Cargando…
A model-based cost-effectiveness analysis of pharmacogenomic panel testing in cardiovascular disease management: preemptive, reactive, or none?
PURPOSE: Pharmacogenomics (PGx) studies how inherited genetic variations in individuals affect drug absorption, distribution, and metabolism. PGx panel testing can potentially help improve efficiency and accuracy in individualizing therapy. This study compared the cost-effectiveness between preempti...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group US
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7935716/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33041335 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41436-020-00995-w |
_version_ | 1783661058593914880 |
---|---|
author | Zhu, Ye Moriarty, James P. Swanson, Kristi M. Takahashi, Paul Y. Bielinski, Suzette J. Weinshilboum, Richard Wang, Liewei Borah, Bijan J. |
author_facet | Zhu, Ye Moriarty, James P. Swanson, Kristi M. Takahashi, Paul Y. Bielinski, Suzette J. Weinshilboum, Richard Wang, Liewei Borah, Bijan J. |
author_sort | Zhu, Ye |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: Pharmacogenomics (PGx) studies how inherited genetic variations in individuals affect drug absorption, distribution, and metabolism. PGx panel testing can potentially help improve efficiency and accuracy in individualizing therapy. This study compared the cost-effectiveness between preemptive PGx panel testing, reactive PGx panel testing and usual care (no testing) in cardiovascular disease management. METHODS: We developed a decision analytic model from the US payer’s perspective for a hypothetical cohort of 10,000 patients ≥45 years old, using a short-term decision tree and long-term Markov model. The testing panel included the following gene–drug pairs: CYP2C19–clopidogrel, CYP2C9/VKORC1–warfarin, and SLCO1B1–statins with 30 test-return days. Costs were reported in 2019 US dollars and effectiveness was measured in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). The primary outcome was incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER = ΔCost/ΔQALY), assuming 3% discount rate for costs and QALYs. Scenario and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the impact of demographics, risk level, and follow-up timeframe. RESULTS: Preemptive testing was found to be cost-effective compared with usual care (ICER $86,227/QALY) at the willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/QALY while reactive testing was not (ICER $148,726/QALY). Sensitivity analyses suggested that our cost-effectiveness results were sensitive to longer follow-up, and the age group 45–64 years. CONCLUSION: Compared with usual care, preemptive PGx panel testing was cost-effective in cardiovascular disease management. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7935716 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group US |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-79357162021-03-19 A model-based cost-effectiveness analysis of pharmacogenomic panel testing in cardiovascular disease management: preemptive, reactive, or none? Zhu, Ye Moriarty, James P. Swanson, Kristi M. Takahashi, Paul Y. Bielinski, Suzette J. Weinshilboum, Richard Wang, Liewei Borah, Bijan J. Genet Med Article PURPOSE: Pharmacogenomics (PGx) studies how inherited genetic variations in individuals affect drug absorption, distribution, and metabolism. PGx panel testing can potentially help improve efficiency and accuracy in individualizing therapy. This study compared the cost-effectiveness between preemptive PGx panel testing, reactive PGx panel testing and usual care (no testing) in cardiovascular disease management. METHODS: We developed a decision analytic model from the US payer’s perspective for a hypothetical cohort of 10,000 patients ≥45 years old, using a short-term decision tree and long-term Markov model. The testing panel included the following gene–drug pairs: CYP2C19–clopidogrel, CYP2C9/VKORC1–warfarin, and SLCO1B1–statins with 30 test-return days. Costs were reported in 2019 US dollars and effectiveness was measured in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). The primary outcome was incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER = ΔCost/ΔQALY), assuming 3% discount rate for costs and QALYs. Scenario and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the impact of demographics, risk level, and follow-up timeframe. RESULTS: Preemptive testing was found to be cost-effective compared with usual care (ICER $86,227/QALY) at the willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/QALY while reactive testing was not (ICER $148,726/QALY). Sensitivity analyses suggested that our cost-effectiveness results were sensitive to longer follow-up, and the age group 45–64 years. CONCLUSION: Compared with usual care, preemptive PGx panel testing was cost-effective in cardiovascular disease management. Nature Publishing Group US 2020-10-12 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC7935716/ /pubmed/33041335 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41436-020-00995-w Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. If you remix, transform, or build upon this article or a part thereof, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Article Zhu, Ye Moriarty, James P. Swanson, Kristi M. Takahashi, Paul Y. Bielinski, Suzette J. Weinshilboum, Richard Wang, Liewei Borah, Bijan J. A model-based cost-effectiveness analysis of pharmacogenomic panel testing in cardiovascular disease management: preemptive, reactive, or none? |
title | A model-based cost-effectiveness analysis of pharmacogenomic panel testing in cardiovascular disease management: preemptive, reactive, or none? |
title_full | A model-based cost-effectiveness analysis of pharmacogenomic panel testing in cardiovascular disease management: preemptive, reactive, or none? |
title_fullStr | A model-based cost-effectiveness analysis of pharmacogenomic panel testing in cardiovascular disease management: preemptive, reactive, or none? |
title_full_unstemmed | A model-based cost-effectiveness analysis of pharmacogenomic panel testing in cardiovascular disease management: preemptive, reactive, or none? |
title_short | A model-based cost-effectiveness analysis of pharmacogenomic panel testing in cardiovascular disease management: preemptive, reactive, or none? |
title_sort | model-based cost-effectiveness analysis of pharmacogenomic panel testing in cardiovascular disease management: preemptive, reactive, or none? |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7935716/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33041335 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41436-020-00995-w |
work_keys_str_mv | AT zhuye amodelbasedcosteffectivenessanalysisofpharmacogenomicpaneltestingincardiovasculardiseasemanagementpreemptivereactiveornone AT moriartyjamesp amodelbasedcosteffectivenessanalysisofpharmacogenomicpaneltestingincardiovasculardiseasemanagementpreemptivereactiveornone AT swansonkristim amodelbasedcosteffectivenessanalysisofpharmacogenomicpaneltestingincardiovasculardiseasemanagementpreemptivereactiveornone AT takahashipauly amodelbasedcosteffectivenessanalysisofpharmacogenomicpaneltestingincardiovasculardiseasemanagementpreemptivereactiveornone AT bielinskisuzettej amodelbasedcosteffectivenessanalysisofpharmacogenomicpaneltestingincardiovasculardiseasemanagementpreemptivereactiveornone AT weinshilboumrichard amodelbasedcosteffectivenessanalysisofpharmacogenomicpaneltestingincardiovasculardiseasemanagementpreemptivereactiveornone AT wangliewei amodelbasedcosteffectivenessanalysisofpharmacogenomicpaneltestingincardiovasculardiseasemanagementpreemptivereactiveornone AT borahbijanj amodelbasedcosteffectivenessanalysisofpharmacogenomicpaneltestingincardiovasculardiseasemanagementpreemptivereactiveornone AT zhuye modelbasedcosteffectivenessanalysisofpharmacogenomicpaneltestingincardiovasculardiseasemanagementpreemptivereactiveornone AT moriartyjamesp modelbasedcosteffectivenessanalysisofpharmacogenomicpaneltestingincardiovasculardiseasemanagementpreemptivereactiveornone AT swansonkristim modelbasedcosteffectivenessanalysisofpharmacogenomicpaneltestingincardiovasculardiseasemanagementpreemptivereactiveornone AT takahashipauly modelbasedcosteffectivenessanalysisofpharmacogenomicpaneltestingincardiovasculardiseasemanagementpreemptivereactiveornone AT bielinskisuzettej modelbasedcosteffectivenessanalysisofpharmacogenomicpaneltestingincardiovasculardiseasemanagementpreemptivereactiveornone AT weinshilboumrichard modelbasedcosteffectivenessanalysisofpharmacogenomicpaneltestingincardiovasculardiseasemanagementpreemptivereactiveornone AT wangliewei modelbasedcosteffectivenessanalysisofpharmacogenomicpaneltestingincardiovasculardiseasemanagementpreemptivereactiveornone AT borahbijanj modelbasedcosteffectivenessanalysisofpharmacogenomicpaneltestingincardiovasculardiseasemanagementpreemptivereactiveornone |