Literature DB >> 10205208

Cost comparison of predictive genetic testing versus conventional clinical screening for familial adenomatous polyposis.

B Bapat1, H Noorani, Z Cohen, T Berk, A Mitri, B Gallie, K Pritzker, S Gallinger, A S Detsky.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Mutations of the APC gene cause familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP), a hereditary colorectal cancer predisposition syndrome. AIMS: To conduct a cost comparison analysis of predictive genetic testing versus conventional clinical screening for individuals at risk of inheriting FAP, using the perspective of a third party payer.
METHODS: All direct health care costs for both screening strategies were measured according to time and motion, and the expected costs evaluated using a decision analysis model.
RESULTS: The baseline analysis predicted that screening a prototype FAP family would cost $4975/ pound3109 by molecular testing and $8031/ pound5019 by clinical screening strategy, when family members were monitored with the same frequency of clinical surveillance (every two to three years). Sensitivity analyses revealed that the genetic testing approach is cost saving for key variables including the kindred size, the age of screening onset, and the cost of mutation identification in a proband. However, if the APC mutation carriers were monitored at an increased (annual) frequency, the cost of the genetic screening strategy increased to $7483/ pound4677 and was especially sensitive to variability in age of onset of screening, family size, and cost of genetic testing of at risk relatives.
CONCLUSIONS: In FAP kindreds, a predictive genetic testing strategy costs less than conventional clinical screening, provided that the frequency of surveillance is identical using either strategy. An additional significant benefit is the elimination of unnecessary colonic examinations for those family members found to be non-carriers.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10205208      PMCID: PMC1727488          DOI: 10.1136/gut.44.5.698

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gut        ISSN: 0017-5749            Impact factor:   23.059


  24 in total

Review 1.  Overview of screening and management of familial adenomatous polyposis.

Authors:  M Rhodes; D M Bradburn
Journal:  Gut       Date:  1992-01       Impact factor: 23.059

2.  Changing causes of mortality in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis.

Authors:  L A Belchetz; T Berk; B V Bapat; Z Cohen; S Gallinger
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  1996-04       Impact factor: 4.585

3.  President's address. The polyp-cancer sequence in the large bowel.

Authors:  B Morson
Journal:  Proc R Soc Med       Date:  1974-06

Review 4.  Decision analysis: a progress report.

Authors:  J P Kassirer; A J Moskowitz; J Lau; S G Pauker
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1987-02       Impact factor: 25.391

5.  Identification of deletion mutations and three new genes at the familial polyposis locus.

Authors:  G Joslyn; M Carlson; A Thliveris; H Albertsen; L Gelbert; W Samowitz; J Groden; J Stevens; L Spirio; M Robertson
Journal:  Cell       Date:  1991-08-09       Impact factor: 41.582

6.  Evolution of hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer.

Authors:  J R Jass; S M Stewart
Journal:  Gut       Date:  1992-06       Impact factor: 23.059

7.  Identification and characterization of the familial adenomatous polyposis coli gene.

Authors:  J Groden; A Thliveris; W Samowitz; M Carlson; L Gelbert; H Albertsen; G Joslyn; J Stevens; L Spirio; M Robertson
Journal:  Cell       Date:  1991-08-09       Impact factor: 41.582

8.  Identification of FAP locus genes from chromosome 5q21.

Authors:  K W Kinzler; M C Nilbert; L K Su; B Vogelstein; T M Bryan; D B Levy; K J Smith; A C Preisinger; P Hedge; D McKechnie
Journal:  Science       Date:  1991-08-09       Impact factor: 47.728

9.  Mutations of chromosome 5q21 genes in FAP and colorectal cancer patients.

Authors:  I Nishisho; Y Nakamura; Y Miyoshi; Y Miki; H Ando; A Horii; K Koyama; J Utsunomiya; S Baba; P Hedge
Journal:  Science       Date:  1991-08-09       Impact factor: 47.728

10.  The UK Northern region genetic register for familial adenomatous polyposis coli: use of age of onset, congenital hypertrophy of the retinal pigment epithelium, and DNA markers in risk calculations.

Authors:  J Burn; P Chapman; J Delhanty; C Wood; F Lalloo; M B Cachon-Gonzalez; K Tsioupra; W Church; M Rhodes; A Gunn
Journal:  J Med Genet       Date:  1991-05       Impact factor: 6.318

View more
  8 in total

1.  Predictive genetic tests and health system costs.

Authors:  Steve Morgan; Jeremiah Hurley; Fiona Miller; Mita Giacomini
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2003-04-15       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 2.  Genetic testing and common disorders in a public health framework: how to assess relevance and possibilities. Background Document to the ESHG recommendations on genetic testing and common disorders.

Authors:  Frauke Becker; Carla G van El; Dolores Ibarreta; Eleni Zika; Stuart Hogarth; Pascal Borry; Anne Cambon-Thomsen; Jean Jacques Cassiman; Gerry Evers-Kiebooms; Shirley Hodgson; A Cécile J W Janssens; Helena Kaariainen; Michael Krawczak; Ulf Kristoffersson; Jan Lubinski; Christine Patch; Victor B Penchaszadeh; Andrew Read; Wolf Rogowski; Jorge Sequeiros; Lisbeth Tranebjaerg; Irene M van Langen; Helen Wallace; Ron Zimmern; Jörg Schmidtke; Martina C Cornel
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2011-04       Impact factor: 4.246

Review 3.  Familial adenomatous polyposis: The practical applications of clinical and molecular screening.

Authors:  Paul Rozen; Finlay Macrae
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 2.375

4.  Retinoblastoma: genetic testing versus conventional clinical screening in India.

Authors:  Biju Joseph; Mahesh Palanivelu Shanmugam; Madhuravasal Krishnan Srinivasan; Govindasamy Kumaramanickavel
Journal:  Mol Diagn       Date:  2004

5.  Hereditary colorectal cancer registries in Canada: report from the Colorectal Cancer Association of Canada consensus meeting; Montreal, Quebec; October 28, 2011.

Authors:  H Rothenmund; H Singh; B Candas; B N Chodirker; K Serfas; M Aronson; S Holter; A Volenik; J Green; E Dicks; M O Woods; D Gilchrist; R Gryfe; Z Cohen; W D Foulkes
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 3.677

Review 6.  Incorporating Cascade Effects of Genetic Testing in Economic Evaluation: A Scoping Review of Methodological Challenges.

Authors:  Alexandra Cernat; Robin Z Hayeems; Lisa A Prosser; Wendy J Ungar
Journal:  Children (Basel)       Date:  2021-04-27

7.  Cost-utility analysis of genetic screening in families of patients with germline MUTYH mutations.

Authors:  Maartje Nielsen; Frederik J Hes; Hans F A Vasen; Wilbert B van den Hout
Journal:  BMC Med Genet       Date:  2007-07-02       Impact factor: 2.103

Review 8.  Cancer genetics services: a systematic review of the economic evidence and issues.

Authors:  G L Griffith; R T Edwards; J Gray
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2004-05-04       Impact factor: 7.640

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.