untreated and undetected, especially in paediatric populations where the potential for long-term therapeutic benefit is higher. Here, we review the recent literature on health economic outcomes for the detection and management of FH in children. RECENT FINDINGS A targeted literature review identified eight studies evaluating detection and management strategies for paediatric FH populations in the last 25 years. Most studies conducted modelled cost-effectiveness analyses to understand the long-term impact of these strategies on health outcomes and the financial impact on the healthcare system. All studies reported that detection and management of HeFH in paediatric populations was cost-effective, regardless of the age of the children. However, cost-effectiveness varied depending on the method of case ascertainment - targeted screening was generally cheaper overall, but less effective, than whole-of-population screening, although both methods were generally cost-effective. SUMMARY Detection and management of HeFH in paediatric populations is a cost-effective way to significantly lower the burden of disease later in life for these individuals. These strategies should be implemented across healthcare systems.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Clara Marquina
- Health Economics and Policy Evaluation Research (HEPER) Group Centre for Medicine Use and Safety, School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Monash University
| | - Jedidiah I Morton
- Health Economics and Policy Evaluation Research (HEPER) Group Centre for Medicine Use and Safety, School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Monash University
- Baker Heart and Diabetes Institute, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Zanfina Ademi
- Health Economics and Policy Evaluation Research (HEPER) Group Centre for Medicine Use and Safety, School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Monash University
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Marquina C, Morton JI, Lloyd M, Abushanab D, Baek Y, Abebe T, Livori A, Dahal P, Watts GF, Ademi Z. Cost-Effectiveness of Screening Strategies for Familial Hypercholesterolaemia: An Updated Systematic Review. PHARMACOECONOMICS 2024; 42:373-392. [PMID: 38265575 PMCID: PMC10937756 DOI: 10.1007/s40273-023-01347-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 12/17/2023] [Indexed: 01/25/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to systematically synthesise the cost-effectiveness of screening strategies to detect heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (FH). METHODS We searched seven databases from inception to 2 February , 2023, for eligible cost-effective analysis (CEA) that evaluated screening strategies for FH versus the standard care for FH detection. Independent reviewers performed the screening, data extraction and quality evaluation. Cost results were adapted to 2022 US dollars (US$) to facilitate comparisons between studies using the same screening strategies. Cost-effectiveness thresholds were based on the original study criteria. RESULTS A total of 21 studies evaluating 62 strategies were included in this review, most of the studies (95%) adopted a healthcare perspective in the base case, and majority were set in high-income countries. Strategies analysed included cascade screening (23 strategies), opportunistic screening (13 strategies), systematic screening (11 strategies) and population-wide screening (15 strategies). Most of the strategies relied on genetic diagnosis for case ascertainment. The most common comparator was no screening, but some studies compared the proposed strategy versus current screening strategies or versus the best next alternative. Six studies evaluated screening in children while the remaining were targeted at adults. From a healthcare perspective, cascade screening was cost-effective in 78% of the studies [cost-adapted incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) ranged from dominant to 2022 US$ 104,877], opportunistic screening in 85% (ICERs from US$4959 to US$41,705), systematic screening in 80% (ICERs from US$2763 to US$69,969) and population-wide screening in 60% (ICERs from US$1484 to US$223,240). The most common driver of ICER identified in the sensitivity analysis was the long-term cost of lipid-lowering treatment. CONCLUSIONS Based on reported willingness to pay thresholds for each setting, most CEA studies concluded that screening for FH compared with no screening was cost-effective, regardless of the screening strategy. Cascade screening resulted in the largest health benefits per person tested.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Clara Marquina
- Health Economics and Policy Evaluation Research (HEPER) Group, Centre for Medicine Use and Safety, Faculty of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Jedidiah I Morton
- Health Economics and Policy Evaluation Research (HEPER) Group, Centre for Medicine Use and Safety, Faculty of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
- Baker Heart and Diabetes Institute, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Melanie Lloyd
- Health Economics and Policy Evaluation Research (HEPER) Group, Centre for Medicine Use and Safety, Faculty of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
- Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Royal Children's Hospital Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Dina Abushanab
- Health Economics and Policy Evaluation Research (HEPER) Group, Centre for Medicine Use and Safety, Faculty of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
- Pharmacy Department, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, Qatar
| | - Yeji Baek
- School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Tamrat Abebe
- Health Economics and Policy Evaluation Research (HEPER) Group, Centre for Medicine Use and Safety, Faculty of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Adam Livori
- Health Economics and Policy Evaluation Research (HEPER) Group, Centre for Medicine Use and Safety, Faculty of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
- Grampians Health, Ballarat, Australia
| | - Padam Dahal
- School of Health, Medical and Applied Sciences, Central Queensland University, Sydney Campus, Sydney, Australia
| | - Gerald F Watts
- School of Health, Medical and Applied Sciences, Central Queensland University, Sydney Campus, Sydney, Australia
- School of Medicine, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia
- Cardiometabolic Service, Departments of Cardiology and Internal Medicine, Royal Perth Hospital, Perth, Australia
| | - Zanfina Ademi
- Health Economics and Policy Evaluation Research (HEPER) Group, Centre for Medicine Use and Safety, Faculty of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
- School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
| |
Collapse
|