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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zhu, Ye, Moriarty, James P., Swanson, Kristi M., Takahashi, Paul Y., Bielinski, Suzette J., Weinshilboum, Richard, Wang, Liewei, Borah, Bijan J.
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