Impact of Structural Differences on the Modeled Cost-Effectiveness of Noninvasive Prenatal Testing.

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Amber Salisbury, Alison Pearce, Kirsten Howard, Sarah Norris
{"title":"Impact of Structural Differences on the Modeled Cost-Effectiveness of Noninvasive Prenatal Testing.","authors":"Amber Salisbury, Alison Pearce, Kirsten Howard, Sarah Norris","doi":"10.1177/0272989X241263368","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) was developed to improve the accuracy of prenatal screening to detect chromosomal abnormalities. Published economic analyses have yielded different incremental cost-effective ratios (ICERs), leading to conclusions of NIPT being dominant, cost-effective, and cost-ineffective. These analyses have used different model structures, and the extent to which these structural variations have contributed to differences in ICERs is unclear.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To assess the impact of different model structures on the cost-effectiveness of NIPT for the detection of trisomy 21 (T21; Down syndrome).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review identified economic models comparing NIPT to conventional screening. The key variations in identified model structures were the number of health states and modeling approach. New models with different structures were developed in TreeAge and populated with consistent parameters to enable a comparison of the impact of selected structural variations on results.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The review identified 34 economic models. Based on these findings, demonstration models were developed: 1) a decision tree with 3 health states, 2) a decision tree with 5 health states, 3) a microsimulation with 3 health states, and 4) a microsimulation with 5 health states. The base-case ICER from each model was 1) USD$34,474 (2023)/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), 2) USD$14,990 (2023)/QALY, (3) USD$54,983 (2023)/QALY, and (4) NIPT was dominated.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Model-structuring choices can have a large impact on the ICER and conclusions regarding cost-effectiveness, which may inadvertently affect policy decisions to support or not support funding for NIPT. The use of reference models could improve international consistency in health policy decision making for prenatal screening.</p><p><strong>Highlights: </strong>NIPT is a clinical area in which a variety of modeling approaches have been published, with wide variation in reported cost-effectiveness.This study shows that when broader contextual factors are held constant, varying the model structure yields results that range from NIPT being less effective and more expensive than conventional screening (i.e., NIPT was dominated) through to NIPT being more effective and more expensive than conventional screening with an ICER of USD$54,983 (2023)/QALY.Model-structuring choices may inadvertently affect policy decisions to support or not support funding of NIPT. Reference models could improve international consistency in health policy decision making for prenatal screening.</p>","PeriodicalId":49839,"journal":{"name":"Medical Decision Making","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Decision Making","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989X241263368","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) was developed to improve the accuracy of prenatal screening to detect chromosomal abnormalities. Published economic analyses have yielded different incremental cost-effective ratios (ICERs), leading to conclusions of NIPT being dominant, cost-effective, and cost-ineffective. These analyses have used different model structures, and the extent to which these structural variations have contributed to differences in ICERs is unclear.

Aim: To assess the impact of different model structures on the cost-effectiveness of NIPT for the detection of trisomy 21 (T21; Down syndrome).

Methods: A systematic review identified economic models comparing NIPT to conventional screening. The key variations in identified model structures were the number of health states and modeling approach. New models with different structures were developed in TreeAge and populated with consistent parameters to enable a comparison of the impact of selected structural variations on results.

Results: The review identified 34 economic models. Based on these findings, demonstration models were developed: 1) a decision tree with 3 health states, 2) a decision tree with 5 health states, 3) a microsimulation with 3 health states, and 4) a microsimulation with 5 health states. The base-case ICER from each model was 1) USD$34,474 (2023)/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), 2) USD$14,990 (2023)/QALY, (3) USD$54,983 (2023)/QALY, and (4) NIPT was dominated.

Conclusion: Model-structuring choices can have a large impact on the ICER and conclusions regarding cost-effectiveness, which may inadvertently affect policy decisions to support or not support funding for NIPT. The use of reference models could improve international consistency in health policy decision making for prenatal screening.

Highlights: NIPT is a clinical area in which a variety of modeling approaches have been published, with wide variation in reported cost-effectiveness.This study shows that when broader contextual factors are held constant, varying the model structure yields results that range from NIPT being less effective and more expensive than conventional screening (i.e., NIPT was dominated) through to NIPT being more effective and more expensive than conventional screening with an ICER of USD$54,983 (2023)/QALY.Model-structuring choices may inadvertently affect policy decisions to support or not support funding of NIPT. Reference models could improve international consistency in health policy decision making for prenatal screening.

结构差异对无创产前检查成本效益模型的影响。
背景:开发无创产前检测(NIPT)是为了提高产前筛查检测染色体异常的准确性。已发表的经济分析得出了不同的增量成本效益比 (ICER),从而得出了 NIPT 占主导地位、成本效益高或成本效益低的结论。目的:评估不同模型结构对检测 21 三体综合征(T21;唐氏综合征)的 NIPT 成本效益的影响:方法:通过系统性回顾确定了比较 NIPT 与传统筛查的经济模型。已确定模型结构的主要差异在于健康状态的数量和建模方法。在 TreeAge 中开发了具有不同结构的新模型,并填充了一致的参数,以便比较选定结构变化对结果的影响:审查确定了 34 个经济模型。根据这些发现,开发了示范模型:1) 具有 3 种健康状态的决策树;2) 具有 5 种健康状态的决策树;3) 具有 3 种健康状态的微观模拟;4) 具有 5 种健康状态的微观模拟。每个模型的基本病例 ICER 分别为:(1) 34,474 美元(2023 年)/质量调整生命年;(2) 14,990 美元(2023 年)/质量调整生命年;(3) 54,983 美元(2023 年)/质量调整生命年;(4) NIPT 占主导地位:结论:模型结构的选择会对 ICER 和有关成本效益的结论产生很大影响,这可能会无意中影响支持或不支持资助 NIPT 的政策决定。参考模型的使用可提高产前筛查卫生政策决策的国际一致性:本研究表明,当更广泛的背景因素保持不变时,改变模型结构所产生的结果从 NIPT 比传统筛查更无效、更昂贵(即 NIPT 占主导地位)到 NIPT 比传统筛查更有效、更昂贵(即 NIPT 占主导地位)不等、模型结构的选择可能会无意中影响支持或不支持资助 NIPT 的政策决策。参考模型可提高产前筛查卫生政策决策的国际一致性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Medical Decision Making
Medical Decision Making 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
5.60%
发文量
146
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Medical Decision Making offers rigorous and systematic approaches to decision making that are designed to improve the health and clinical care of individuals and to assist with health care policy development. Using the fundamentals of decision analysis and theory, economic evaluation, and evidence based quality assessment, Medical Decision Making presents both theoretical and practical statistical and modeling techniques and methods from a variety of disciplines.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信