Economic Evaluation of Universal Lynch Syndrome Screening Protocols among Newly Diagnosed Patients with Colorectal Cancer.
Economic Evaluation of Universal Lynch Syndrome Screening Protocols among Newly Diagnosed Patients with Colorectal Cancer.
复制标题
新诊断结直肠癌患者中普遍Lynch综合征筛查方案的经济学评价。
DOI:
10.3390/jpm11121284
复制
发表时间:
2021-12-02
影响因子:
--
通讯作者:
Rahm AK
中科院分区:
文献类型:
--
作者:
Hao J;Hassen D;Gudgeon JM;Snyder SR;Hampel H;Williams MS;Sharaf RN;Lu CY;Williams JL;Schlieder V;Rahm AK
We conducted an updated economic evaluation, from a healthcare system perspective, to compare the relative effectiveness and efficiency of eight Lynch syndrome (LS) screening protocols among newly diagnosed colorectal cancer (CRC) patients. We developed decision analytic models for a hypothetical cohort of 1000 patients. Model assumptions and parameter values were based on literature and expert opinion. All costs were in 2018 USD. For identifying LS cases, the direct germline sequencing (DGS) protocol provided the best performance (sensitivity 99.90%, 99.57–99.93%; specificity 99.50%, 97.28–99.85%), followed by the tumor sequencing to germline sequencing (TSGS) protocol (sensitivity, 99.42%, 96.55–99.63%; specificity, 96.58%, 96.46–96.60%). The immunohistochemistry (IHC) protocol was most efficient at $20,082 per LS case identified, compared to microsatellite instability (MSI) ($22,988), DGS ($31,365), and TSGS ($104,394) protocols. Adding double-somatic testing to IHC and MSI protocols did not change sensitivity and specificity, increased costs by 6% and 3.5%, respectively, but reduced unexplained cases by 70% and 50%, respectively. DGS would be as efficient as the IHC protocol when the cost of germline sequencing declines under $368 indicating DGS could be an efficient option in the near future. Until then, IHC and MSI protocols with double-somatic testing would be the optimal choices.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子:
39.2
作者:
Ladabaum U;Wang G;Terdiman J;Blanco A;Kuppermann M;Boland CR;Ford J;Elkin E;Phillips KA
通讯作者:
Phillips KA
影响因子:
8.8
作者:
Deng, G;Peng, E;Gum, J;Terdiman, J;Sleisenger, M;Kim, Y S
通讯作者:
Kim, Y S
影响因子:
29.4
作者:
Haraldsdottir S;Hampel H;Tomsic J;Frankel WL;Pearlman R;de la Chapelle A;Pritchard CC
通讯作者:
Pritchard CC
影响因子:
2.2
作者:
Hampel, Heather;de la Chapelle, Albert
通讯作者:
de la Chapelle, Albert
影响因子:
7.3
作者:
Geurts-Giele, Willemina R. R.;Leenen, Celine H. M.;Dinjens, Winand N. M.
通讯作者:
Dinjens, Winand N. M.