Literature DB >> 15382046

Genetic counseling program in familial breast cancer: analysis of its effectiveness, cost and cost-effectiveness ratio.

Judith Balmaña1, Judit Sanz, Xavier Bonfill, Alfonso Casado, Montse Rué, Ignasi Gich, Orland Díez, Josep M Sabaté, Montserrat Baiget, M Carmen Alonso.   

Abstract

Women with a family history of breast cancer are at increased risk for developing this neoplasm. Starting surveillance more frequently at a younger age than the general population and the possibility of undergoing genetic testing are options for their medical management. We analyzed the benefits and costs of our clinical program in familial breast cancer (FBC) and carried out a cost-effectiveness analysis of such procedure. The benefits and costs of performing genetic counseling and a screening program in FBC based on 143 high-risk families registered in our database between June 1995 and December 2001 were analyzed. A decision tree was constructed to estimate the survival benefit and cost-effectiveness of the clinical genetic counseling program compared with the strategy of not performing any screening protocol. We estimated that the prevalence of a BRCA mutation in an unaffected relative of our high-risk cohort was 10% and that 53% of the mutations are found in the BRCA1 gene. We assigned a 58.5% lifetime risk of breast cancer for a 30-year-old mutation carrier according to the SEER data. The effectiveness of the screening was obtained from our experience and data for estimating survival were derived from other studies with longer follow-up. We used our local payment data to calculate the costs of the program. A mutation in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes was identified in 20% of the probands. Seventy primary breast cancer cases were recorded since the onset of the program. Thirty percent of the tumors were diagnosed through the screening program and 71% of them were lymph node-negative compared to 49% of the tumors diagnosed outside the program (p=0.1). The cost-effectiveness ratio of our FBC genetic counseling and screening program was 4,294 euros per life-year gained. The model was sensitive to the prevalence of mutation carriers, the lifetime risk of breast cancer and the effectiveness of the screening. In our setting and according to our model, this analysis suggests that a program of genetic testing and screening for breast cancer in a high-risk population may be cost-effective. These results need to be confirmed as more effective interventions for cancer prevention and screening are being implemented. Copyright 2004 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15382046     DOI: 10.1002/ijc.20458

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Cancer        ISSN: 0020-7136            Impact factor:   7.396


  15 in total

Review 1.  The use of cost per life year gained as a measurement of cost-effectiveness in Spain: a systematic review of recent publications.

Authors:  José Manuel Rodríguez Barrios; Ferran Pérez Alcántara; Carlos Crespo Palomo; Paloma González García; Enrique Antón De Las Heras; Max Brosa Riestra
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2011-06-10

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

3.  Genetic testing in the European Union: does economic evaluation matter?

Authors:  Fernando Antoñanzas; R Rodríguez-Ibeas; M F Hutter; R Lorente; C Juárez; M Pinillos
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2011-05-20

Review 4.  Public health action in genomics is now needed beyond newborn screening.

Authors:  M S Bowen; K Kolor; W D Dotson; R M Ned; M J Khoury
Journal:  Public Health Genomics       Date:  2012-09-11       Impact factor: 2.000

5.  Economic Evaluation Alongside a Clinical Trial of Telephone Versus In-Person Genetic Counseling for BRCA1/2 Mutations in Geographically Underserved Areas.

Authors:  Yaojen Chang; Aimee M Near; Karin M Butler; Amanda Hoeffken; Sandra L Edwards; Antoinette M Stroup; Wendy Kohlmann; Amanda Gammon; Saundra S Buys; Marc D Schwartz; Beth N Peshkin; Anita Y Kinney; Jeanne S Mandelblatt; Yaojen Chang; Aimee M Near; Karin M Butler; Amanda Hoeffken; Sandra L Edwards; Antoinette M Stroup; Wendy Kohlmann; Amanda Gammon; Saundra S Buys; Marc D Schwartz; Beth N Peshkin; Anita Y Kinney; Jeanne S Mandelblatt
Journal:  J Oncol Pract       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 3.840

Review 6.  Molecular screening for breast cancer prevention, early detection, and treatment planning: combining biomarkers from DNA, RNA, and protein.

Authors:  Katherine Stemke-Hale; Bryan Hennessy; Gordon B Mills; Rahul Mitra
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 5.075

7.  Randomized noninferiority trial of telephone versus in-person genetic counseling for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Marc D Schwartz; Heiddis B Valdimarsdottir; Beth N Peshkin; Jeanne Mandelblatt; Rachel Nusbaum; An-Tsun Huang; Yaojen Chang; Kristi Graves; Claudine Isaacs; Marie Wood; Wendy McKinnon; Judy Garber; Shelley McCormick; Anita Y Kinney; George Luta; Sarah Kelleher; Kara-Grace Leventhal; Patti Vegella; Angie Tong; Lesley King
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-01-21       Impact factor: 44.544

Review 8.  A Case for Inclusion of Genetic Counselors in Cardiac Care.

Authors:  Patricia Arscott; Colleen Caleshu; Katrina Kotzer; Sarah Kreykes; Teresa Kruisselbrink; Kate Orland; Christina Rigelsky; Emily Smith; Katherine Spoonamore; Joy Larsen Haidle; Monica Marvin; Michael J Ackerman; Azam Hadi; Arya Mani; Steven Ommen; Sara Cherny
Journal:  Cardiol Rev       Date:  2016 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.644

9.  Cost-effectiveness of population screening for BRCA mutations in Ashkenazi jewish women compared with family history-based testing.

Authors:  Ranjit Manchanda; Rosa Legood; Matthew Burnell; Alistair McGuire; Maria Raikou; Kelly Loggenberg; Jane Wardle; Saskia Sanderson; Sue Gessler; Lucy Side; Nyala Balogun; Rakshit Desai; Ajith Kumar; Huw Dorkins; Yvonne Wallis; Cyril Chapman; Rohan Taylor; Chris Jacobs; Ian Tomlinson; Uziel Beller; Usha Menon; Ian Jacobs
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2014-11-30       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 10.  Which BRCA genetic testing programs are ready for implementation in health care? A systematic review of economic evaluations.

Authors:  Elvira D'Andrea; Carolina Marzuillo; Corrado De Vito; Marco Di Marco; Erica Pitini; Maria Rosaria Vacchio; Paolo Villari
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2016-04-14       Impact factor: 8.822

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.