LAUSR.org creates dashboard-style pages of related content for over 1.5 million academic articles. Sign Up to like articles & get recommendations!

Canadian cost-effectiveness model of BRCA-driven surgical prevention of breast/ovarian cancers compared to treatment if cancer develops

Photo by nci from unsplash

Objectives To assess the cost effectiveness from a Canadian perspective of index patient germline BRCA testing and then, if positive, family members with subsequent risk-reducing surgery (RRS) in as yet… Click to show full abstract

Objectives To assess the cost effectiveness from a Canadian perspective of index patient germline BRCA testing and then, if positive, family members with subsequent risk-reducing surgery (RRS) in as yet unaffected mutation carriers compared with no testing and treatment of cancer when it develops. Methods A patient level simulation was developed comparing outcomes between two groups using Canadian data. Group 1: no mutation testing with treatment if cancer developed. Group 2: cascade testing (index patient BRCA tested and first-/second-degree relatives tested if index patient/first-degree relative is positive) with RRS in carriers. End points were the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and budget impact. Results There were 29,102 index patients: 2,786 ovarian cancer and 26,316 breast cancer (BC). Using the base-case assumption of 44 percent and 21 percent of women with a BRCA mutation receiving risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and risk-reducing mastectomy, respectively, testing was cost effective versus no testing and treatment on cancer development, with an ICER of CAD 14,942 (USD 10,555) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), 127 and 104 fewer cases of ovarian and BC, respectively, and twenty-one fewer all-cause deaths. Testing remained cost effective versus no testing at the commonly accepted North American threshold of approximately CAD 100,000 (or USD 100,000) per QALY gained in all scenario analyses, and cost effectiveness improved as RRS uptake rates increased. Conclusions Prevention via testing and RRS is cost effective at current RRS uptake rates; however, optimization of uptake rates and RRS will increase cost effectiveness and can provide cost savings.

Keywords: cost; cost effectiveness; cancer; treatment cancer

Journal Title: International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care
Year Published: 2020

Link to full text (if available)


Share on Social Media:                               Sign Up to like & get
recommendations!

Related content

More Information              News              Social Media              Video              Recommended



                Click one of the above tabs to view related content.