First trimester screening cut-offs for noninvasive prenatal testing as a contingent screen: Balancing detection and screen-positive rates for trisomy 21

Economic evaluation of prenatal screening for fetal aneuploidies in Thailand

Historically, there has been a lack of cost-effectiveness data regarding the inclusion of universal non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for trisomy 21, 18, and 13 in the benefit package of the Universal Health Coverage (UHC) in Thailand. Therefore, this study aimed to perform the cost-benefit analysis of prenatal screening tests and calculate the budget impact that would result from the implementation of a universal NIPT program. A decision-tree model was employed to evaluate cost and benefit of different prenatal chromosomal abnormalities screenings: 1) first-trimester screening (FTS), 2) NIPT, and 3) definitive diagnostic (amniocentesis). The comparison was made between these screenings and no screening in three groups of pregnant women: all ages, < 35 years, and ≥ 35 years. The analysis was conducted from societal and governmental perspectives. The costs comprised direct medical, direct non-medical, and indirect costs, while the benefit was cost-avoidance associated with caring for children with trisomy and the loss of productivity for caregivers. Parameter uncertainties were evaluated through one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. From a governmental perspective, all three methods were found to be cost-beneficial. Among them, FTS was identified as the most cost-beneficial, especially for pregnant women aged ≥ 35 years. From a societal perspective, the definitive diagnostic test was not cost-effective, but the other two screening tests were. The most sensitive parameters for FTS and NIPT strategies were the productivity loss of caregivers and the incidence of trisomy 21. Our study suggested that NIPT was the most cost-effective strategy in Thailand, if the cost was reduced to 47 USD. This evidence-based information can serve as a crucial resource for policymakers when making informed decisions regarding the allocation of resources for prenatal care in Thailand and similar context.

Diagnostic performance and costs of contingent screening models for trisomy 21 incorporating non-invasive prenatal testing

BACKGROUND

Contingent screening for trisomy 21 using non-invasive prenatal testing has the potential to reduce invasive diagnostic testing and increase the detection of trisomy 21.

AIM

To describe the diagnostic and economic performance of prenatal screening models for trisomy 21 that use non-invasive prenatal testing as a contingent screen across a range of combined first trimester screening risk cut-offs from a public health system perspective.

METHODS

Using a hypothetical cohort of 300 000 pregnancies, we modelled the outcomes of 25 contingent non-invasive prenatal testing screening models and compared these to conventional screening, offering women with a high-risk (1 > 300) combined first trimester screening result an invasive test. The 25 models used a range of risk cut-offs. High-risk women were offered invasive testing. Intermediate-risk women were offered non-invasive prenatal testing. We report the cost of each model, detection rate, costs per diagnosis, invasive tests per diagnosis and the number of fetal losses per diagnosis.

RESULTS

The cost per prenatal diagnosis of trisomy 21 using the conventional model was $51 876 compared to the contingent models which varied from $49 309-66 686. The number of diagnoses and cost per diagnosis increased as the intermediate-risk threshold was lowered. Results were sensitive to trisomy 21 incidence, uptake of testing and cost of non-invasive prenatal testing.

CONCLUSION

Contingent non-invasive prenatal testing models using more sensitive combined first trimester screening risk cut-offs than conventional screening improved the detection rate of trisomy 21, reduced procedure-related fetal loss and could potentially be provided at a lower cost per diagnosis than conventional screening.