Literature DB >> 16612060

Economic evaluation of the familial cancer programme in Western Australia: predictive genetic testing for familial adenomatous polyposis and hereditary non-polyposis colorectal carcinoma.

N Breheny1, E Geelhoed, J Goldblatt, H Ee, P O'Leary.   

Abstract

AIM: To evaluate costs and outcomes of genetic testing for familial colorectal cancer through services provided by Genetic Services of Western Australia (GSWA).
METHODS: Costs and outcomes of predictive DNA-based testing for inherited colorectal cancers (CRC) were assessed, specifically for familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) and hereditary non-polyposis CRC (HNPCC) using a decision-analysis model. Costs were assigned according to standards of care in Western Australia (WA). Cancer risks and the efficacy of surveillance on long-term outcomes were derived from the published literature.
RESULTS: The cost-effectiveness of genetic testing was compared in first-degree relatives of known mutation carriers who have a 50% risk of carrying the mutated gene (intervention group) to individuals with the same risk but who do not undergo a genetic test (control subjects). Compared with control subjects undergoing the same high-level surveillance and surgery, the FAP and HNPCC intervention groups provided total savings of 13,390 US dollars and 14,783-15,460 per person (males-females), respectively. HPNCC mutation carriers also gained 1 CRC-free year. Compared to control subjects having only population surveillance, individuals in the FAP intervention group delayed the onset of CRC by 40 years for a net cost of 9,042 US dollars. Individuals in the HNPCC intervention group delayed the onset of CRC by 8 years at a net cost of 12,141 US dollars for males and 12,596 US dollars for females.
CONCLUSIONS: Genetic testing for familial CRC in WA allows targeted surveillance for mutation carriers, which ensures the efficient use of resources and reduces cancer-related morbidity, if clinical recommendations for intervention are adopted.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16612060     DOI: 10.1159/000091487

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Community Genet        ISSN: 1422-2795


  9 in total

1.  Choosing not to undergo predictive genetic testing for hereditary colorectal cancer syndromes: expanding our understanding of decliners and declining.

Authors:  Louise A Keogh; Heather Niven; Alison Rutstein; Louisa Flander; Clara Gaff; Mark Jenkins
Journal:  J Behav Med       Date:  2017-02-14

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.  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

4.  Predictive genetic testing of first degree relatives of mutation carriers is a cost-effective strategy in preventing hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer in Singapore.

Authors:  Vivian Wei Wang; Poh Koon Koh; Wai Leng Chow; Jeremy Fung Yen Lim
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 2.375

Review 5.  EGAPP supplementary evidence review: DNA testing strategies aimed at reducing morbidity and mortality from Lynch syndrome.

Authors:  Glenn E Palomaki; Monica R McClain; Stephanie Melillo; Heather L Hampel; Stephen N Thibodeau
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 8.822

6.  Recommendations from the EGAPP Working Group: genetic testing strategies in newly diagnosed individuals with colorectal cancer aimed at reducing morbidity and mortality from Lynch syndrome in relatives.

Authors: 
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 8.822

Review 7.  Is there evidence that we should screen the general population for Lynch syndrome with genetic testing? A systematic review.

Authors:  Anya E R Prince; R Jean Cadigan; Gail E Henderson; James P Evans; Michael Adams; Emmanuel Coker-Schwimmer; Dolly C Penn; Marcia Van Riper; Giselle Corbie-Smith; Daniel E Jonas
Journal:  Pharmgenomics Pers Med       Date:  2017-02-20

8.  Costs and outcomes of Lynch syndrome screening in the Australian colorectal cancer population.

Authors:  Dayna R Cenin; Steffie K Naber; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar; Mark A Jenkins; Daniel D Buchanan; David B Preen; Hooi C Ee; Peter O'Leary
Journal:  J Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2018-05-17       Impact factor: 4.029

9.  Which Lynch syndrome screening programs could be implemented in the "real world"? A systematic review of economic evaluations.

Authors:  Marco Di Marco; Elvira DAndrea; Nikola Panic; Valentina Baccolini; Giuseppe Migliara; Carolina Marzuillo; Corrado De Vito; Roberta Pastorino; Stefania Boccia; Paolo Villari
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2018-01-04       Impact factor: 8.822

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.