Samuel A Crawford1, Cynthia L Gong2,3, Leah Yieh2,3, Linda M Randolph4, Joel W Hay2. 1. Schaeffer Center for Health Policy & Economics, School of Pharmacy, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA. crawfosa@usc.edu. 2. Schaeffer Center for Health Policy & Economics, School of Pharmacy, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 3. Fetal & Neonatal Institute, Division of Neonatology, Children's Hospital Los Angeles, Department of Pediatrics, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 4. Division of Medical Genetics, Children's Hospital Los Angeles, Department of Pediatrics, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine the value of early exome sequencing (eES) relative to the current typical care (TC) in the diagnosis of newborns with suspected severe mitochondrial disorders (MitD). METHODS: We used a decision tree-Markov hybrid to model neonatal intensive care unit (NICU)-related outcomes and costs, lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life-years among patients with MitD. Probabilities, costs, and utilities were populated using published literature, expert opinion, and the Pediatric Health Information System database. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) and net monetary benefits (NMB) were calculated from lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life-years for singleton and trio eES, and TC. Robustness was assessed using univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA). Scenario analyses were also conducted. RESULTS: Findings indicate trio eES is a cost-minimizing and cost-effective alternative to current TC. Diagnostic probabilities and NICU length-of-stay were the most sensitive model parameters. Base case analysis demonstrates trio eES has the highest incremental NMB, and PSA demonstrates trio eES had the highest likelihood of being cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) of $200,000 relative to TC, singleton eES, and no ES. CONCLUSION: Trio and singleton eES are cost-effective and cost-minimizing alternatives to current TC in diagnosing newborns suspected of having a severe MitD.
PURPOSE: To determine the value of early exome sequencing (eES) relative to the current typical care (TC) in the diagnosis of newborns with suspected severe mitochondrial disorders (MitD). METHODS: We used a decision tree-Markov hybrid to model neonatal intensive care unit (NICU)-related outcomes and costs, lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life-years among patients with MitD. Probabilities, costs, and utilities were populated using published literature, expert opinion, and the Pediatric Health Information System database. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) and net monetary benefits (NMB) were calculated from lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life-years for singleton and trio eES, and TC. Robustness was assessed using univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA). Scenario analyses were also conducted. RESULTS: Findings indicate trio eES is a cost-minimizing and cost-effective alternative to current TC. Diagnostic probabilities and NICU length-of-stay were the most sensitive model parameters. Base case analysis demonstrates trio eES has the highest incremental NMB, and PSA demonstrates trio eES had the highest likelihood of being cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) of $200,000 relative to TC, singleton eES, and no ES. CONCLUSION: Trio and singleton eES are cost-effective and cost-minimizing alternatives to current TC in diagnosing newborns suspected of having a severe MitD.
Authors: Tomas Honzik; Marketa Tesarova; Martin Magner; Johannes Mayr; Pavel Jesina; Katerina Vesela; Laszlo Wenchich; Karol Szentivanyi; Hana Hansikova; Wolfgang Sperl; Jiri Zeman Journal: J Inherit Metab Dis Date: 2012-01-10 Impact factor: 4.982
Authors: Fernando Scaglia; Jeffrey A Towbin; William J Craigen; John W Belmont; E O'Brian Smith; Stephen R Neish; Stephanie M Ware; Jill V Hunter; Susan D Fernbach; Georgirene D Vladutiu; Lee-Jun C Wong; Hannes Vogel Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2004-10 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Nick Dragojlovic; Alison M Elliott; Shelin Adam; Clara van Karnebeek; Anna Lehman; Jill C Mwenifumbo; Tanya N Nelson; Christèle du Souich; Jan M Friedman; Larry D Lynd Journal: Genet Med Date: 2018-01-04 Impact factor: 8.822
Authors: Zornitza Stark; Deborah Schofield; Khurshid Alam; William Wilson; Nessie Mupfeki; Ivan Macciocca; Rupendra Shrestha; Susan M White; Clara Gaff Journal: Genet Med Date: 2017-01-26 Impact factor: 8.822
Authors: Anath C Lionel; Gregory Costain; Nasim Monfared; Susan Walker; Miriam S Reuter; S Mohsen Hosseini; Bhooma Thiruvahindrapuram; Daniele Merico; Rebekah Jobling; Thomas Nalpathamkalam; Giovanna Pellecchia; Wilson W L Sung; Zhuozhi Wang; Peter Bikangaga; Cyrus Boelman; Melissa T Carter; Dawn Cordeiro; Cheryl Cytrynbaum; Sharon D Dell; Priya Dhir; James J Dowling; Elise Heon; Stacy Hewson; Linda Hiraki; Michal Inbar-Feigenberg; Regan Klatt; Jonathan Kronick; Ronald M Laxer; Christoph Licht; Heather MacDonald; Saadet Mercimek-Andrews; Roberto Mendoza-Londono; Tino Piscione; Rayfel Schneider; Andreas Schulze; Earl Silverman; Komudi Siriwardena; O Carter Snead; Neal Sondheimer; Joanne Sutherland; Ajoy Vincent; Jonathan D Wasserman; Rosanna Weksberg; Cheryl Shuman; Chris Carew; Michael J Szego; Robin Z Hayeems; Raveen Basran; Dimitri J Stavropoulos; Peter N Ray; Sarah Bowdin; M Stephen Meyn; Ronald D Cohn; Stephen W Scherer; Christian R Marshall Journal: Genet Med Date: 2017-08-03 Impact factor: 8.822