Dirk Müller1, Marion Danner2, Kerstin Rhiem3, Björn Stollenwerk4, Christoph Engel5, Linda Rasche6, Lisa Borsi2, Rita Schmutzler3, Stephanie Stock2. 1. Institute for Health Economics and Clinical Epidemiology, The University Hospital of Cologne (AöR), Gleueler Straße 176-178, 50935, Cologne, Germany. dirk.mueller@uk-koeln.de. 2. Institute for Health Economics and Clinical Epidemiology, The University Hospital of Cologne (AöR), Gleueler Straße 176-178, 50935, Cologne, Germany. 3. Center for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer, The University Hospital of Cologne (AöR), Kerpener Straße 34, 50931, Cologne, Germany. 4. Institute of Health Economics and Health Care Management, Helmholtz Zentrum München-German Research Center for Environmental Health, Ingolstädter Landstraße 1, 85764, Neuherberg, Germany. 5. Institute for Medical Informatics, Statistics and Epidemiology (IMISE), University of Leipzig, Härtelstraße 16-18, 04107, Leipzig, Germany. 6. Department of Controlling, The University Hospital of Cologne (AöR), Kerpener Straße 62, 50937, Cologne, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation are at increased risk of developing breast and/or ovarian cancer. This economic modeling study evaluated different preventive interventions for 30-year-old women with a confirmed BRCA (1 or 2) mutation. METHODS: A Markov model was developed to estimate the costs and benefits [i.e., quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and life years gained (LYG)] associated with prophylactic bilateral mastectomy (BM), prophylactic bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (BSO), BM plus BSO, BM plus BSO at age 40, and intensified surveillance. Relevant input data was obtained from a large German database including 5902 women with BRCA 1 or 2, and from the literature. The analysis was performed from the German Statutory Health Insurance (SHI) perspective. In order to assess the robustness of the results, deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: With costs of €29,434 and a gain in QALYs of 17.7 (LYG 19.9), BM plus BSO at age 30 was less expensive and more effective than the other strategies, followed by BM plus BSO at age 40. Women who were offered the surveillance strategy had the highest costs at the lowest gain in QALYs/LYS. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, the probability of cost-saving was 57% for BM plus BSO. At a WTP of 10,000 € per QALY, the probability of the intervention being cost-effective was 80%. CONCLUSIONS: From the SHI perspective, undergoing BM plus immediate BSO should be recommended to BRCA 1 or 2 mutation carriers due to its favorable comparative cost-effectiveness.
BACKGROUND:Women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation are at increased risk of developing breast and/or ovarian cancer. This economic modeling study evaluated different preventive interventions for 30-year-old women with a confirmed BRCA (1 or 2) mutation. METHODS: A Markov model was developed to estimate the costs and benefits [i.e., quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and life years gained (LYG)] associated with prophylactic bilateral mastectomy (BM), prophylactic bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (BSO), BM plus BSO, BM plus BSO at age 40, and intensified surveillance. Relevant input data was obtained from a large German database including 5902 women with BRCA 1 or 2, and from the literature. The analysis was performed from the German Statutory Health Insurance (SHI) perspective. In order to assess the robustness of the results, deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: With costs of €29,434 and a gain in QALYs of 17.7 (LYG 19.9), BM plus BSO at age 30 was less expensive and more effective than the other strategies, followed by BM plus BSO at age 40. Women who were offered the surveillance strategy had the highest costs at the lowest gain in QALYs/LYS. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, the probability of cost-saving was 57% for BM plus BSO. At a WTP of 10,000 € per QALY, the probability of the intervention being cost-effective was 80%. CONCLUSIONS: From the SHI perspective, undergoing BM plus immediate BSO should be recommended to BRCA 1 or 2 mutation carriers due to its favorable comparative cost-effectiveness.
Entities:
Keywords:
BRCA; Breast cancer; Cost-effectiveness; Economic modeling; Risk-reducing surgery
Authors: Roy A Willems; Catherine A W Bolman; Ilse Mesters; Iris M Kanera; Audrey A J M Beaulen; Lilian Lechner Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2015-06-25 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: Timothy R Rebbeck; Tara Friebel; Henry T Lynch; Susan L Neuhausen; Laura van 't Veer; Judy E Garber; Gareth R Evans; Steven A Narod; Claudine Isaacs; Ellen Matloff; Mary B Daly; Olufunmilayo I Olopade; Barbara L Weber Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2004-02-23 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: E C Inwald; O Ortmann; F Zeman; M Koller; F Hofstädter; M Gerstenhauer; M Klinkhammer-Schalke Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2014-03-20 Impact factor: 3.411
Authors: Kerstin Rhiem; Christoph Engel; Monika Graeser; Silke Zachariae; Karin Kast; Marion Kiechle; Nina Ditsch; Wolfgang Janni; Christoph Mundhenke; Michael Golatta; Dominic Varga; Sabine Preisler-Adams; Tilman Heinrich; Ulrich Bick; Dorothea Gadzicki; Susanne Briest; Alfons Meindl; Rita K Schmutzler Journal: Breast Cancer Res Date: 2012-12-07 Impact factor: 6.466
Authors: Aruni Ghose; Anita Bolina; Ishika Mahajan; Syed Ahmer Raza; Miranda Clarke; Abhinanda Pal; Elisabet Sanchez; Kathrine Sofia Rallis; Stergios Boussios Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-09-23 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: Philipp Harter; Jan Hauke; Florian Heitz; Alexander Reuss; Stefan Kommoss; Frederik Marmé; André Heimbach; Katharina Prieske; Lisa Richters; Alexander Burges; Guido Neidhardt; Nikolaus de Gregorio; Ahmed El-Balat; Felix Hilpert; Werner Meier; Rainer Kimmig; Karin Kast; Jalid Sehouli; Klaus Baumann; Christian Jackisch; Tjoung-Won Park-Simon; Lars Hanker; Sandra Kröber; Jacobus Pfisterer; Heidrun Gevensleben; Andreas Schnelzer; Dimo Dietrich; Tanja Neunhöffer; Mathias Krockenberger; Sara Y Brucker; Peter Nürnberg; Holger Thiele; Janine Altmüller; Josefin Lamla; Gabriele Elser; Andreas du Bois; Eric Hahnen; Rita Schmutzler Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-10-20 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Michael G Schrauder; Lisa Brunel-Geuder; Lothar Häberle; Marius Wunderle; Juliane Hoyer; Roland Csorba; André Reis; Rüdiger Schulz-Wendtland; Matthias W Beckmann; Michael P Lux Journal: Eur J Med Res Date: 2019-09-14 Impact factor: 2.175