Qin Xi , Rahul Patel , Thomas Linton-Willoughby , John Short , Marc Tischkowitz , Katie Snape , Stephen Morris
{"title":"对接受过 NHS 种系基因诊断检测的癌症患者进行扩展面板分析的经济评估--基于真实世界数据的建模研究","authors":"Qin Xi , Rahul Patel , Thomas Linton-Willoughby , John Short , Marc Tischkowitz , Katie Snape , Stephen Morris","doi":"10.1016/j.ejmg.2024.104969","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>The South West Thames Centre for Genomics implemented a wider diagnostic Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) gene panel for eligible cancer patients undergoing diagnostic testing whilst restricting data analysis and reporting for BRCA1/BRCA2/PALB2/CHEK2 1100delC only as per contemporaneous guidelines. This study investigated the cost-utility of reanalyzing existing diagnostic grade extended panel data for truncating germline pathogenic variants (GPVs) in known moderate risk cancer susceptibility genes (CSGs) and performing follow-up genetic testing for first-degree relatives if patients have an identified CSG allele.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Reanalysis of existing NGS data was undertaken in 889 samples from cancer patients contemporaneously eligible through the NHS England National Genomic Test Directory (NGTD) codes R207 (ovarian) or R208 (breast) who had tested negative for <em>BRCA1/BRCA2/PALB2</em> and <em>CHEK2</em> 1100delC founder variant. We modeled the cost and health outcomes for comparisons between: 1. Extending reanalysis to <em>ATM</em> truncating GPVs (partial extended testing) versus historical genetic testing, and 2. Extending analysis to <em>ATM</em> truncating GPV/<em>BRIP1</em> truncating <em>GPV</em>/<em>CHEK2</em> truncating GPV excluding <em>CHEK2</em> 1100delC/<em>RAD51C</em> truncating GPV/<em>RAD51D</em> truncating GPV (full extended testing) versus historical genetic testing.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>For partial extended testing, the ICER compared with historical genetic testing was UK£49,671/QALY. For full extended testing, the ICER compared with historical genetic testing of historical genetic testing was UK£5716/QALY. The full extended testing remained cost-effective with a 30% increase in genetic testing cost.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Where existing NGS data for cancer susceptibility genes is stored to diagnostic standard in UK laboratories, this study suggests it is cost-effective to analyze, report and clinically manage patients and relatives by extended analysis to an 8-gene panel compared to the historical genetic testing.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":11916,"journal":{"name":"European journal of medical genetics","volume":"72 ","pages":"Article 104969"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1769721224000612/pdfft?md5=50cb4a23057fdd510638f4a901c6c944&pid=1-s2.0-S1769721224000612-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Economic evaluation of extended panel analysis in cancer patients with historical NHS diagnostic germline genetic testing – A modeling study based on real-world data\",\"authors\":\"Qin Xi , Rahul Patel , Thomas Linton-Willoughby , John Short , Marc Tischkowitz , Katie Snape , Stephen Morris\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ejmg.2024.104969\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>The South West Thames Centre for Genomics implemented a wider diagnostic Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) gene panel for eligible cancer patients undergoing diagnostic testing whilst restricting data analysis and reporting for BRCA1/BRCA2/PALB2/CHEK2 1100delC only as per contemporaneous guidelines. This study investigated the cost-utility of reanalyzing existing diagnostic grade extended panel data for truncating germline pathogenic variants (GPVs) in known moderate risk cancer susceptibility genes (CSGs) and performing follow-up genetic testing for first-degree relatives if patients have an identified CSG allele.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Reanalysis of existing NGS data was undertaken in 889 samples from cancer patients contemporaneously eligible through the NHS England National Genomic Test Directory (NGTD) codes R207 (ovarian) or R208 (breast) who had tested negative for <em>BRCA1/BRCA2/PALB2</em> and <em>CHEK2</em> 1100delC founder variant. We modeled the cost and health outcomes for comparisons between: 1. Extending reanalysis to <em>ATM</em> truncating GPVs (partial extended testing) versus historical genetic testing, and 2. Extending analysis to <em>ATM</em> truncating GPV/<em>BRIP1</em> truncating <em>GPV</em>/<em>CHEK2</em> truncating GPV excluding <em>CHEK2</em> 1100delC/<em>RAD51C</em> truncating GPV/<em>RAD51D</em> truncating GPV (full extended testing) versus historical genetic testing.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>For partial extended testing, the ICER compared with historical genetic testing was UK£49,671/QALY. For full extended testing, the ICER compared with historical genetic testing of historical genetic testing was UK£5716/QALY. The full extended testing remained cost-effective with a 30% increase in genetic testing cost.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Where existing NGS data for cancer susceptibility genes is stored to diagnostic standard in UK laboratories, this study suggests it is cost-effective to analyze, report and clinically manage patients and relatives by extended analysis to an 8-gene panel compared to the historical genetic testing.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11916,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European journal of medical genetics\",\"volume\":\"72 \",\"pages\":\"Article 104969\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1769721224000612/pdfft?md5=50cb4a23057fdd510638f4a901c6c944&pid=1-s2.0-S1769721224000612-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European journal of medical genetics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1769721224000612\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"GENETICS & HEREDITY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European journal of medical genetics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1769721224000612","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GENETICS & HEREDITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Economic evaluation of extended panel analysis in cancer patients with historical NHS diagnostic germline genetic testing – A modeling study based on real-world data
Background
The South West Thames Centre for Genomics implemented a wider diagnostic Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) gene panel for eligible cancer patients undergoing diagnostic testing whilst restricting data analysis and reporting for BRCA1/BRCA2/PALB2/CHEK2 1100delC only as per contemporaneous guidelines. This study investigated the cost-utility of reanalyzing existing diagnostic grade extended panel data for truncating germline pathogenic variants (GPVs) in known moderate risk cancer susceptibility genes (CSGs) and performing follow-up genetic testing for first-degree relatives if patients have an identified CSG allele.
Methods
Reanalysis of existing NGS data was undertaken in 889 samples from cancer patients contemporaneously eligible through the NHS England National Genomic Test Directory (NGTD) codes R207 (ovarian) or R208 (breast) who had tested negative for BRCA1/BRCA2/PALB2 and CHEK2 1100delC founder variant. We modeled the cost and health outcomes for comparisons between: 1. Extending reanalysis to ATM truncating GPVs (partial extended testing) versus historical genetic testing, and 2. Extending analysis to ATM truncating GPV/BRIP1 truncating GPV/CHEK2 truncating GPV excluding CHEK2 1100delC/RAD51C truncating GPV/RAD51D truncating GPV (full extended testing) versus historical genetic testing.
Results
For partial extended testing, the ICER compared with historical genetic testing was UK£49,671/QALY. For full extended testing, the ICER compared with historical genetic testing of historical genetic testing was UK£5716/QALY. The full extended testing remained cost-effective with a 30% increase in genetic testing cost.
Conclusion
Where existing NGS data for cancer susceptibility genes is stored to diagnostic standard in UK laboratories, this study suggests it is cost-effective to analyze, report and clinically manage patients and relatives by extended analysis to an 8-gene panel compared to the historical genetic testing.
期刊介绍:
The European Journal of Medical Genetics (EJMG) is a peer-reviewed journal that publishes articles in English on various aspects of human and medical genetics and of the genetics of experimental models.
Original clinical and experimental research articles, short clinical reports, review articles and letters to the editor are welcome on topics such as :
• Dysmorphology and syndrome delineation
• Molecular genetics and molecular cytogenetics of inherited disorders
• Clinical applications of genomics and nextgen sequencing technologies
• Syndromal cancer genetics
• Behavioral genetics
• Community genetics
• Fetal pathology and prenatal diagnosis
• Genetic counseling.