Display options
Cite
Sun L, Brentnall A, Patel S, et al. A Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Multigene Testing for All Patients With Breast Cancer. JAMA Oncol. 2019;doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2019.3323.
Sun, L., Brentnall, A., Patel, S., Buist, D. S. M., Bowles, E. J. A., Evans, D. G. R., Eccles, D., Hopper, J., Li, S., Southey, M., Duffy, S., Cuzick, J., Dos Santos Silva, I., Miners, A., Sadique, Z., Yang, L., Legood, R., & Manchanda, R. (2019). A Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Multigene Testing for All Patients With Breast Cancer. JAMA oncology, . https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2019.3323
Sun, Li, et al. "A Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Multigene Testing for All Patients With Breast Cancer." JAMA oncology vol. (2019). doi: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2019.3323
Sun L, Brentnall A, Patel S, Buist DSM, Bowles EJA, Evans DGR, Eccles D, Hopper J, Li S, Southey M, Duffy S, Cuzick J, Dos Santos Silva I, Miners A, Sadique Z, Yang L, Legood R, Manchanda R. A Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Multigene Testing for All Patients With Breast Cancer. JAMA Oncol. 2019 Oct 03; doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2019.3323. Epub 2019 Oct 03. PMID: 31580391; PMCID: PMC6777250.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

JAMA Oncol. 2019 Oct 03; doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2019.3323. Epub 2019 Oct 03.

A Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Multigene Testing for All Patients With Breast Cancer.

JAMA oncology

Li Sun, Adam Brentnall, Shreeya Patel, Diana S M Buist, Erin J A Bowles, D Gareth R Evans, Diana Eccles, John Hopper, Shuai Li, Melissa Southey, Stephen Duffy, Jack Cuzick, Isabel Dos Santos Silva, Alec Miners, Zia Sadique, Li Yang, Rosa Legood, Ranjit Manchanda

Affiliations

  1. Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
  2. Centre for Experimental Cancer Medicine, Barts Cancer Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom.
  3. Centre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom.
  4. Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, Washington.
  5. Genomic Medicine, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester Universities Foundation Trust, St Mary's Hospital, The University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.
  6. Cancer Sciences Academic Unit, Faculty of Medicine and Cancer Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom.
  7. Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
  8. Precision Medicine, School of Clinical Sciences at Monash Health, Monash University, Clayton, Australia.
  9. Department of Clinical Pathology, Melbourne Medical School, Melbourne University, Melbourne, Australia.
  10. Cancer Epidemiology Division, Cancer Council Victoria, Victoria, Australia.
  11. Department of Noncommunicable Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
  12. School of Public Health, Peking University, Beijing, China.
  13. Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Barts Health National Health System Trust, Royal London Hospital, London, United Kingdom.
  14. MRC (Medical Research Counsel) Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, Faculty of Population Health Sciences, University College London, London, United Kingdom.

PMID: 31580391 PMCID: PMC6777250 DOI: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2019.3323

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: Moving to multigene testing for all women with breast cancer (BC) could identify many more mutation carriers who can benefit from precision prevention. However, the cost-effectiveness of this approach remains unaddressed.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate incremental lifetime effects, costs, and cost-effectiveness of multigene testing of all patients with BC compared with the current practice of genetic testing (BRCA) based on family history (FH) or clinical criteria.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This cost-effectiveness microsimulation modeling study compared lifetime costs and effects of high-risk BRCA1/BRCA2/PALB2 (multigene) testing of all unselected patients with BC (strategy A) with BRCA1/BRCA2 testing based on FH or clinical criteria (strategy B) in United Kingdom (UK) and US populations. Data were obtained from 11 836 patients in population-based BC cohorts (regardless of FH) recruited to 4 large research studies. Data were collected and analyzed from January 1, 2018, through June 8, 2019. The time horizon is lifetime. Payer and societal perspectives are presented. Probabilistic and 1-way sensitivity analyses evaluate model uncertainty.

INTERVENTIONS: In strategy A, all women with BC underwent BRCA1/BRCA2/PALB2 testing. In strategy B, only women with BC fulfilling FH or clinical criteria underwent BRCA testing. Affected BRCA/PALB2 carriers could undertake contralateral preventive mastectomy; BRCA carriers could choose risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO). Relatives of mutation carriers underwent cascade testing. Unaffected relative carriers could undergo magnetic resonance imaging or mammography screening, chemoprevention, or risk-reducing mastectomy for BC risk and RRSO for ovarian cancer (OC) risk.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated as incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained and compared with standard £30 000/QALY and $100 000/QALY UK and US thresholds, respectively. Incidence of OC, BC, excess deaths due to heart disease, and the overall population effects were estimated.

RESULTS: BRCA1/BRCA2/PALB2 multigene testing for all patients detected with BC annually would cost £10 464/QALY (payer perspective) or £7216/QALY (societal perspective) in the United Kingdom or $65 661/QALY (payer perspective) or $61 618/QALY (societal perspective) in the United States compared with current BRCA testing based on clinical criteria or FH. This is well below UK and US cost-effectiveness thresholds. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, unselected multigene testing remained cost-effective for 98% to 99% of UK and 64% to 68% of US health system simulations. One year's unselected multigene testing could prevent 2101 cases of BC and OC and 633 deaths in the United Kingdom and 9733 cases of BC and OC and 2406 deaths in the United States. Correspondingly, 8 excess deaths due to heart disease occurred in the United Kingdom and 35 in the United States annually.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This study found unselected, high-risk multigene testing for all patients with BC to be extremely cost-effective compared with testing based on FH or clinical criteria for UK and US health systems. These findings support changing current policy to expand genetic testing to all women with BC.

References

  1. J Clin Oncol. 2017 Dec 1;35(34):3800-3806 - PubMed
  2. J Clin Oncol. 2004 Mar 15;22(6):1055-62 - PubMed
  3. N Engl J Med. 2014 Aug 28;371(9):796-7 - PubMed
  4. Lancet. 2005 May 21-27;365(9473):1769-78 - PubMed
  5. J Med Genet. 2018 Aug;55(8):538-545 - PubMed
  6. Int J Cancer. 2008 May 1;122(9):2017-22 - PubMed
  7. Value Health. 2005 Jan-Feb;8(1):1-2 - PubMed
  8. Value Health. 2003 Sep-Oct;6(5):551-9 - PubMed
  9. JAMA. 2006 Jul 12;296(2):185-92 - PubMed
  10. Gynecol Oncol. 2017 Oct;147(1):110-114 - PubMed
  11. Obstet Gynecol. 2009 May;113(5):1027-37 - PubMed
  12. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl). 2011 Jul;20(4):508-13 - PubMed
  13. Fam Cancer. 2014 Jun;13(2):189-96 - PubMed
  14. Telemed J E Health. 2018 Feb;24(2):130-138 - PubMed
  15. Genet Med. 2018 Sep;20(9):985-994 - PubMed
  16. Cancer Inform. 2015 May 10;14(Suppl 2):147-57 - PubMed
  17. Hum Mutat. 2008 Nov;29(11):1282-91 - PubMed
  18. Natl Vital Stat Rep. 2017 Aug;66(4):1-64 - PubMed
  19. JAMA. 2017 Jun 20;317(23):2402-2416 - PubMed
  20. Br J Cancer. 2019 Jul;121(1):15-21 - PubMed
  21. N Engl J Med. 2014 Aug 7;371(6):497-506 - PubMed
  22. J Med Genet. 2016 Oct;53(10):655-61 - PubMed
  23. Menopause. 2009 Jan-Feb;16(1):15-23 - PubMed
  24. Lancet. 2013 May 25;381(9880):1827-34 - PubMed
  25. Breast. 2013 Oct;22(5):561-8 - PubMed
  26. J Clin Oncol. 2017 Dec 1;35(34):3789-3791 - PubMed
  27. Cancers (Basel). 2018 Nov 05;10(11):null - PubMed
  28. JAMA. 2010 Sep 1;304(9):967-75 - PubMed
  29. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009 Jan 21;101(2):80-7 - PubMed
  30. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014 Nov 30;107(1):379 - PubMed
  31. Arch Intern Med. 2003 Jul 28;163(14):1637-41 - PubMed
  32. J Clin Oncol. 2019 Feb 20;37(6):453-460 - PubMed
  33. JAMA. 2018 Sep 25;320(12):1266-1274 - PubMed
  34. N Engl J Med. 2015 Jun 4;372(23):2243-57 - PubMed
  35. Gynecol Oncol. 2003 May;89(2):281-7 - PubMed
  36. Eur J Cancer. 2007 Jul;43(11):1713-7 - PubMed
  37. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2002 Sep;28(6):627-32 - PubMed
  38. Obstet Gynecol. 2013 Apr;121(4):709-16 - PubMed
  39. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2008 Oct;61(10):1177-87 - PubMed
  40. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. 2015;15(11):1315-26 - PubMed
  41. ESMO Open. 2018 Apr 13;3(3):e000328 - PubMed
  42. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2018 May;169(1):43-46 - PubMed
  43. Gynecol Oncol. 2017 Aug;146(2):399-404 - PubMed
  44. J Clin Oncol. 2017 Jul 10;35(20):2232-2239 - PubMed
  45. BJOG. 2012 Apr;119(5):527-36 - PubMed
  46. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2012 Jan;38(1):38-43 - PubMed
  47. J Clin Oncol. 2014 Mar 1;32(7):618-26 - PubMed
  48. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2015 Mar 18;107(5):null - PubMed
  49. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014 Nov 05;106(12):null - PubMed
  50. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 1999;(26):95-100 - PubMed
  51. N Engl J Med. 2018 Dec 27;379(26):2495-2505 - PubMed
  52. BJOG. 2011 Jun;118(7):814-24 - PubMed
  53. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2015 Aug 11;107(9):null - PubMed
  54. Br J Cancer. 2012 Jun 26;107(1):24-30 - PubMed
  55. J Med Genet. 2016 Jul;53(7):472-80 - PubMed
  56. JAMA Oncol. 2018 Sep 1;4(9):e180174 - PubMed
  57. Sci Rep. 2016 Jul 13;6:29506 - PubMed
  58. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2018 Dec;132:138-144 - PubMed
  59. Br J Cancer. 2008 Apr 22;98(8):1457-66 - PubMed
  60. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2009 Aug;18(8):2318-24 - PubMed
  61. J Clin Oncol. 2005 Oct 1;23(28):6890-8 - PubMed
  62. Lancet Oncol. 2018 Feb;19(2):169-180 - PubMed
  63. J Clin Oncol. 2016 Aug 20;34(24):2914-24 - PubMed
  64. Cancer. 2015 Jan 1;121(1):25-33 - PubMed
  65. Gynecol Oncol. 2011 Apr;121(1):163-8 - PubMed
  66. J Clin Oncol. 2008 Aug 20;26(24):3943-9 - PubMed
  67. Ann Intern Med. 2014 Feb 18;160(4):255-66 - PubMed

Publication Types

Grant support