Cargando…

Cost-effectiveness of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy for women with subfertility in China: an economic evaluation using evidence from the CESE-PGS trial

BACKGROUND: There are a large number of infertile couples in China, but its treatment is notoriously expensive and not currently covered by insurance. The utility of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy as an adjunct to in vitro fertilization has been debated. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: He, Xuan, Wang, Xiao, Shen, Jiaojie, Wan, Bin, Wang, Yingpeng, Zhang, Zhuolin, Cai, Lele, Bao, Yuwen, Ding, Haixia, Li, Xin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10103395/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37060068
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12884-023-05563-z
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: There are a large number of infertile couples in China, but its treatment is notoriously expensive and not currently covered by insurance. The utility of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy as an adjunct to in vitro fertilization has been debated. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the cost-effectiveness of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) versus conventional technology in in vitro fertilization (IVF) from the perspective of the healthcare system in China. METHODS: Following the exact steps in the IVF protocol, a decision tree model was developed, based on the data from the CESE-PGS trial and using cost scenarios for IVF in China. The scenarios were compared for costs per patient and cost-effectiveness. One-way sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were performed to confirm the robustness of the findings. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Costs per live birth, Costs per patient, Incremental cost-effectiveness for miscarriage prevention. RESULTS: The average costs per live birth of PGT-A were estimated as ¥39230.71, which is about 16.8% higher than that of the conventional treatment. Threshold analysis revealed that PGT-A would need to increase the pregnancy rate of 26.24–98.24% or a cost reduction of ¥4649.29 to ¥1350.71 to achieve the same cost-effectiveness. The incremental costs per prevented miscarriage was approximately ¥45600.23. The incremental cost-effectiveness for miscarriage prevention showed that the willingness to pay would be ¥43422.60 for PGT-A to be cost-effective. CONCLUSION: The present cost-effectiveness analysis demonstrates that embryo selection with PGT‑A is not suitable for routine applications from the perspective of healthcare providers in China, given the cumulative live birth rate and the high costs of PGT‑A. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12884-023-05563-z.