| Literature DB >> 34065950 |
Huey-Fen Chen1, Angela M Rose2, Susan Waisbren3, Ayesha Ahmad4, Lisa A Prosser1,2.
Abstract
The objective of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of newborn screening and treatment for phenylketonuria (PKU) in the context of new data on adherence to recommended diet treatment and a newly available drug treatment (sapropterin dihydrochloride). A computer simulation model was developed to project outcomes for a hypothetical cohort of newborns with PKU. Four strategies were compared: (1) clinical identification (CI) with diet treatment; (2) newborn screening (NBS) with diet treatment; (3) CI with diet and medication (sapropterin dihydrochloride); and (4) NBS with diet and medication. Data sources included published literature, primary data, and expert opinion. From a societal perspective, newborn screening with diet treatment had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $6400/QALY compared to clinical identification with diet treatment. Adding medication to NBS with diet treatment resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of more than $16,000,000/QALY. Uncertainty analyses did not substantially alter the cost-effectiveness results. Newborn screening for PKU with diet treatment yields a cost-effectiveness ratio lower than many other recommended childhood prevention programs even if adherence is lower than previously assumed. Adding medication yields cost-effectiveness results unlikely to be considered favorable. Future research should consider conditions under which sapropterin dihydrochloride would be more economically attractive.Entities:
Keywords: cost-effectiveness; newborn screening; phenylketonuria; sapropterin dihydrochloride
Year: 2021 PMID: 34065950 PMCID: PMC8151371 DOI: 10.3390/children8050381
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Children (Basel) ISSN: 2227-9067
Epidemiology Inputs
| Base–Case | Range for Sensitivity Analysis | Reference | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| Probability false negative screen | 0 | –– | [ |
| Probability positive screen | 0.0002064 | 0.0001308–0.0003097 | [ |
| Probability positive screen, confirmatory testing|positive initial screen | 0.4782609 | 0.2681962–0.694122 | [ |
| Probability PKU|positive confirmatory test | 0.5454545 | 0.2337936–0.8325119 | [ |
|
| 0.3770197 | 0.3366195–0.418732 | [ |
|
| |||
| Probability of responding to medication|Phe level 360–600, NBS | 0.81 | 0.79–0.83 | [ |
| Probability of responding to medication|Phe level > 600, NBS/CI | 0.315 | 0.07–0.6 | [ |
| Treatment effect–Diet treatment | 0.99 | –– | Assumption 2 |
| Treatment effect–Medication | 1 | –– | Assumption 3 |
|
| |||
| Diet treatment | |||
| Age 0 to 3 | 0.88 | 0–1 | [ |
| Age 4 to 12 | 0.74 | 0–1 | |
| Age 13 to 17 | 0.5 | 0–1 | |
| Age 18 and over | 0.375 | 0–1 | |
| Medication | 0.6552 | 0.4567–0.821 | [ |
1 Modeled a combined function for adherence rate and treatment effect: (1-(adherence rate * treatment effect)). For medication combined with diet, the value of the function for diet treatment and medication treatment were compared and the higher value was used. 2 Based on Markov trace. Assumed treatment effect is consistent while adherence varies. 3 Individuals with PKU that are non-responsive to medication were treated with diet treatment only. 4 95% confidence intervals estimated assuming a binomial distribution.
Costs, 2017 US Dollars.
| Base-Case | Range for Sensitivity Analysis | Data Source | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| Screening test | 4.87 | 1.31–14.00 | [ |
| Confirmatory testing | 114.48 | -- | 1 |
|
| |||
| Diet treatment 2 | 2696–5100 | -- | [ |
| Medication 3 | 15,142–171,713 | -- | [ |
|
| |||
| Laboratory testing, PKU | |||
| Age 0 to 1 | 3870 | -- | [ |
| Age 2 to 17 | 1290 | -- | |
| Age 18 and above | 595 | -- | |
| Laboratory testing, hyperphe | |||
| Age 0 to 1 | 248 | -- | |
| Age 2 to 4 | 198 | -- | |
| Age 5 and above | 50 | -- | |
| Developmental testing | 16 | -- | [ |
|
| |||
| Tutoring, mild impairment | 1507 | -- | [ |
| Special education, age 5 to 17, moderate impairment | 10,517 | -- | [ |
|
| 26.31 | -- | [ |
1 Personal communication with the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services (MDHHS). 2 Costs varied by age, includes low protein food and medical formula, see Table S2 for more detail. 3 Sapropterin, costs varied by age, see Table S4 for detail. 4 Tests include amino acids (CPT 82131), tyrosine (CPT 84510), and Phe (CPT 84030). Testing frequencies for those with PKU were age 0–1 = 78/yr; age 2–17 = 26/yr; age 18+ = 12/year. Testing frequencies for those with hyperphe were age 0–1 = 5/yr; age 2–17 = 4/yr; age 18+ = 1/year. 5 Yearly average for tests given every 3 years. Tests included neurobehavioral status exam (CPT 96116), neuropsychological testing (CPT 96118), and developmental testing, extended (CPT 96111). 6 2 h per week of tutoring.
Quality of Life Adjustments.
| PKU Health State | Utility Weight | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Base-Case | Range for Sensitivity Analysis | Data Source | |
| Moderate/severe 1 | |||
| Age 0–17 | 0.564 | 0.506–0.623 | [ |
| Age 18+ | 0.679 | 0.628–0.730 | |
| Mild 1 | |||
| Age 0–17 | 0.639 | 0.581–0.696 | |
| Age 18+ | 0.808 | 0.762–0.852 | |
|
| |||
| Moderate/severe | 0.120 | 0.079–0.160 | [ |
| Mild | 0.110 | 0.072–0.148 | |
1 Community sample 2 Caregiver disutility are assumed to be 0 for the health state “No/few deficits”, and 1 for health state “Dead”.
Figure 1Model framework.
Figure 2Proportion of Hypothetical Cohort of PKU Patients by Health State and Age–diet treatment only (no medication), partial adherence. 1 Individuals with PKU that are untreated or identified through clinical identification start with mild or moderate/severe impairment. 2 These figures only reflect the proportion of individuals alive at that age and does not include those that have died.
Base case results (partial adherence, cohort size: 1000 individuals).
| Strategies | Cost ($USD) | Incremental Cost | QALYs | Incremental QALYs | ICER ($/QALY) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CI/diet | 15,332 | – | 30,468.921 | – | – |
| NBS/diet | 17,471 | 2139 | 30,469.255 | 0.334 | 6408 |
| CI/diet with medication | 80,865 | 63,394 | 30,468.922 | –0.333 | dominated |
| NBS/diet with medication | 83,003 | 65,532 | 30,469.259 | 0.004 | 16,135,442 |
NBS: Newborn screening; CI: Clinical identification; QALY: Quality adjusted life year; ICER: incremental cost effectiveness ratio.
Figure 3One–way sensitivity analysis for NBS/diet when compared with CI/diet, ICER. * For these variables, when the value decreased to a certain threshold, the reference case switched to NBS/diet and becomes a cost–saving strategy when compared to CI/diet the ICER is negative with NBS/diet as reference case, therefore, 0 is used here to indicate that NBS/diet is the more cost–effective strategy when the value is lower, i.e., when the cost of NBS decreases, when the probability of NBS screened positive decreases, and when the probability of true positive decreases, all these would turn NBS/diet to a more favorable strategy.