Cargando…

Polygenic risk-tailored screening for prostate cancer: A benefit–harm and cost-effectiveness modelling study

BACKGROUND: The United States Preventive Services Task Force supports individualised decision-making for prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based screening in men aged 55–69. Knowing how the potential benefits and harms of screening vary by an individual’s risk of developing prostate cancer could infor...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Callender, Tom, Emberton, Mark, Morris, Steve, Eeles, Ros, Kote-Jarai, Zsofia, Pharoah, Paul D. P., Pashayan, Nora
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6924639/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31860675
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1002998
_version_ 1783481753953894400
author Callender, Tom
Emberton, Mark
Morris, Steve
Eeles, Ros
Kote-Jarai, Zsofia
Pharoah, Paul D. P.
Pashayan, Nora
author_facet Callender, Tom
Emberton, Mark
Morris, Steve
Eeles, Ros
Kote-Jarai, Zsofia
Pharoah, Paul D. P.
Pashayan, Nora
author_sort Callender, Tom
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The United States Preventive Services Task Force supports individualised decision-making for prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based screening in men aged 55–69. Knowing how the potential benefits and harms of screening vary by an individual’s risk of developing prostate cancer could inform decision-making about screening at both an individual and population level. This modelling study examined the benefit–harm tradeoffs and the cost-effectiveness of a risk-tailored screening programme compared to age-based and no screening. METHODS AND FINDINGS: A life-table model, projecting age-specific prostate cancer incidence and mortality, was developed of a hypothetical cohort of 4.48 million men in England aged 55 to 69 years with follow-up to age 90. Risk thresholds were based on age and polygenic profile. We compared no screening, age-based screening (quadrennial PSA testing from 55 to 69), and risk-tailored screening (men aged 55 to 69 years with a 10-year absolute risk greater than a threshold receive quadrennial PSA testing from the age they reach the risk threshold). The analysis was undertaken from the health service perspective, including direct costs borne by the health system for risk assessment, screening, diagnosis, and treatment. We used probabilistic sensitivity analyses to account for parameter uncertainty and discounted future costs and benefits at 3.5% per year. Our analysis should be considered cautiously in light of limitations related to our model’s cohort-based structure and the uncertainty of input parameters in mathematical models. Compared to no screening over 35 years follow-up, age-based screening prevented the most deaths from prostate cancer (39,272, 95% uncertainty interval [UI]: 16,792–59,685) at the expense of 94,831 (95% UI: 84,827–105,630) overdiagnosed cancers. Age-based screening was the least cost-effective strategy studied. The greatest number of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) was generated by risk-based screening at a 10-year absolute risk threshold of 4%. At this threshold, risk-based screening led to one-third fewer overdiagnosed cancers (64,384, 95% UI: 57,382–72,050) but averted 6.3% fewer (9,695, 95% UI: 2,853–15,851) deaths from prostate cancer by comparison with age-based screening. Relative to no screening, risk-based screening at a 4% 10-year absolute risk threshold was cost-effective in 48.4% and 57.4% of the simulations at willingness-to-pay thresholds of GBP£20,000 (US$26,000) and £30,000 ($39,386) per QALY, respectively. The cost-effectiveness of risk-tailored screening improved as the threshold rose. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the results of this modelling study, offering screening to men at higher risk could potentially reduce overdiagnosis and improve the benefit–harm tradeoff and the cost-effectiveness of a prostate cancer screening program. The optimal threshold will depend on societal judgements of the appropriate balance of benefits–harms and cost-effectiveness.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6924639
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-69246392020-01-07 Polygenic risk-tailored screening for prostate cancer: A benefit–harm and cost-effectiveness modelling study Callender, Tom Emberton, Mark Morris, Steve Eeles, Ros Kote-Jarai, Zsofia Pharoah, Paul D. P. Pashayan, Nora PLoS Med Research Article BACKGROUND: The United States Preventive Services Task Force supports individualised decision-making for prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based screening in men aged 55–69. Knowing how the potential benefits and harms of screening vary by an individual’s risk of developing prostate cancer could inform decision-making about screening at both an individual and population level. This modelling study examined the benefit–harm tradeoffs and the cost-effectiveness of a risk-tailored screening programme compared to age-based and no screening. METHODS AND FINDINGS: A life-table model, projecting age-specific prostate cancer incidence and mortality, was developed of a hypothetical cohort of 4.48 million men in England aged 55 to 69 years with follow-up to age 90. Risk thresholds were based on age and polygenic profile. We compared no screening, age-based screening (quadrennial PSA testing from 55 to 69), and risk-tailored screening (men aged 55 to 69 years with a 10-year absolute risk greater than a threshold receive quadrennial PSA testing from the age they reach the risk threshold). The analysis was undertaken from the health service perspective, including direct costs borne by the health system for risk assessment, screening, diagnosis, and treatment. We used probabilistic sensitivity analyses to account for parameter uncertainty and discounted future costs and benefits at 3.5% per year. Our analysis should be considered cautiously in light of limitations related to our model’s cohort-based structure and the uncertainty of input parameters in mathematical models. Compared to no screening over 35 years follow-up, age-based screening prevented the most deaths from prostate cancer (39,272, 95% uncertainty interval [UI]: 16,792–59,685) at the expense of 94,831 (95% UI: 84,827–105,630) overdiagnosed cancers. Age-based screening was the least cost-effective strategy studied. The greatest number of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) was generated by risk-based screening at a 10-year absolute risk threshold of 4%. At this threshold, risk-based screening led to one-third fewer overdiagnosed cancers (64,384, 95% UI: 57,382–72,050) but averted 6.3% fewer (9,695, 95% UI: 2,853–15,851) deaths from prostate cancer by comparison with age-based screening. Relative to no screening, risk-based screening at a 4% 10-year absolute risk threshold was cost-effective in 48.4% and 57.4% of the simulations at willingness-to-pay thresholds of GBP£20,000 (US$26,000) and £30,000 ($39,386) per QALY, respectively. The cost-effectiveness of risk-tailored screening improved as the threshold rose. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the results of this modelling study, offering screening to men at higher risk could potentially reduce overdiagnosis and improve the benefit–harm tradeoff and the cost-effectiveness of a prostate cancer screening program. The optimal threshold will depend on societal judgements of the appropriate balance of benefits–harms and cost-effectiveness. Public Library of Science 2019-12-20 /pmc/articles/PMC6924639/ /pubmed/31860675 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1002998 Text en © 2019 Callender et al 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
Callender, Tom
Emberton, Mark
Morris, Steve
Eeles, Ros
Kote-Jarai, Zsofia
Pharoah, Paul D. P.
Pashayan, Nora
Polygenic risk-tailored screening for prostate cancer: A benefit–harm and cost-effectiveness modelling study
title Polygenic risk-tailored screening for prostate cancer: A benefit–harm and cost-effectiveness modelling study
title_full Polygenic risk-tailored screening for prostate cancer: A benefit–harm and cost-effectiveness modelling study
title_fullStr Polygenic risk-tailored screening for prostate cancer: A benefit–harm and cost-effectiveness modelling study
title_full_unstemmed Polygenic risk-tailored screening for prostate cancer: A benefit–harm and cost-effectiveness modelling study
title_short Polygenic risk-tailored screening for prostate cancer: A benefit–harm and cost-effectiveness modelling study
title_sort polygenic risk-tailored screening for prostate cancer: a benefit–harm and cost-effectiveness modelling study
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6924639/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31860675
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1002998
work_keys_str_mv AT callendertom polygenicrisktailoredscreeningforprostatecancerabenefitharmandcosteffectivenessmodellingstudy
AT embertonmark polygenicrisktailoredscreeningforprostatecancerabenefitharmandcosteffectivenessmodellingstudy
AT morrissteve polygenicrisktailoredscreeningforprostatecancerabenefitharmandcosteffectivenessmodellingstudy
AT eelesros polygenicrisktailoredscreeningforprostatecancerabenefitharmandcosteffectivenessmodellingstudy
AT kotejaraizsofia polygenicrisktailoredscreeningforprostatecancerabenefitharmandcosteffectivenessmodellingstudy
AT pharoahpauldp polygenicrisktailoredscreeningforprostatecancerabenefitharmandcosteffectivenessmodellingstudy
AT pashayannora polygenicrisktailoredscreeningforprostatecancerabenefitharmandcosteffectivenessmodellingstudy