EXPLORING THE COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF A SMOKING-CESSATION PROGRAM ENHANCED WITH INDIVIDUAL GENETIC FEEDBACK ON LUNG CANCER RISK
Author(s)
Gordon LG1, Hirst NG1, Young RP2, Brown PM31Queensland Institute of Medical Research, Brisbane, Australia, 2Auckland Hospital, Auckland, New Zealand, 3The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
Presentation Documents
OBJECTIVES: Several genetic characteristics are implicated in the onset of lung cancer and the smoking-gene interaction means that some smokers are at greater risk of developing lung cancer than others. The purpose of this study was to explore the potential cost-effectiveness of offering smokers a genetic test designed to provide feedback regarding their individual risk of developing lung cancer to motivate smoking cessation. METHODS: Two strategies were modelled; heavy-smoking individuals aged 50 years either received or did not receive a genetic test within the course of a usual smoking-cessation intervention comprising nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) and counselling. A Markov model was constructed using evidence from published randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses for estimates on 12-month quit rates and long-term relapse rates. Recent epidemiological data were used for estimates on the risk of developing lung cancer stratified by time since quitting and heavy/light smoking patterns. Scenario analyses, one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were used to explore uncertainty. RESULTS: The discounted incremental costs for the genetic testing strategy were AU$299 and corresponding quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were 0.0109 producing an incremental cost per QALY of AUS$34,687 (95% CI $12,483, $87,734). At a willingness-to-pay of AU$20,000 per QALY gained, the genetic testing strategy needs to have a minimum 12-month quit rate of 12.4% or the relapse rate 12% lower to demonstrate cost-effective equivalence to NRT and counselling alone. The probability that adding a genetic test to the usual smoking-cessation intervention is cost-effective was 20.6%. CONCLUSIONS: Very small differences in costs and QALYs were found between the two options over a period of 35 years. The findings were sensitive to small changes in critical variables such as the 12-month quit rates and relapse rates. Further research on smoking-cessation quit rates following genetic testing is needed to inform cost-utility analyses.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2009-10, ISPOR Europe 2009, Paris, France
Value in Health, Vol. 12, No. 7 (October 2009)
Code
PCN106
Topic
Economic Evaluation
Topic Subcategory
Cost-comparison, Effectiveness, Utility, Benefit Analysis
Disease
Oncology, Respiratory-Related Disorders