Literature DB >> 25315699

Cell-free fetal DNA screening in the USA: a cost analysis of screening strategies.

M I Evans1, J D Sonek, T W Hallahan, D A Krantz.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether implementation of primary cell-free fetal DNA (cffDNA) screening would be cost-effective in the USA and to evaluate potential lower-cost alternatives.
METHODS: Three strategies to screen for trisomy 21 were evaluated using decision tree analysis: 1) a primary strategy in which cffDNA screening was offered to all patients, 2) a contingent strategy in which cffDNA screening was offered only to patients who were high risk on traditional first-trimester screening and 3) a hybrid strategy in which cffDNA screening was offered to all patients ≥ 35 years of age and only to patients < 35 years who were high risk after first-trimester screening. Four traditional screening protocols were evaluated, each assessing nuchal translucency (NT) and pregnancy-associated plasma protein-A (PAPP-A) along with either free or total beta-human chorionic gonadotropin (β-hCG), with or without nasal bone (NB) assessment.
RESULTS: Utilizing a primary cffDNA screening strategy, the cost per patient was 1017 US$. With a traditional screening protocol using free β-hCG, PAPP-A and NT assessment as part of a hybrid screening strategy, a contingent strategy with a 1/300 cut-off and a contingent strategy with a 1/1000 cut-off, the cost per patient was 474, 430 and 409 US$, respectively. Findings were similar using the other traditional screening protocols. Marginal cost per viable case detected for the primary screening strategy as compared to the other strategies was 3-16 times greater than the cost of care for a missed case.
CONCLUSIONS: Primary cffDNA screening is not currently a cost-effective strategy. The contingent strategy was the lowest-cost alternative, especially with a risk cut-off of 1/1000. The hybrid strategy, although less costly than primary cffDNA screening, was more costly than the contingent strategy.
Copyright © 2014 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Down syndrome screening; aneuploidy serum markers; cell-free fetal DNA; cost analysis; nasal bone; nuchal translucency

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25315699     DOI: 10.1002/uog.14693

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0960-7692            Impact factor:   7.299


  14 in total

1.  Cost-effectiveness of preimplantation genetic screening for women older than 37 undergoing in vitro fertilization.

Authors:  Stephen C Collins; Xiao Xu; Winifred Mak
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2017-07-27       Impact factor: 3.412

2.  Health economic evaluation of noninvasive prenatal testing and serum screening for down syndrome.

Authors:  Gefei Xiao; Yanling Zhao; Wuyan Huang; Liqing Hu; Guoqing Wang; Huayu Luo
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-04-14       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  Incorporation of dried blood alpha fetoprotein into traditional first trimester Down syndrome screening service.

Authors:  Jonathan Carmichael; David Krantz; Hsiao-Pin Liu; David Janik; Terrence Hallahan
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2015-05-13       Impact factor: 3.050

4.  Prenatal screening for fetal aneuploidies with cell-free DNA in the general pregnancy population: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  Genevieve Fairbrother; John Burigo; Thomas Sharon; Ken Song
Journal:  J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med       Date:  2015-05-22

5.  A Retrospective Analysis Of Different Contingent Screening Models For Fetal Down Syndrome In Southwestern China.

Authors:  Wei Luo; Bin He; Daiwen Han; Lixing Yuan; Xinlian Chen; Ling Pang; Jun Tang; Fene Zou; Kai Zhao; Yepei Du; Hongqian Liu
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-06-11       Impact factor: 4.379

6.  Clinical validation of a novel automated cell-free DNA screening assay for trisomies 21, 13, and 18 in maternal plasma.

Authors:  Olle Ericsson; Tarja Ahola; Fredrik Dahl; Filip Karlsson; Fredrik Persson; Olof Karlberg; Fredrik Roos; Ida Alftrén; Björn Andersson; Emelie Barkenäs; Ani Boghos; Birgit Brandner; Jenny Dahlberg; Per-Ola Forsgren; Niels Francois; Anna Gousseva; Faizan Hakamali; Åsa Janfalk-Carlsson; Henrik Johansson; Johanna Lundgren; Atefeh Mohsenchian; Linus Olausson; Simon Olofsson; Atif Qureshi; Björn Skarpås; Peter Svahn; Anna Sävneby; Eva Åström; Anna Sahlberg; Aino Fianu-Jonasson; Jérémie Gautier; Jean-Marc Costa; Bo Jacobsson; Kypros Nicolaides
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2019-08-19       Impact factor: 3.050

7.  The Cost of Prenatal Care Services in the City of Aydın: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Authors:  Safiye Özvurmaz; Zekiye Karaçam; Vesile Ünay
Journal:  Florence Nightingale Hemsire Derg       Date:  2019-10-01

Review 8.  Understanding False Negative in Prenatal Testing.

Authors:  Mark I Evans; Ming Chen; David W Britt
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2021-05-17

9.  Cost-effectiveness of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy for fresh donor oocyte cycles.

Authors:  Maria Facadio Antero; Bhuchitra Singh; Apoorva Pradhan; Megan Gornet; William G Kearns; Valerie Baker; Mindy S Christianson
Journal:  F S Rep       Date:  2020-12-09

10.  An Economic Analysis of Cell-Free DNA Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing in the US General Pregnancy Population.

Authors:  Peter Benn; Kirsten J Curnow; Steven Chapman; Steven N Michalopoulos; John Hornberger; Matthew Rabinowitz
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-07-09       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.