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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Henderson, Raymond, Keeling, Peter, French, Declan, Smart, Dave, Sullivan, Richard, Lawler, Mark
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