Cargando…
Cost‐effectiveness of precision diagnostic testing for precision medicine approaches against non‐small‐cell lung cancer: A systematic review
Precision diagnostic testing (PDT) employs appropriate biomarkers to identify cancer patients that may optimally respond to precision medicine (PM) approaches, such as treatments with targeted agents and immuno‐oncology drugs. To date, there are no published systematic appraisals evaluating the cost...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8486593/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34110679 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/1878-0261.13038 |
_version_ | 1784577777628872704 |
---|---|
author | Henderson, Raymond Keeling, Peter French, Declan Smart, Dave Sullivan, Richard Lawler, Mark |
author_facet | Henderson, Raymond Keeling, Peter French, Declan Smart, Dave Sullivan, Richard Lawler, Mark |
author_sort | Henderson, Raymond |
collection | PubMed |
description | Precision diagnostic testing (PDT) employs appropriate biomarkers to identify cancer patients that may optimally respond to precision medicine (PM) approaches, such as treatments with targeted agents and immuno‐oncology drugs. To date, there are no published systematic appraisals evaluating the cost‐effectiveness of PDT in non‐small‐cell lung cancer (NSCLC). To address this gap, we conducted Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses searches for the years 2009–2019. Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards were employed to screen, assess and extract data. Employing base costs, life years gained or quality‐adjusted life years, as well as willingness‐to‐pay (WTP) threshold for each country, net monetary benefit was calculated to determine cost‐effectiveness of each intervention. Thirty‐seven studies (50%) were included for analysis; a further 37 (50%) were excluded, having failed population‐, intervention‐, comparator‐, outcomes‐ and study‐design criteria. Within the 37 studies included, we defined 64 scenarios. Eleven scenarios compared PDT‐guided PM with non‐guided therapy [epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), n = 5; programmed death‐ligand 1 (PD‐L1), n = 6]. Twenty‐eight scenarios compared PDT‐guided PM with chemotherapy alone (anaplastic lymphoma kinase, n = 3; EGFR, n = 17; PD‐L1, n = 8). Twenty‐five scenarios compared PDT‐guided PM with chemotherapy alone, while varying the PDT approach. Thirty‐four scenarios (53%) were cost‐effective, 28 (44%) were not cost‐effective, and two were marginal, dependent on their country’s WTP threshold. When PDT‐guided therapy was compared with a therapy‐for‐all patients approach, all scenarios (100%) proved cost‐effective. Seven of 37 studies had been structured appropriately to assess PDT‐PM cost‐effectiveness. Within these seven studies, all evaluated scenarios were cost‐effective. However, 81% of studies had been poorly designed. Our systematic analysis implies that more robust health economic evaluation could help identify additional approaches towards PDT cost‐effectiveness, underpinning value‐based care and enhanced outcomes for patients with NSCLC. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8486593 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-84865932021-10-07 Cost‐effectiveness of precision diagnostic testing for precision medicine approaches against non‐small‐cell lung cancer: A systematic review Henderson, Raymond Keeling, Peter French, Declan Smart, Dave Sullivan, Richard Lawler, Mark Mol Oncol Systematic Review Precision diagnostic testing (PDT) employs appropriate biomarkers to identify cancer patients that may optimally respond to precision medicine (PM) approaches, such as treatments with targeted agents and immuno‐oncology drugs. To date, there are no published systematic appraisals evaluating the cost‐effectiveness of PDT in non‐small‐cell lung cancer (NSCLC). To address this gap, we conducted Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses searches for the years 2009–2019. Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards were employed to screen, assess and extract data. Employing base costs, life years gained or quality‐adjusted life years, as well as willingness‐to‐pay (WTP) threshold for each country, net monetary benefit was calculated to determine cost‐effectiveness of each intervention. Thirty‐seven studies (50%) were included for analysis; a further 37 (50%) were excluded, having failed population‐, intervention‐, comparator‐, outcomes‐ and study‐design criteria. Within the 37 studies included, we defined 64 scenarios. Eleven scenarios compared PDT‐guided PM with non‐guided therapy [epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), n = 5; programmed death‐ligand 1 (PD‐L1), n = 6]. Twenty‐eight scenarios compared PDT‐guided PM with chemotherapy alone (anaplastic lymphoma kinase, n = 3; EGFR, n = 17; PD‐L1, n = 8). Twenty‐five scenarios compared PDT‐guided PM with chemotherapy alone, while varying the PDT approach. Thirty‐four scenarios (53%) were cost‐effective, 28 (44%) were not cost‐effective, and two were marginal, dependent on their country’s WTP threshold. When PDT‐guided therapy was compared with a therapy‐for‐all patients approach, all scenarios (100%) proved cost‐effective. Seven of 37 studies had been structured appropriately to assess PDT‐PM cost‐effectiveness. Within these seven studies, all evaluated scenarios were cost‐effective. However, 81% of studies had been poorly designed. Our systematic analysis implies that more robust health economic evaluation could help identify additional approaches towards PDT cost‐effectiveness, underpinning value‐based care and enhanced outcomes for patients with NSCLC. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-07-19 2021-10 /pmc/articles/PMC8486593/ /pubmed/34110679 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/1878-0261.13038 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Molecular Oncology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Federation of European Biochemical Societies https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Systematic Review Henderson, Raymond Keeling, Peter French, Declan Smart, Dave Sullivan, Richard Lawler, Mark Cost‐effectiveness of precision diagnostic testing for precision medicine approaches against non‐small‐cell lung cancer: A systematic review |
title | Cost‐effectiveness of precision diagnostic testing for precision medicine approaches against non‐small‐cell lung cancer: A systematic review |
title_full | Cost‐effectiveness of precision diagnostic testing for precision medicine approaches against non‐small‐cell lung cancer: A systematic review |
title_fullStr | Cost‐effectiveness of precision diagnostic testing for precision medicine approaches against non‐small‐cell lung cancer: A systematic review |
title_full_unstemmed | Cost‐effectiveness of precision diagnostic testing for precision medicine approaches against non‐small‐cell lung cancer: A systematic review |
title_short | Cost‐effectiveness of precision diagnostic testing for precision medicine approaches against non‐small‐cell lung cancer: A systematic review |
title_sort | cost‐effectiveness of precision diagnostic testing for precision medicine approaches against non‐small‐cell lung cancer: a systematic review |
topic | Systematic Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8486593/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34110679 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/1878-0261.13038 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT hendersonraymond costeffectivenessofprecisiondiagnostictestingforprecisionmedicineapproachesagainstnonsmallcelllungcancerasystematicreview AT keelingpeter costeffectivenessofprecisiondiagnostictestingforprecisionmedicineapproachesagainstnonsmallcelllungcancerasystematicreview AT frenchdeclan costeffectivenessofprecisiondiagnostictestingforprecisionmedicineapproachesagainstnonsmallcelllungcancerasystematicreview AT smartdave costeffectivenessofprecisiondiagnostictestingforprecisionmedicineapproachesagainstnonsmallcelllungcancerasystematicreview AT sullivanrichard costeffectivenessofprecisiondiagnostictestingforprecisionmedicineapproachesagainstnonsmallcelllungcancerasystematicreview AT lawlermark costeffectivenessofprecisiondiagnostictestingforprecisionmedicineapproachesagainstnonsmallcelllungcancerasystematicreview |