Cost Effectiveness of Gene Expression Profiling for Early Stage Breast Cancer

被引:60
|
作者
Yang, Mo [1 ,2 ]
Rajan, Suja [1 ,2 ]
Issa, Amalia M. [1 ,2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Sci, Program Personalized Med & Targeted Therapeut, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA
[2] Univ Houston, Coll Pharm, Dept Clin Sci & Adm, Houston, TX 77030 USA
[3] Univ Sci, Dept Hlth Policy & Publ Hlth, Philadelphia, PA USA
关键词
gene-expression profiling; breast cancer; Markov modeling; cost-effectiveness; health economics; RT-PCR ASSAY; ADJUVANT TRASTUZUMAB; 70-GENE SIGNATURE; ECONOMIC-ANALYSIS; WOMEN; CHEMOTHERAPY; THERAPY; CARE; LIFE; UTILITY;
D O I
10.1002/cncr.27443
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
BACKGROUND: Gene expression profiling (GEP) is being used increasingly for risk stratification to identify women with lymph node-negative, estrogen receptor-positive, early stage breast cancer who are most likely to benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy. The authors of this report evaluated the cost effectiveness of recurrence score-guided treatment using 2 commercially available GEP tests, Oncotype DX (Genomic Health, Redwood City, Calif) and MammaPrint (Agendia Inc., Irvine, Calif), from a third-party payer's perspective. METHODS: A 10-year Markov model was developed to compare the costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of treatment decisions guided by either Oncotype DX or MammaPrint in a hypothetical cohort of women with early stage, lymph node-negative, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer who may experience recurrence. Outcomes included no recurrence, recurrence, and death. The costs considered included gene test costs, the costs of adjuvant chemotherapy and other chemotherapy (including premedication, oncology visits, and monitoring for adverse events), the cost of treating recurrence, costs associated with the treatment of adverse events, and end-of-life care costs. RESULTS: The model demonstrated that the patients who received the Oncotype DX test to guide treatment spent $27,882 (in US dollars) and gained 7.364 QALYs, whereas patients who received the MammaPrint test to guide treatment spent $21,598 and gained 7.461 QALYs. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated that the results were robust to changes in all parameters. CONCLUSIONS: The model suggested that MammaPrint is a more cost-effective GEP test compared with Oncotype DX at a threshold willingness-to-pay of $50,000 per QALY. Because Oncotype DX is the most frequently used GEP in clinical practice in the United States, the authors concluded that the current findings have implications for health policy, particularly health insurance reimbursement decisions. Cancer 2012;118:5163-70. (C) 2012 American Cancer Society.
引用
收藏
页码:5163 / 5170
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Cost Effectiveness of Gene Expression Profiling for Early Stage Breast Cancer A Decision-Analytic Model
    Reed, Shelby D.
    Lyman, Gary H.
    [J]. CANCER, 2012, 118 (24) : 6298 - 6299
  • [2] Reply to Cost Effectiveness of Gene Expression Profiling for Early Stage Breast Cancer A Decision-Analytic Model
    Rajan, Suja S.
    Yang, Mo
    Issa, Amalia M.
    [J]. CANCER, 2012, 118 (24) : 6299 - 6300
  • [3] Optimizing the Use of Gene Expression Profiling in Early-Stage Breast Cancer
    Kim, Hyun-seok
    Umbricht, Christopher B.
    Illei, Peter B.
    Cimino-Mathews, Ashley
    Cho, Soonweng
    Chowdhury, Nivedita
    Figueroa-Magalhaes, Maria Cristina
    Pesce, Catherine
    Jeter, Stacie C.
    Mylander, Charles
    Rosman, Martin
    Tafra, Lorraine
    Turner, Bradley M.
    Hicks, David G.
    Jensen, Tyler A.
    Miller, Dylan V.
    Armstrong, Deborah K.
    Connolly, Roisin M.
    Fetting, John H.
    Miller, Robert S.
    Park, Ben Ho
    Stearns, Vered
    Visvanathan, Kala
    Wolff, Antonio C.
    Cope, Leslie
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2016, 34 (36) : 4390 - +
  • [4] Underutilization of gene expression profiling for early-stage breast cancer in California
    Rosemary D. Cress
    Yingjia S. Chen
    Cyllene R. Morris
    Helen Chew
    Kenneth W. Kizer
    [J]. Cancer Causes & Control, 2016, 27 : 721 - 727
  • [5] Underutilization of gene expression profiling for early-stage breast cancer in California
    Cress, Rosemary D.
    Chen, Yingjia S.
    Morris, Cyllene R.
    Chew, Helen
    Kizer, Kenneth W.
    [J]. CANCER CAUSES & CONTROL, 2016, 27 (06) : 721 - 727
  • [6] Cost-Effectiveness of Molecular Profiling for Early Breast Cancer
    Gauchan, Dron
    Ramaekers, Ryan
    Copur, Sitki M.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2015, 33 (14) : 1627 - +
  • [7] Systematic review: Gene expression profiling assays in early-stage breast cancer
    Marchionni, Luigi
    Wilson, Renee F.
    Wolff, Antonio C.
    Marinopoulos, Spyridon
    Parmigiani, Giovanni
    Bass, Eric B.
    Goodman, Steven N.
    [J]. ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2008, 148 (05) : 358 - W81
  • [8] Cost effectiveness of Gene Expression Profiling in Patients with Early-Stage Breast Cancer in a Middle-Income Country, Turkey: Results of a Prospective Multicenter Study
    Ozmen, Vahit
    Cakar, Burcu
    Gokmen, Erhan
    Ozdogan, Mustafa
    Guler, Nilufer
    Uras, Cihan
    Ok, Engin
    Demircan, Orhan
    Isikdogan, Abdurrahman
    Saip, Pinar
    [J]. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF BREAST HEALTH, 2019, 15 (03) : 183 - 190
  • [9] Economic Impact of Gene Expression Profiling in Patients with Early-Stage Breast Cancer in France
    Katz, Gregory
    Romano, Olivier
    Foa, Cyril
    Vataire, Anne-Lise
    Chantelard, Jean-Victor
    Herve, Robert
    Barletta, Hugues
    Durieux, Axel
    Martin, Jean-Pierre
    Salmon, Remy
    [J]. PLOS ONE, 2015, 10 (06):
  • [10] Indications for Prognostic Gene Expression Profiling in Early Breast Cancer
    Cobain, Erin F.
    Hayes, Daniel F.
    [J]. CURRENT TREATMENT OPTIONS IN ONCOLOGY, 2015, 16 (05)