F&S reports · 2023
Preimplantation genetic testing for sickle cell disease: a cost-effectiveness analysis.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Combs Joshua C, Dougherty Maura, Yamasaki Meghan U, DeCherney Alan H, Devine Kate M, Hill Micah J, Rothwell Erin, O'Brien Jeanne E, Nelson Richard E
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of in vitro fertilization with preimplantation genetic testing for monogenic disease (IVF + PGT-M) in the conception of a nonsickle cell disease (non-SCD) individual compared with standard of care treatment for a naturally conceived, sickle cell disease (SCD)-affected individual.
DESIGN: A Markov simulation model was constructed to evaluate a one-time IVF + PGT-M treatment compared with the lifetime standard of care costs of treatment for an individual potentially born with SCD. Using an annual discount rate of 3% for cost and outcome measures, quality-adjusted life years were constructed from utility weights and life expectancy values and then used as the effectiveness measurement. An incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was calculated for both treatment arms, and a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000 per quality-adjusted life year was assumed.
SETTING: Tertiary care or university medical center.
PATIENTS: A hypothetical cohort of 10,000 patients was analzyed over a lifetime horizon using yearly cycles.
INTERVENTIONS: In vitro fertilization with preimplantation genetic testing for monogenic disease use in conception of a non-SCD individual.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes of interest were the incremental cost and effectiveness of an IVF+PGT-M conception compared with the SOC treatment of an SCD-affected individual.
RESULTS: In vitro fertilization with preimplantation genetic testing for monogenic disease was the optimal strategy in 93.17% of the iterations. An incremental savings of $137,594 was demonstrated with a gain of 1.96 QALYs and 3.69 life years over a lifetime. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated that SOC treatment never met equivalent cost-effectiveness.
CONCLUSIONS: Our model demonstrates that IVF + PGT-M for selection against SCD, compared with lifetime SOC treatment for those affected, is the most cost-effective strategy within the United States healthcare sector.
DESIGN: A Markov simulation model was constructed to evaluate a one-time IVF + PGT-M treatment compared with the lifetime standard of care costs of treatment for an individual potentially born with SCD. Using an annual discount rate of 3% for cost and outcome measures, quality-adjusted life years were constructed from utility weights and life expectancy values and then used as the effectiveness measurement. An incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was calculated for both treatment arms, and a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000 per quality-adjusted life year was assumed.
SETTING: Tertiary care or university medical center.
PATIENTS: A hypothetical cohort of 10,000 patients was analzyed over a lifetime horizon using yearly cycles.
INTERVENTIONS: In vitro fertilization with preimplantation genetic testing for monogenic disease use in conception of a non-SCD individual.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes of interest were the incremental cost and effectiveness of an IVF+PGT-M conception compared with the SOC treatment of an SCD-affected individual.
RESULTS: In vitro fertilization with preimplantation genetic testing for monogenic disease was the optimal strategy in 93.17% of the iterations. An incremental savings of $137,594 was demonstrated with a gain of 1.96 QALYs and 3.69 life years over a lifetime. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated that SOC treatment never met equivalent cost-effectiveness.
CONCLUSIONS: Our model demonstrates that IVF + PGT-M for selection against SCD, compared with lifetime SOC treatment for those affected, is the most cost-effective strategy within the United States healthcare sector.