Literature DB >> 18506736

Cost-effectiveness analysis of prevention strategies for gynecologic cancers in Lynch syndrome.

Janice S Kwon1, Charlotte C Sun, Susan K Peterson, Kristin G White, Molly S Daniels, Stephanie G Boyd-Rogers, Karen H Lu.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Women with Lynch syndrome (hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer) have an increased lifetime risk for endometrial and ovarian cancer. Screening and prophylactic surgery have been recommended as prevention strategies. In this study, the authors estimated the net health benefits and cost-effectiveness of these strategies in a Markov decision-analytic model.
METHODS: Five strategies were compared for a hypothetical cohort of women with Lynch syndrome: 1) no prevention ('reference'); 2) prophylactic surgery (hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy) at age 30 years; 3) prophylactic surgery at age 40 years; 4) annual screening with endometrial biopsy, transvaginal ultrasound, and CA 125 from age 30 years; and 5) annual screening from age 30 years until prophylactic surgery at age 40 years (combined strategy). Net health benefit was measured in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and the primary outcome measured was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Baseline and transition probabilities were obtained from published literature, and costs were from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and Agency for Health Care Quality and Research. Sensitivity analyses were performed for uncertainty around various parameters.
RESULTS: The combined strategy provided the highest net health benefit (18.98 QALYs) but had an ICER of $194,650 per QALY relative to the next best strategy (prophylactic surgery at age 40 years). Prophylactic surgery at age 30 years and annual screening were dominated by alternate strategies.
CONCLUSIONS: Annual screening followed by prophylactic surgery at age 40 years was the most effective gynecologic cancer prevention strategy, but the incremental benefit over prophylactic surgery alone was attained at substantial cost. The ICER would become favorable by improving the effectiveness and reducing the costs of screening in this population.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18506736     DOI: 10.1002/cncr.23554

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  28 in total

Review 1.  ACG clinical guideline: Genetic testing and management of hereditary gastrointestinal cancer syndromes.

Authors:  Sapna Syngal; Randall E Brand; James M Church; Francis M Giardiello; Heather L Hampel; Randall W Burt
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2015-02-03       Impact factor: 10.864

Review 2.  Hereditary and familial colon cancer.

Authors:  Kory W Jasperson; Thérèse M Tuohy; Deborah W Neklason; Randall W Burt
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 22.682

3.  A cost-effectiveness analysis of prophylactic surgery versus gynecologic surveillance for women from hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC) Families.

Authors:  Kathleen Y Yang; Aaron B Caughey; Sarah E Little; Michael K Cheung; Lee-May Chen
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 2.375

4.  Health benefits and cost-effectiveness of primary genetic screening for Lynch syndrome in the general population.

Authors:  Tuan A Dinh; Benjamin I Rosner; James C Atwood; C Richard Boland; Sapna Syngal; Hans F A Vasen; Stephen B Gruber; Randall W Burt
Journal:  Cancer Prev Res (Phila)       Date:  2010-11-18

5.  Tumor mismatch repair immunohistochemistry and DNA MLH1 methylation testing of patients with endometrial cancer diagnosed at age younger than 60 years optimizes triage for population-level germline mismatch repair gene mutation testing.

Authors:  Daniel D Buchanan; Yen Y Tan; Michael D Walsh; Mark Clendenning; Alexander M Metcalf; Kaltin Ferguson; Sven T Arnold; Bryony A Thompson; Felicity A Lose; Michael T Parsons; Rhiannon J Walters; Sally-Ann Pearson; Margaret Cummings; Martin K Oehler; Penelope B Blomfield; Michael A Quinn; Judy A Kirk; Colin J Stewart; Andreas Obermair; Joanne P Young; Penelope M Webb; Amanda B Spurdle
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2013-12-09       Impact factor: 44.544

Review 6.  Hereditary ovarian carcinoma: heterogeneity, molecular genetics, pathology, and management.

Authors:  Henry T Lynch; Murray Joseph Casey; Carrie L Snyder; Chhanda Bewtra; Jane F Lynch; Matthew Butts; Andrew K Godwin
Journal:  Mol Oncol       Date:  2009-02-21       Impact factor: 6.603

Review 7.  Endometrial and ovarian cancer in women with Lynch syndrome: update in screening and prevention.

Authors:  Karen H Lu; Molly Daniels
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 2.375

8.  Economic and Survival Implications of Use of Electric Power Morcellation for Hysterectomy for Presumed Benign Gynecologic Disease.

Authors:  Jason D Wright; Rosa R Cui; Anqi Wang; Ling Chen; Ana I Tergas; William M Burke; Cande V Ananth; June Y Hou; Alfred I Neugut; Sarah M Temkin; Y Claire Wang; Dawn L Hershman
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2015-10-08       Impact factor: 13.506

9.  Influence of patient preferences on the cost-effectiveness of screening for lynch syndrome.

Authors:  Grace Wang; Miriam Kuppermann; Benjamin Kim; Kathryn A Phillips; Uri Ladabaum
Journal:  J Oncol Pract       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 3.840

10.  Impact of genetic testing on endometrial cancer risk-reducing practices in women at risk for Lynch syndrome.

Authors:  Matthew B Yurgelun; Rowena Mercado; Margery Rosenblatt; Monica Dandapani; Wendy Kohlmann; Peggy Conrad; Amie Blanco; Kristen M Shannon; Daniel C Chung; Jonathan Terdiman; Stephen B Gruber; Judy E Garber; Sapna Syngal; Elena M Stoffel
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2012-08-29       Impact factor: 5.482

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.