Cargando…

Cost and efficacy comparison of prenatal recall and reflex DNA screening for trisomy 21, 18 and 13

OBJECTIVE: To compare costs and efficacy of reflex and recall prenatal DNA screening for trisomy 21, 18 and 13 (affected pregnancies). In both methods women have Combined test markers measured. With recall screening, women with a high Combined test risk are recalled for counselling and offered a DNA...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bestwick, Jonathan Paul, Wald, Nicholas John
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6658079/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31344071
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0220053
_version_ 1783438909108125696
author Bestwick, Jonathan Paul
Wald, Nicholas John
author_facet Bestwick, Jonathan Paul
Wald, Nicholas John
author_sort Bestwick, Jonathan Paul
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To compare costs and efficacy of reflex and recall prenatal DNA screening for trisomy 21, 18 and 13 (affected pregnancies). In both methods women have Combined test markers measured. With recall screening, women with a high Combined test risk are recalled for counselling and offered a DNA blood test or invasive diagnostic testing. With reflex screening, a DNA analysis is automatically performed on plasma collected when blood was collected for measurement of the Combined test markers. METHODS: Published data were used to estimate, for each method, using various unit costs and risk cut-offs, the cost per woman screened, cost per affected pregnancy diagnosed, and for a given number of women screened, numbers of affected pregnancies diagnosed, unaffected pregnancies with positive results, and women with unaffected pregnancies having invasive diagnostic testing. RESULTS: Cost per woman screened is lower with reflex v recall screening: £37 v £38, and £11,043 v £11,178 per affected pregnancy diagnosed (DNA £250, Combined test markers risk cut-off 1 in 150). Reflex screening results in similar numbers of affected pregnancies diagnosed, with 100-fold fewer false-positives and 20-fold fewer women with unaffected pregnancies having invasive diagnostic testing. CONCLUSIONS: Reflex DNA screening is less expensive, more cost-effective, and safer than recall screening.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6658079
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-66580792019-08-07 Cost and efficacy comparison of prenatal recall and reflex DNA screening for trisomy 21, 18 and 13 Bestwick, Jonathan Paul Wald, Nicholas John PLoS One Research Article OBJECTIVE: To compare costs and efficacy of reflex and recall prenatal DNA screening for trisomy 21, 18 and 13 (affected pregnancies). In both methods women have Combined test markers measured. With recall screening, women with a high Combined test risk are recalled for counselling and offered a DNA blood test or invasive diagnostic testing. With reflex screening, a DNA analysis is automatically performed on plasma collected when blood was collected for measurement of the Combined test markers. METHODS: Published data were used to estimate, for each method, using various unit costs and risk cut-offs, the cost per woman screened, cost per affected pregnancy diagnosed, and for a given number of women screened, numbers of affected pregnancies diagnosed, unaffected pregnancies with positive results, and women with unaffected pregnancies having invasive diagnostic testing. RESULTS: Cost per woman screened is lower with reflex v recall screening: £37 v £38, and £11,043 v £11,178 per affected pregnancy diagnosed (DNA £250, Combined test markers risk cut-off 1 in 150). Reflex screening results in similar numbers of affected pregnancies diagnosed, with 100-fold fewer false-positives and 20-fold fewer women with unaffected pregnancies having invasive diagnostic testing. CONCLUSIONS: Reflex DNA screening is less expensive, more cost-effective, and safer than recall screening. Public Library of Science 2019-07-25 /pmc/articles/PMC6658079/ /pubmed/31344071 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0220053 Text en © 2019 Bestwick, Wald http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Bestwick, Jonathan Paul
Wald, Nicholas John
Cost and efficacy comparison of prenatal recall and reflex DNA screening for trisomy 21, 18 and 13
title Cost and efficacy comparison of prenatal recall and reflex DNA screening for trisomy 21, 18 and 13
title_full Cost and efficacy comparison of prenatal recall and reflex DNA screening for trisomy 21, 18 and 13
title_fullStr Cost and efficacy comparison of prenatal recall and reflex DNA screening for trisomy 21, 18 and 13
title_full_unstemmed Cost and efficacy comparison of prenatal recall and reflex DNA screening for trisomy 21, 18 and 13
title_short Cost and efficacy comparison of prenatal recall and reflex DNA screening for trisomy 21, 18 and 13
title_sort cost and efficacy comparison of prenatal recall and reflex dna screening for trisomy 21, 18 and 13
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6658079/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31344071
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0220053
work_keys_str_mv AT bestwickjonathanpaul costandefficacycomparisonofprenatalrecallandreflexdnascreeningfortrisomy2118and13
AT waldnicholasjohn costandefficacycomparisonofprenatalrecallandreflexdnascreeningfortrisomy2118and13