THE ROLE OF SECONDARY FINDINGS AND PATIENT PREFERNCE IN THE COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF NEXT GENERATION SEQUENCING IN CANCER
Author(s)
Regier D1, Cromwell I2, Veenstra DL3
1BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 2Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (ARCC), British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 3Comparative Health Outcomes, Policy, and Economics (CHOICE) Institute, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
OBJECTIVES: Next generation sequencing (NGS) is an increasingly important component of cancer care. Testing a person’s genetic material for known mutations can provide patients with information about the risk of future disease events, including diseases other than the primary condition (secondary findings; SFs). We describe an exercise in which these implications were explored using two previously-published policy models. METHODS: Two policy models were used to estimate the impact of the return of SFs to a population of 10,000 colorectal cancer patients being tested for the risk of Colorectal Polyposis Syndromes (CRCPs) using a hypothetical NGS panel versus immunohistochemistry (IHC). The first model estimates the incremental costs and QALYs in a population of colorectal cancer patients and their relatives. The second model estimates incremental costs and outcomes in a population of healthy people being tested for a list of 56 identified genetic mutations published by the American College of Medical Geneticists. Net Monetary Benefit (NMB) was estimated using a value-based framework that also considers the value that people place on having information (VoK) about SFs, derived from a Discrete Choice Experiment conducted in the general Canadian population. RESULTS: In our baseline scenario, testing probands and their relatives resulted in a mean NMB of $4,596 (95% credible range: -3,904 – 16,845), suggesting that the return of SFs to people tested for CRCPs was mostly (79%) cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000. Using the NGS panel to test for CRCP alone was 74% cost-effective. When the VoK was incorporated into the NMB calculation, returning SFs was 86% cost-effective. CONCLUSIONS: NGS testing is cost-effective in colorectal cancer patients, and our analysis suggests that the return of non-CRCP related SFs improves the cost-effectiveness of NGS testing, particularly when the VoK is considered. Returning SFs can be cost-effective provided that there is good cost-effectiveness evidence for the primary condition.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2018-11, ISPOR Europe 2018, Barcelona, Spain
Value in Health, Vol. 21, S3 (October 2018)
Code
PCN132
Topic
Economic Evaluation
Topic Subcategory
Cost-comparison, Effectiveness, Utility, Benefit Analysis
Disease
Oncology