1
|
Quinlan TAG, Schroeder B, Kwon S, Barlow JF, Sherman MS, Anderson HD, Wright G, McQueen RB. Economic Impact of Coverage Expansion for Non-invasive Prenatal Testing Through a Performance-Based Risk-Sharing Agreement. PHARMACOECONOMICS - OPEN 2021; 5:449-458. [PMID: 33689154 PMCID: PMC7944877 DOI: 10.1007/s41669-021-00261-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 02/19/2021] [Indexed: 06/12/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Harvard Pilgrim Health Care expanded coverage for non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) to include all pregnant, single-gestation women aged < 35 years, through a performance-based risk-sharing (PBRS) agreement with Illumina to offset costs from coverage expansion. NIPT analyzes cell-free DNA fragments from a maternal blood sample to screen for fetal aneuploidies and is considered a more accurate screening method than conventional serum biochemical screening and nuchal translucency ultrasound-based approaches. OBJECTIVE This study assessed the impact of NIPT coverage expansion on prenatal screening strategies and payer expenditures. METHODS This was a real-world comparison of utilization and expenditures of prenatal screening and diagnostic testing in pregnant women aged < 35 years pre- (1 March 2016-28 February 2018) and post- (1 March 2018-30 September 2019) coverage expansion. Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated to compare changes in utilization of conventional and NIPT-based prenatal screening methods. Change in per member per month (PMPM) expenditures in $US year 2020 were assessed post-coverage expansion using a budget impact model. RESULTS A total of 5041 and 4109 distinct pregnancies were identified in pre- and post-coverage expansion periods, respectively. Mean ± standard deviation maternal age was consistent between pre- and post-coverage expansion periods (30.35 ± 3.35 and 30.33 ± 3.28, respectively). Screening orders for conventional methods decreased, with an adjusted IRR in the post-expansion period of 0.87 (95% CI 0.85-0.90) times the rate in the pre-expansion period; orders for NIPT increased, with an adjusted IRR in the post-expansion period of 1.41 (95% CI 1.32-1.51) times the rate in the pre-expansion period. Invasive diagnostic testing was low at baseline (1.0%) and did not change post-coverage expansion. The change in PMPM is estimated at $US0.026 post-coverage expansion. CONCLUSION The PBRS agreement to expand NIPT coverage for women aged < 35 years was associated with an increase in NIPT utilization, decreases in conventional screening methods, and a modest increase in PMPM expenditures.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Taryn A G Quinlan
- Department of Health Systems, Management and Policy, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, USA
| | | | - Sue Kwon
- Department of Clinical Pharmacy, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, USA
| | | | - Michael S Sherman
- Harvard Pilgrim Health Care, Wellesley, MA, USA
- Department of Population Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Heather D Anderson
- Department of Clinical Pharmacy, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, USA
| | - Garth Wright
- Department of Clinical Pharmacy, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, USA
| | - R Brett McQueen
- Department of Clinical Pharmacy, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, USA.
- Skaggs School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Colorado, Mail Stop C238, 12850 E. Montview Blvd, Aurora, CO, 80045, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Oepkes D, Page-Christiaens GCL, Bax CJ, Bekker MN, Bilardo CM, Boon EMJ, Schuring-Blom GH, Coumans ABC, Faas BH, Galjaard RJH, Go AT, Henneman L, Macville MVE, Pajkrt E, Suijkerbuijk RF, Huijsdens-van Amsterdam K, Van Opstal D, Verweij EJJ, Weiss MM, Sistermans EA. Trial by Dutch laboratories for evaluation of non-invasive prenatal testing. Part I-clinical impact. Prenat Diagn 2016; 36:1083-1090. [PMID: 27750376 PMCID: PMC5214231 DOI: 10.1002/pd.4945] [Citation(s) in RCA: 110] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/08/2016] [Revised: 10/12/2016] [Accepted: 10/13/2016] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
Objective To evaluate the clinical impact of nationwide implementation of genome‐wide non‐invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) in pregnancies at increased risk for fetal trisomies 21, 18 and 13 (TRIDENT study). Method Women with elevated risk based on first trimester combined testing (FCT ≥ 1:200) or medical history, not advanced maternal age alone, were offered NIPT as contingent screening test, performed by Dutch University Medical laboratories. We analyzed uptake, test performance, redraw/failure rate, turn‐around time and pregnancy outcome. Results Between 1 April and 1 September 2014, 1413/23 232 (6%) women received a high‐risk FCT result. Of these, 1211 (85.7%) chose NIPT. One hundred seventy‐nine women had NIPT based on medical history. In total, 1386/1390 (99.7%) women received a result, 6 (0.4%) after redraw. Mean turn‐around time was 14 days. Follow‐up was available in 1376 (99.0%) pregnancies. NIPT correctly predicted 37/38 (97.4%) trisomies 21, 18 or 13 (29/30, 4/4 and 4/4 respectively); 5/1376 (0.4%) cases proved to be false positives: trisomies 21 (n = 2), 18 (n = 1) and 13 (n = 2). Estimated reduction in invasive testing was 62%. Conclusion Introduction of NIPT in the Dutch National healthcare‐funded Prenatal Screening Program resulted in high uptake and a vast reduction of invasive testing. Our study supports offering NIPT to pregnant women at increased risk for fetal trisomy. © 2016 The Authors. Prenatal Diagnosis published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. © 2016 The Authors. Prenatal Diagnosis published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. What's already known about this topic?Non‐invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for trisomies 21, 18 and 13 is mainly offered in a commercial setting. Offering NIPT to pregnant women at increased risk for fetal trisomy leads to a reduction in invasive testing.
What does this study adds?NIPT implemented as a contingent test under the umbrella of a national health authority‐supported fetal trisomy screening program facilitates optimal counseling with close to 100% follow‐up, results in 86% uptake and confirms a major reduction of invasive tests.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dick Oepkes
- Department of Obstetrics, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | | | - Caroline J Bax
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Mireille N Bekker
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.,Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Catia M Bilardo
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Elles M J Boon
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | | | - Audrey B C Coumans
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Maastricht UMC+, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Brigitte H Faas
- Department of Human Genetics, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | | | - Attie T Go
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Lidewij Henneman
- Department of Clinical Genetics, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Merryn V E Macville
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Maastricht UMC+, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Eva Pajkrt
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Ron F Suijkerbuijk
- Department of Genetics, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | | | - Diane Van Opstal
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - E J Joanne Verweij
- Department of Obstetrics, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Marjan M Weiss
- Department of Clinical Genetics, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Erik A Sistermans
- Department of Clinical Genetics, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
Abstract
Genetic carrier screening, prenatal screening for aneuploidy, and prenatal diagnostic testing have expanded dramatically over the past 2 decades. Driven in part by powerful market forces, new complex testing modalities have become available after limited clinical research. The responsibility for offering these tests lies primarily on the obstetrical care provider and has become more burdensome as the number of testing options expands. Genetic testing in pregnancy is optional, and decisions about undergoing tests, as well as follow-up testing, should be informed and based on individual patients' values and needs. Careful pre- and post-test counseling is central to supporting informed decision-making. This article explores three areas of technical expansion in genetic testing: expanded carrier screening, non-invasive prenatal screening for fetal aneuploidies using cell-free DNA, and diagnostic testing using fetal chromosomal microarray testing, and provides insights aimed at enabling the obstetrical practitioner to better support patients considering these tests.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jill Fonda Allen
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The George Washington University, 2150 Pennsylvania Ave, NW Washington, DC 20037.
| | - Katie Stoll
- Genetic Support Foundation, Olympia, WA; Providence Health & Services, Olympia, WA
| | - Barbara A Bernhardt
- Division of Translational Medicine and Human Genetics, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Benn P, Curnow KJ, Chapman S, Michalopoulos SN, Hornberger J, Rabinowitz M. An Economic Analysis of Cell-Free DNA Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing in the US General Pregnancy Population. PLoS One 2015; 10:e0132313. [PMID: 26158465 PMCID: PMC4497716 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0132313] [Citation(s) in RCA: 39] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/07/2015] [Accepted: 06/11/2015] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Analyze the economic value of replacing conventional fetal aneuploidy screening approaches with non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) in the general pregnancy population. METHODS Using decision-analysis modeling, we compared conventional screening to NIPT with cell-free DNA (cfDNA) analysis in the annual US pregnancy population. Sensitivity and specificity for fetal aneuploidies, trisomy 21, trisomy 18, trisomy 13, and monosomy X, were estimated using published data and modeling of both first- and second trimester screening. Costs were assigned for each prenatal test component and for an affected birth. The overall cost to the healthcare system considered screening costs, the number of aneuploid cases detected, invasive procedures performed, procedure-related euploid losses, and affected pregnancies averted. Sensitivity analyses evaluated the effect of variation in parameters. Costs were reported in 2014 US Dollars. RESULTS Replacing conventional screening with NIPT would reduce healthcare costs if it can be provided for $744 or less in the general pregnancy population. The most influential variables were timing of screening entry, screening costs, and pregnancy termination rates. Of the 13,176 affected pregnancies undergoing screening, NIPT detected 96.5% (12,717/13,176) of cases, compared with 85.9% (11,314/13,176) by conventional approaches. NIPT reduced invasive procedures by 60.0%, with NIPT and conventional methods resulting in 24,596 and 61,430 invasive procedures, respectively. The number of procedure-related euploid fetal losses was reduced by 73.5% (194/264) in the general screening population. CONCLUSION Based on our analysis, universal application of NIPT would increase fetal aneuploidy detection rates and can be economically justified. Offering this testing to all pregnant women is associated with substantial prenatal healthcare benefits.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Peter Benn
- Division of Human Genetics, Department of Genetics and Genome Sciences, University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, CT, United States of America
| | | | | | | | - John Hornberger
- Cedar Associates, Menlo Park, CA, United States of America
- Stanford University, Stanford, CA, United States of America
| | | |
Collapse
|
5
|
Warsof SL, Larion S, Abuhamad AZ. Overview of the impact of noninvasive prenatal testing on diagnostic procedures. Prenat Diagn 2015; 35:972-9. [PMID: 25868782 DOI: 10.1002/pd.4601] [Citation(s) in RCA: 83] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/12/2015] [Revised: 03/31/2015] [Accepted: 03/31/2015] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
Noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) has had a profound influence in the field of prenatal diagnosis since the 1997 discovery of cell-free fetal DNA in maternal blood. Research has progressed rapidly, with clinical data supporting laboratory studies showing that NIPT is highly sensitive and specific for fetal aneuploidy, resulting in marked uptake in the high-risk patient population. The superior accuracy of NIPT compared with conventional screening methods has led to significant decreases in the number of invasive diagnostic procedures, in addition to a concomitant decrease in the number of procedure-related fetal losses. Yet, NIPT has been described as a 'disruptive innovation' due to the considerable changes the technology has commanded on current prenatal screening and diagnostic practices. This review summarizes both institutional and global experience with NIPT uptake, its effect on reducing diagnostic invasive procedures, and the unique challenges that reduced procedural volume may have on physician and trainee proficiency, cytogenetic laboratories, and neonatal outcome.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Steven L Warsof
- Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Eastern Virginia Medical School, Norfolk, VA, USA
| | - Sebastian Larion
- Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Eastern Virginia Medical School, Norfolk, VA, USA
| | - Alfred Z Abuhamad
- Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Eastern Virginia Medical School, Norfolk, VA, USA
| |
Collapse
|