PURPOSE: To evaluate the cost effectiveness of next-generation sequencing (NGS) panels for the diagnosis of colorectal cancer and polyposis (CRCP) syndromes in patients referred to cancer genetics clinics. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We developed a decision model to evaluate NGS panel testing compared with current standard of care in patients referred to a cancer genetics clinic. We obtained data on the prevalence of genetic variants from a large academic laboratory and calculated the costs and health benefits of identifying relatives with a pathogenic variant, in life-years and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). We classified the CRCP syndromes according to their type of inheritance and penetrance of colorectal cancer. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess uncertainty. RESULTS: Evaluation with an NGS panel that included Lynch syndrome genes and other genes associated with highly penetrant CRCP syndromes led to an average increase of 0.151 year of life, 0.128 QALY, and $4,650 per patient, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $36,500 per QALY compared with standard care and a 99% probability that this panel was cost effective at a threshold of $100,000 per QALY. When compared with this panel, the addition of genes with low colorectal cancer penetrance resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $77,300 per QALY. CONCLUSION: The use of an NGS panel that includes genes associated with highly penetrant CRCP syndromes in addition to Lynch syndrome genes as a first-line test is likely to provide meaningful clinical benefits in a cost-effective manner at a $100,000 per QALY threshold.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the cost effectiveness of next-generation sequencing (NGS) panels for the diagnosis of colorectal cancer and polyposis (CRCP) syndromes in patients referred to cancer genetics clinics. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We developed a decision model to evaluate NGS panel testing compared with current standard of care in patients referred to a cancer genetics clinic. We obtained data on the prevalence of genetic variants from a large academic laboratory and calculated the costs and health benefits of identifying relatives with a pathogenic variant, in life-years and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). We classified the CRCP syndromes according to their type of inheritance and penetrance of colorectal cancer. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess uncertainty. RESULTS: Evaluation with an NGS panel that included Lynch syndrome genes and other genes associated with highly penetrant CRCP syndromes led to an average increase of 0.151 year of life, 0.128 QALY, and $4,650 per patient, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $36,500 per QALY compared with standard care and a 99% probability that this panel was cost effective at a threshold of $100,000 per QALY. When compared with this panel, the addition of genes with low colorectal cancer penetrance resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $77,300 per QALY. CONCLUSION: The use of an NGS panel that includes genes associated with highly penetrant CRCP syndromes in addition to Lynch syndrome genes as a first-line test is likely to provide meaningful clinical benefits in a cost-effective manner at a $100,000 per QALY threshold.
Authors: Heather Hampel; Wendy Frankel; Jenny Panescu; Janet Lockman; Kaisa Sotamaa; Daniel Fix; Ilene Comeras; Jennifer La Jeunesse; Hidewaki Nakagawa; Judith A Westman; Thomas W Prior; Mark Clendenning; Pamela Penzone; Janet Lombardi; Patti Dunn; David E Cohn; Larry Copeland; Lynne Eaton; Jeffrey Fowler; George Lewandowski; Luis Vaccarello; Jeffrey Bell; Gary Reid; Albert de la Chapelle Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2006-08-01 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Colin C Pritchard; Christina Smith; Stephen J Salipante; Ming K Lee; Anne M Thornton; Alex S Nord; Cassandra Gulden; Sonia S Kupfer; Elizabeth M Swisher; Robin L Bennett; Akiva P Novetsky; Gail P Jarvik; Olufunmilayo I Olopade; Paul J Goodfellow; Mary-Claire King; Jonathan F Tait; Tom Walsh Journal: J Mol Diagn Date: 2012-05-30 Impact factor: 5.568
Authors: Joanne Ngeow; Brandie Heald; Lisa A Rybicki; Mohammed S Orloff; Jin Lian Chen; Xiuli Liu; Lisa Yerian; Joseph Willis; Heli J Lehtonen; Rainer Lehtonen; Jessica L Mester; Jessica Moline; Carol A Burke; James Church; Lauri A Aaltonen; Charis Eng Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2013-02-08 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Tristan Snowsill; Nicola Huxley; Martin Hoyle; Tracey Jones-Hughes; Helen Coelho; Chris Cooper; Ian Frayling; Chris Hyde Journal: Health Technol Assess Date: 2014-09 Impact factor: 4.014
Authors: Angela Hamblin; Sarah Wordsworth; Jilles M Fermont; Suzanne Page; Kulvinder Kaur; Carme Camps; Pamela Kaisaki; Avinash Gupta; Denis Talbot; Mark Middleton; Shirley Henderson; Anthony Cutts; Dimitrios V Vavoulis; Nick Housby; Ian Tomlinson; Jenny C Taylor; Anna Schuh Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2017-02-14 Impact factor: 11.069
Authors: C Guillén-Ponce; E Lastra; I Lorenzo-Lorenzo; T Martín Gómez; R Morales Chamorro; A B Sánchez-Heras; R Serrano; M C Soriano Rodríguez; J L Soto; L Robles Journal: Clin Transl Oncol Date: 2020-01-24 Impact factor: 3.405
Authors: Elena M Stoffel; Erika Koeppe; Jessica Everett; Peter Ulintz; Mark Kiel; Jenae Osborne; Linford Williams; Kristen Hanson; Stephen B Gruber; Laura S Rozek Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2017-11-14 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Matthew B Yurgelun; Matthew H Kulke; Charles S Fuchs; Brian A Allen; Hajime Uno; Jason L Hornick; Chinedu I Ukaegbu; Lauren K Brais; Philip G McNamara; Robert J Mayer; Deborah Schrag; Jeffrey A Meyerhardt; Kimmie Ng; John Kidd; Nanda Singh; Anne-Renee Hartman; Richard J Wenstrup; Sapna Syngal Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2017-01-30 Impact factor: 44.544