INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: The aim was to assess the cost-effectiveness of a genetic screening program for first-degree relatives of patients with familial hypercholesterolemia (FH), followed by treatment when necessary, compared with the alternative of no screening. METHODS: The cost-effectiveness analysis modeled the effect of statin treatment on individuals who were diagnosed with FH after genetic screening. The impact of uncertainty was evaluated using univariate probabilistic sensitivity analysis. The alternate strategy considered was no screening. In the cost-effectiveness analysis, the number of life-years gained (LYG) was regarded as the health outcome and the costs of screening, statin treatment, specialist consultations and hospital visits were all included. In addition, the expected value of perfect information was calculated as part of the sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: In the base case, the incremental cost of the screening program for close relatives was 3423 euros per LYG. Although the sensitivity analysis gave a range of results, the conclusions were not affected by changes in the parameters considered. The screening program was found to be better than the alternative considered at a probability level of 95% if the acceptable level of health-care costs was at least 7400 euros per LYG. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis indicates that a genetic screening program, supplemented by treatment, for the close relatives of individuals with FH is preferable to the alternative of no screening in terms of incremental cost-effectiveness.
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: The aim was to assess the cost-effectiveness of a genetic screening program for first-degree relatives of patients with familial hypercholesterolemia (FH), followed by treatment when necessary, compared with the alternative of no screening. METHODS: The cost-effectiveness analysis modeled the effect of statin treatment on individuals who were diagnosed with FH after genetic screening. The impact of uncertainty was evaluated using univariate probabilistic sensitivity analysis. The alternate strategy considered was no screening. In the cost-effectiveness analysis, the number of life-years gained (LYG) was regarded as the health outcome and the costs of screening, statin treatment, specialist consultations and hospital visits were all included. In addition, the expected value of perfect information was calculated as part of the sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: In the base case, the incremental cost of the screening program for close relatives was 3423 euros per LYG. Although the sensitivity analysis gave a range of results, the conclusions were not affected by changes in the parameters considered. The screening program was found to be better than the alternative considered at a probability level of 95% if the acceptable level of health-care costs was at least 7400 euros per LYG. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis indicates that a genetic screening program, supplemented by treatment, for the close relatives of individuals with FH is preferable to the alternative of no screening in terms of incremental cost-effectiveness.
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
Authors: Nelva Mata; Rodrigo Alonso; Lina Badimón; Teresa Padró; Francisco Fuentes; Ovidio Muñiz; Francisco Perez-Jiménez; José López-Miranda; Jose L Díaz; Jose I Vidal; A Barba; Mar Piedecausa; Juan F Sanchez; Luis Irigoyen; Eliseo Guallar; José M Ordovas; Pedro Mata Journal: Lipids Health Dis Date: 2011-06-10 Impact factor: 3.876
Authors: Albert Wiegman; Samuel S Gidding; Gerald F Watts; M John Chapman; Henry N Ginsberg; Marina Cuchel; Leiv Ose; Maurizio Averna; Catherine Boileau; Jan Borén; Eric Bruckert; Alberico L Catapano; Joep C Defesche; Olivier S Descamps; Robert A Hegele; G Kees Hovingh; Steve E Humphries; Petri T Kovanen; Jan Albert Kuivenhoven; Luis Masana; Børge G Nordestgaard; Päivi Pajukanta; Klaus G Parhofer; Frederick J Raal; Kausik K Ray; Raul D Santos; Anton F H Stalenhoef; Elisabeth Steinhagen-Thiessen; Erik S Stroes; Marja-Riitta Taskinen; Anne Tybjærg-Hansen; Olov Wiklund Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2015-05-25 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Michael V Holmes; Seamus Harrison; Philippa J Talmud; Aroon D Hingorani; Steve E Humphries Journal: Nat Rev Cardiol Date: 2011-02-15 Impact factor: 32.419
Authors: Leo E Akioyamen; Jacques Genest; Shubham D Shan; Rachel L Reel; Jordan M Albaum; Anna Chu; Jack V Tu Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2017-09-01 Impact factor: 2.692