The Cost Effectiveness of Genomic Medicine in Cancer Control: A Systematic Literature Review

IF 3.1 4区 医学 Q1 ECONOMICS
Mackenzie Bourke, Aideen McInerney-Leo, Julia Steinberg, Tiffany Boughtwood, Vivienne Milch, Anna Laura Ross, Elena Ambrosino, Kim Dalziel, Fanny Franchini, Li Huang, Riccarda Peters, Francisco Santos Gonzalez, Ilias Goranitis
{"title":"The Cost Effectiveness of Genomic Medicine in Cancer Control: A Systematic Literature Review","authors":"Mackenzie Bourke,&nbsp;Aideen McInerney-Leo,&nbsp;Julia Steinberg,&nbsp;Tiffany Boughtwood,&nbsp;Vivienne Milch,&nbsp;Anna Laura Ross,&nbsp;Elena Ambrosino,&nbsp;Kim Dalziel,&nbsp;Fanny Franchini,&nbsp;Li Huang,&nbsp;Riccarda Peters,&nbsp;Francisco Santos Gonzalez,&nbsp;Ilias Goranitis","doi":"10.1007/s40258-025-00949-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background and Objective</h3><p>Genomic medicine offers an unprecedented opportunity to improve cancer outcomes through prevention, early detection and precision therapy. Health policy makers worldwide are developing strategies to embed genomic medicine in routine cancer care. Successful translation of genomic medicine, however, remains slow. This systematic review aims to identify and synthesise published evidence on the cost effectiveness of genomic medicine in cancer control. The insights could support efforts to accelerate access to cost-effective applications of human genomics.</p><h3>Methods</h3><p>The study protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42024480842), and the review was conducted in line with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analyses (PRISMA) Guidelines. The search was run in four databases: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and EconLit. Full economic evaluations of genomic technologies at any stage of cancer care, and published after 2018 and in English, were included for data extraction.</p><h3>Results</h3><p>The review identified 137 articles that met the inclusion criteria. Most economic evaluations focused on the prevention and early detection stage (<i>n</i> = 44; 32%), the treatment stage (<i>n</i> = 36; 26%), and managing relapsed, refractory or progressive disease (<i>n</i> = 51, 37%). Convergent cost-effectiveness evidence was identified for the prevention and early detection of breast and ovarian cancer, and for colorectal and endometrial cancers. For cancer treatment, the use of genomic testing for guiding therapy was highly likely to be cost effective for breast and blood cancers. Studies reported that genomic medicine was cost effective for advanced and metastatic non-small cell lung cancer. There was insufficient or mixed evidence regarding the cost effectiveness of genomic medicine in the management of other cancers.</p><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>This review mapped out the cost-effectiveness evidence of genomic medicine across the cancer care continuum. Gaps in the literature mean that potentially cost-effective uses of genomic medicine in cancer control, for example rare cancers or cancers of unknown primary, may be being overlooked. Evidence on the value of information and budget impact are critical, and advancements in methods to include distributional effects, system capacity and consumer preferences will be valuable. Expanding the current cost-effectiveness evidence base is essential to enable the sustainable and equitable translation of genomic medicine.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":8065,"journal":{"name":"Applied Health Economics and Health Policy","volume":"23 3","pages":"359 - 393"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s40258-025-00949-w.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Health Economics and Health Policy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40258-025-00949-w","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and Objective

Genomic medicine offers an unprecedented opportunity to improve cancer outcomes through prevention, early detection and precision therapy. Health policy makers worldwide are developing strategies to embed genomic medicine in routine cancer care. Successful translation of genomic medicine, however, remains slow. This systematic review aims to identify and synthesise published evidence on the cost effectiveness of genomic medicine in cancer control. The insights could support efforts to accelerate access to cost-effective applications of human genomics.

Methods

The study protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42024480842), and the review was conducted in line with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analyses (PRISMA) Guidelines. The search was run in four databases: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and EconLit. Full economic evaluations of genomic technologies at any stage of cancer care, and published after 2018 and in English, were included for data extraction.

Results

The review identified 137 articles that met the inclusion criteria. Most economic evaluations focused on the prevention and early detection stage (n = 44; 32%), the treatment stage (n = 36; 26%), and managing relapsed, refractory or progressive disease (n = 51, 37%). Convergent cost-effectiveness evidence was identified for the prevention and early detection of breast and ovarian cancer, and for colorectal and endometrial cancers. For cancer treatment, the use of genomic testing for guiding therapy was highly likely to be cost effective for breast and blood cancers. Studies reported that genomic medicine was cost effective for advanced and metastatic non-small cell lung cancer. There was insufficient or mixed evidence regarding the cost effectiveness of genomic medicine in the management of other cancers.

Conclusions

This review mapped out the cost-effectiveness evidence of genomic medicine across the cancer care continuum. Gaps in the literature mean that potentially cost-effective uses of genomic medicine in cancer control, for example rare cancers or cancers of unknown primary, may be being overlooked. Evidence on the value of information and budget impact are critical, and advancements in methods to include distributional effects, system capacity and consumer preferences will be valuable. Expanding the current cost-effectiveness evidence base is essential to enable the sustainable and equitable translation of genomic medicine.

基因组医学在癌症控制中的成本效益:系统文献综述。
背景与目的:基因组医学通过预防、早期发现和精确治疗,为改善癌症预后提供了前所未有的机会。世界各地的卫生政策制定者正在制定将基因组医学纳入常规癌症治疗的战略。然而,基因组医学的成功翻译仍然缓慢。本系统综述旨在确定和综合已发表的关于基因组医学在癌症控制中的成本效益的证据。这些见解可以支持加快获得具有成本效益的人类基因组应用的努力。方法:研究方案在PROSPERO注册(CRD42024480842),按照系统评价和Meta分析(PRISMA)指南的首选报告项目进行综述。搜索在四个数据库中运行:MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL和EconLit。纳入了2018年以后发表的基因组技术在癌症治疗任何阶段的完整经济评估,并以英文发表,用于数据提取。结果:本综述确定了137篇符合纳入标准的文献。大多数经济评价侧重于预防和早期发现阶段(n = 44;32%)、治疗阶段(n = 36;26%),以及治疗复发、难治性或进展性疾病(n = 51, 37%)。在乳腺癌和卵巢癌以及结直肠癌和子宫内膜癌的预防和早期发现方面,确定了趋同的成本效益证据。就癌症治疗而言,使用基因组测试指导治疗乳腺癌和血癌极有可能具有成本效益。研究报告称,基因组药物对晚期和转移性非小细胞肺癌具有成本效益。关于基因组医学在其他癌症治疗中的成本效益,证据不足或证据不一。结论:本综述列出了基因组医学在整个癌症治疗连续体中的成本效益证据。文献的空白意味着基因组医学在癌症控制中的潜在成本效益用途,例如罕见癌症或原发不明的癌症,可能被忽视了。关于信息价值和预算影响的证据至关重要,在包括分配效应、系统能力和消费者偏好的方法方面取得进展将是有价值的。扩大目前的成本效益证据基础对于实现基因组医学的可持续和公平转化至关重要。
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
Applied Health Economics and Health Policy
Applied Health Economics and Health Policy Economics, Econometrics and Finance-Economics and Econometrics
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
2.80%
发文量
64
期刊介绍: Applied Health Economics and Health Policy provides timely publication of cutting-edge research and expert opinion from this increasingly important field, making it a vital resource for payers, providers and researchers alike. The journal includes high quality economic research and reviews of all aspects of healthcare from various perspectives and countries, designed to communicate the latest applied information in health economics and health policy. While emphasis is placed on information with practical applications, a strong basis of underlying scientific rigor is maintained.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信