Economic evaluation of a novel genetic screening test for risk of venous thromboembolism compared with standard of care in women considering combined hormonal contraception in Switzerland

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.

Oral Contraceptives and Venous Thromboembolism: Focus on Testing that May Enable Prediction and Assessment of the Risk

Combined oral contraceptives (COCs) induce several changes in the levels of coagulation factors. The levels of procoagulant factors are often increased, while levels of anticoagulant factors are decreased. Fibrinolysis is also affected, even if the effect seems to be more counterbalanced by opposite regulation of profibrinolytic and antifibrinolytic factors. These effects on hemostasis are more pronounced with third- or fourth-generation COC compared with second-generation COC. Venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk increases when multiple risk factors, including genetic and environmental, are present simultaneously. COC use causes changes in coagulation that modify the prothrombotic state induced by preexisting hemostatic alterations in a supra-additive manner. Therefore, testing appears to be of importance not only before implementing COC but also to monitor any potential thrombogenicity induced by COC therapy. Inherited genetic factors, such as factor V Leiden, G20210A prothrombin mutation, antithrombin, protein C or protein S deficiencies, non-O blood group, as well as CYP2C9*2 and the rs4379368 mutations, have all been identified as genetic predictive risk factors of VTE in women. Nevertheless, the screening of these genetic biomarkers is not capable of assessing the phenotypic expression of the risk. This review will focus on the different options for screening the thrombogenic status in this population. Specific attention will be given to the endogenous thrombin potential-based activated protein C resistance, a test aiming at assessing the thrombogenicity induced by hormonal therapies and inherited or acquired thrombophilia.