A Systematic Scoping Review of Published Economic Analyses of Public Cord Blood Banking: Is It Time to Re-Assess?
Author(s)
Luke E. Allan, BA1, Risa Shorr, BSc2, Matthew Seftel, MD3, Pierre Villeneuve, MSc, PhD, MD4;
1Dartmouth College, Economics, Hanover, NH, USA, 2Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, ON, Canada, 3Canadian Blood Services, Ottawa, ON, Canada, 4Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada
1Dartmouth College, Economics, Hanover, NH, USA, 2Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, ON, Canada, 3Canadian Blood Services, Ottawa, ON, Canada, 4Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada
OBJECTIVES: Public umbilical cord blood (UCB) banking offers a valuable source of hematopoietic cells for transplantation, particularly beneficial for patients with limited donor matches. Despite its potential, the economic value of UCB remains unclear and numerous UCB banks are re-evaluating the number of UCB that they should bank to meet their objective of offering optimal products within the constraint of limited financial resources. This systematic scoping review of published studies is needed to better understand the economic value of public UCB banking.
METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of economic analyses related to public UCB banking to June 2024. Searches were performed in Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central, HTA, Econlit, Scopus and Cinahl databases. Eligibility criteria included studies focused on cost analyses, cost-effectiveness, or cost-utility evaluations of public cord blood banking. Data were extracted on economic classifications, funding sources, and key outcomes, with reporting quality assessed using the CHEERS-VOI checklist.
RESULTS: The review identifies 13 studies published between 1999 and 2019, predominantly from the USA and Europe. Of these, five are classified as full economic evaluations, with two employing cost-effectiveness analysis, one applying cost-utility analysis and two applying cost-benefit analysis. Key findings reveal a shift from initial evaluations emphasizing bank establishment to optimizing efficiency and assessing viability. Studies suggest centralized banking models as cost-effective and emphasize the importance of preserving units for underrepresented populations. However, significant variability in outcomes and limited reporting on societal benefits are noted.
CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis highlights the evolving landscape of public UCB banking economic evaluations. While centralized models and stringent UCB banking criteria may improve cost efficiency, gaps in standardized reporting and societal value assessments persist. Future studies should integrate contemporary data into economic evaluations that directly compare inputs and outputs from a societal perspective to inform policies on banking that best support the needs of patients.
METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of economic analyses related to public UCB banking to June 2024. Searches were performed in Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central, HTA, Econlit, Scopus and Cinahl databases. Eligibility criteria included studies focused on cost analyses, cost-effectiveness, or cost-utility evaluations of public cord blood banking. Data were extracted on economic classifications, funding sources, and key outcomes, with reporting quality assessed using the CHEERS-VOI checklist.
RESULTS: The review identifies 13 studies published between 1999 and 2019, predominantly from the USA and Europe. Of these, five are classified as full economic evaluations, with two employing cost-effectiveness analysis, one applying cost-utility analysis and two applying cost-benefit analysis. Key findings reveal a shift from initial evaluations emphasizing bank establishment to optimizing efficiency and assessing viability. Studies suggest centralized banking models as cost-effective and emphasize the importance of preserving units for underrepresented populations. However, significant variability in outcomes and limited reporting on societal benefits are noted.
CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis highlights the evolving landscape of public UCB banking economic evaluations. While centralized models and stringent UCB banking criteria may improve cost efficiency, gaps in standardized reporting and societal value assessments persist. Future studies should integrate contemporary data into economic evaluations that directly compare inputs and outputs from a societal perspective to inform policies on banking that best support the needs of patients.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2025-05, ISPOR 2025, Montréal, Quebec, CA
Value in Health, Volume 28, Issue S1
Code
EE278
Topic
Economic Evaluation
Disease
SDC: Oncology, SDC: Pediatrics, STA: Genetic, Regenerative & Curative Therapies