Skip directly to search Skip directly to A to Z list Skip directly to navigation Skip directly to page options Skip directly to site content


Hot Topics of the Day|PHGKB
Search PHGKB:

Archive

Hot Topics of the Day are picked by experts to capture the latest information and publications on public health genomics and precision health for various diseases and health topics. Sources include published scientific literature, reviews, blogs and popular press articles.

Sign up MyPHGKB to receive the daily hot topic email alert.

Search Archive:
Archived Hot Topics of the Day By Date
46 hot topic(s) found with the query "Cost-effectiveness analysis"

Alternative cascade-testing protocols for identifying and managing patients with familial hypercholesterolaemia: systematic reviews, qualitative study and cost-effectiveness analysis.
Nadeem Qureshi et al. Health Technol Assess 2023 11 (16) 1-140 (Posted: Nov 07, 2023 0PM)

From the abstract: "Cascade testing the relatives of people with familial hypercholesterolaemia is an efficient approach to identifying familial hypercholesterolaemia. The cascade-testing protocol starts with identifying an index patient with familial hypercholesterolaemia, followed by one of three approaches to contact other relatives: indirect approach, whereby index patients contact their relatives; direct approach, whereby the specialist contacts the relatives; or a combination of both direct and indirect approaches. However, it is unclear which protocol may be most effective. "

AI-based skin cancer detection: the balance between access and overutilization
KP Venkatesh et al, NPJ Digital Medicine, August 15, 2023 (Posted: Aug 15, 2023 0PM)

A recent study evaluated the healthcare implications and costs of an AI-enabled mobile health app for skin cancer detection, involving 18,960 beneficiaries of a Netherlands insurer. They report a 32% increase in claims for premalignant and malignant skin lesions among app users, largely attributed to benign skin lesions and leading to higher annual costs for app users (€64.97) compared to controls (€43.09). Cost-effectiveness analysis showed a comparable cost to dermatologist-based diagnosis alone. This editorial emphasizes the balance in AI-based dermatology between increased access and increased false positives resulting in overutilization.

Implementing preconception expanded carrier screening in a universal healthcare system: a model-based cost-effectiveness analysis
A Busnelli et al, Genet Med, July 2023 (Posted: Jul 24, 2023 11AM)

The Promise of Population-based Genomic Screening for Selected Hereditary Conditions: Contributions of Cost-Effectiveness Analysis
ND Rao et al, CDC Blog Post, July 14, 2023 Brand (Posted: Jul 14, 2023 1PM)

Initial cost-effectiveness research suggests that simultaneous population genomic screening for three CDC Tier 1 genomic applications (hereditary breast and ovarian cancer, Lynch syndrome, and familial hypercholesterolemia) can be cost effective and reduce morbidity and mortality if implemented in adults younger than 40 years old, costs of screening tests are low, and those found carrying a pathogenic variant have access to preventive care.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Personalized Hypertension Prevention
ST Wang, J Per Med, June 15, 2023 (Posted: Jun 16, 2023 1PM)

While a population-wide strategy involving lifestyle changes and a high-risk strategy involving pharmacological interventions have been described, the recently proposed personalized medicine approach combining both strategies for the prevention of hypertension has increasingly gained attention. However, a cost-effectiveness analysis has been hardly addressed. The personalized preventive treatment appeared more cost-effective than population-based conventional care. These findings are extremely valuable for making hypertension-based health decisions based on precise preventive medication.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis in Public Health Genomics and Precision Health: Recent Findings, Methodologic Issues, and the Path Forward
CDC Public Health Genomics Webinar, October 26, 2023 Brand (Posted: Jun 09, 2023 8AM)

Dr David Veenstra from the University of Washington in Seattle will review the field as a whole and his research projects including evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of population-level genomic screening, pharmacogenomics in diverse populations, decision modeling techniques to assess evidence thresholds, and stakeholder preferences for precision medicine. He will address recent findings, methodologic issues and the path forward.

Population Genomic Screening for Three Common Hereditary Conditions : A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.
Gregory F Guzauskas et al. Ann Intern Med 2023 5 (Posted: May 09, 2023 5AM)

The cost-effectiveness of screening the U.S. population for Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Tier 1 genomic conditions is unknown. We estimated the cost-effectiveness of simultaneous genomic screening for Lynch syndrome (LS), hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome (HBOC), and familial hypercholesterolemia (FH). We found that population genomic screening with a restricted panel of high-evidence genes is likely to be cost-effective in U.S. adults younger than 40 years if the testing cost is relatively low and probands have access to preventive interventions.

A systematic review of economic evaluations of whole-genome sequencing for the surveillance of bacterial pathogens.
Vivien Price et al. Microbial genomics 2023 2 (2) (Posted: Feb 17, 2023 9AM)

Six hundred and eighty-one articles were identified, of which 49 proceeded to full-text screening, with 9 selected for inclusion. All had been published since 2019. Heterogeneity was high. Five studies assessed WGS for hospital surveillance and four analyzed foodborne pathogens. Four were cost-benefit analyses, one was a cost-utility analysis, one was a cost-effectiveness analysis, one was a combined cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analysis, one combined cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit analyses and one was a partial analysis. All studies supported the use of WGS as a surveillance tool on economic grounds.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of BNT162b2 COVID-19 booster vaccination in the United States
R Li et al, MEDRXIV, November 14, 2021 (Posted: Nov 15, 2021 6AM)

Health information technology interventions and engagement in HIV care and achievement of viral suppression in publicly funded settings in the US: A cost-effectiveness analysis.
Shade Starley B et al. PLoS medicine 2021 4 (4) e1003389 (Posted: Apr 12, 2021 8AM)

A New State-Space Epidemiological Model for Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Non-Medical Interventions- A Study on COVID-19 in California and Florida
V Deo et al, MEDRXIV, December 26, 2020 (Posted: Dec 27, 2020 11AM)

Cost-effectiveness of genome-wide sequencing for unexplained developmental disabilities and multiple congenital anomalies.
Li Chunmei et al. Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics 2020 Oct (Posted: Oct 29, 2020 11AM)

A cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted using a simulation from a public payer perspective. Six strategies involving ES or GS were compared. Outcomes reported were direct medical costs, number of molecular diagnoses, number of positive findings, and number of active treatment changes. ES would likely be cost-saving if used earlier in the diagnostic pathway.

A model-based cost-effectiveness analysis of pharmacogenomic panel testing in cardiovascular disease management: preemptive, reactive, or none?
Y Zhu et al, Genetics in Medicine, October 12, 2020 (Posted: Oct 12, 2020 0PM)

This study compared the cost-effectiveness between preemptive PGx panel testing, reactive PGx panel testing and usual care in cardiovascular disease management. Preemptive testing was found to be cost-effective compared with usual care (ICER $86,227/QALY) at the willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/QALY while reactive testing was not (ICER $148,726/QALY).

Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Genetic Testing and Tailored First-Line Therapy for Patients With Metastatic Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors
S Banerjee et al, JAMA Network Open, September 28, 2020 (Posted: Sep 28, 2020 1PM)

This economic evaluation examined the cost-effectiveness of targeted gene testing with tailored imatinib dosing for patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumor based on KIT exon variation status. The model found that targeted gene testing was cost-effective, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $92?100, compared with empirical treatment with imatinib.

A cost-effectiveness analysis of genomic sequencing in a prospective versus historical cohort of complex pediatric patients
A Yeung et al, Genetics in Medicine, August 10, 2020 (Posted: Aug 10, 2020 9AM)

Cost-effectiveness evaluations of first-line genomic sequencing (GS) in the diagnosis of children with genetic conditions are limited by the lack of well-defined comparative cohorts. We sought to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of early GS in pediatric patients with complex monogenic conditions compared with a matched historical cohort.

Selecting the optimal risk threshold of diabetes risk scores to identify high-risk individuals for diabetes prevention: a cost-effectiveness analysis.
Mühlenbruch Kristin et al. Acta diabetologica 2019 Nov (Posted: Feb 26, 2020 9AM)

Cost-effectiveness of risk-stratified colorectal cancer screening based on polygenic risk – current status and future potential
SK Naber et al, JNCI SPectrum, October 17, 2019 (Posted: Oct 18, 2019 8AM)

This cost-effectiveness analysis shows that currently, colorectal cancer screening based on polygenic risk is unlikely to be cost effective compared to uniform screening. This is expected to change with a?>?0.05 increase in AUC value, a?>?30% reduction in polygenic testing costs, or a?>?5% increase in adherence with screening.

A Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Multigene Testing for All Patients With Breast Cancer
L Sun et al, JAMA Oncology, October 3, 2019 (Posted: Oct 04, 2019 9AM)

In this cost-effectiveness microsimulation modeling study incorporating data from 11 836 women, unselected BRCA1/BRCA2/PALB2 testing at breast cancer diagnosis was extremely cost-effective compared with BRCA1/BRCA2 testing based on clinical criteria or family history for UK and US health systems.

Should women with a BRCA1/2 mutation aged 60 and older be offered intensified breast cancer screening? - A cost-effectiveness analysis.
Phi Xuan-Anh et al. Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) 2019 Mar 4582-88 (Posted: Mar 27, 2019 9AM)

Population genomic screening of all young adults in a health-care system: a cost-effectiveness analysis.
Zhang Lei et al. Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics 2019 Feb (Posted: Feb 20, 2019 11AM)

Using "Big Data" in the Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Next-Generation Sequencing Technologies: Challenges and Potential Solutions.
Wordsworth Sarah et al. Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research 2018 21(9) 1048-1053 (Posted: Sep 19, 2018 9AM)

Gene therapy in hemophilia A: a cost-effectiveness analysis.
Machin Nicoletta et al. Blood advances 2018 Jul 2(14) 1792-1798 (Posted: Aug 01, 2018 10AM)

BRCA mutation carrier detection. A model-based cost-effectiveness analysis comparing the traditional family history approach and the testing of all patients with breast cancer.
Norum Jan et al. ESMO open 2018 3(3) e000328 (Posted: Apr 25, 2018 9AM)

The role of cost-effectiveness analysis in precision medicine and public health genomics.
S Grosse, CDC slide presentation, Mar 2018 (Posted: Apr 20, 2018 10AM)

Cardiovascular Genetic Risk Testing for Targeting Statin Therapy in the Primary Prevention of Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.
Jarmul Jamie et al. Circulation. Cardiovascular quality and outcomes 2018 Apr 11(4) e004171 (Posted: Apr 18, 2018 10AM)

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Diagnosis of Duchenne/Becker Muscular Dystrophy in Colombia.
Atehortúa Sara C et al. Value in health regional issues 2018 Mar 171-6 (Posted: Mar 14, 2018 10AM)

The Role of Cost-Effectiveness Analysis in Precision Medicine and Public Health Genomics
CDC Public Health Genomics Webinar, March 27, 2018 Brand (Posted: Mar 07, 2018 7PM)

Economics of Pharmacogenetic-Guided Treatments: Underwhelming or Overstated?
Hughes Dyfrig A et al. Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics 2018 Feb (Posted: Feb 21, 2018 10AM)

Cost-effectiveness analysis of germ-line BRCA testing in women with breast cancer and cascade testing in family members of mutation carriers.
Tuffaha Haitham W et al. Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics 2018 Jan (Posted: Jan 10, 2018 9AM)

Cost-effectiveness analysis of HLA-B*58: 01 genetic testing before initiation of allopurinol therapy to prevent allopurinol-induced Stevens-Johnson syndrome/toxic epidermal necrolysis in a Malaysian population.
Chong Huey Yi et al. Pharmacogenetics and genomics 2017 Nov (Posted: Nov 29, 2017 9AM)

Using Cost-Effectiveness Analysis to Quantify the Value of Genomic-Based Diagnostic Tests: Recommendations for Practice and Research.
Spackman Eldon et al. Genetic testing and molecular biomarkers 2017 Oct (Posted: Oct 17, 2017 1PM)

A cost-effectiveness analysis of maternal CYP2D6 genetic testing to guide treatment for postpartum pain and avert infant adverse events.
Moretti M E et al. The pharmacogenomics journal 2017 Jul (Posted: Jul 19, 2017 8AM)

Cost-effectiveness Analysis for Genotyping before Allopurinol Treatment to Prevent Severe Cutaneous Adverse Drug Reactions.
Ke Ching-Hua et al. The Journal of rheumatology 2017 Apr (Posted: Apr 05, 2017 11AM)

Economic Evaluation in Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy: Model Frameworks for Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.
Landfeldt Erik et al. PharmacoEconomics 2016 Oct (Posted: Nov 21, 2016 1PM)

A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Using the JBR.10-Based 15-Gene Expression Signature to Guide Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Early Stage Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.
Wong Kit Man et al. Clinical lung cancer 2016 Jul (Posted: Aug 10, 2016 9AM)

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Different Genetic Testing Strategies for Lynch Syndrome in Taiwan.
Chen Ying-Erh et al. PloS one 2016 11(8) e0160599 (Posted: Aug 10, 2016 9AM)

Newborn screening and prophylactic interventions for sickle cell disease in 47 countries in sub-Saharan Africa: a cost-effectiveness analysis.
Kuznik Andreas et al. BMC health services research 2016 16(1) 304 (Posted: Aug 03, 2016 9AM)

Genetic risk for atrial fibrillation could motivate patient adherence to warfarin therapy: a cost effectiveness analysis.
Shiffman Dov et al. BMC cardiovascular disorders 2015 15(1) 104 (Posted: Oct 06, 2015 5PM)

A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of First Trimester Non-Invasive Prenatal Screening for Fetal Trisomies in the United States.
Walker Brandon S et al. PLoS ONE 2015 10(7) e0131402 (Posted: Sep 02, 2015 1PM)

Cost-effectiveness analysis of EGFR mutation testing and gefitinib as first-line therapy for non-small cell lung cancer.
Narita Yusuke et al. Lung Cancer 2015 Jul 26. (Posted: Aug 19, 2015 0PM)

Cost-effectiveness analysis of pharmacogenetic-guided warfarin dosing in Thailand.
Chong Huey Yi et al. Thromb. Res. 2014 Dec 134(6) 1278-84 (Posted: Aug 11, 2015 4PM)

Next-Generation Sequencing Panels for the Diagnosis of Colorectal Cancer and Polyposis Syndromes: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.
Gallego Carlos J et al. J. Clin. Oncol. 2015 May 4. (Posted: May 18, 2015 2PM)

Cost-effectiveness analysis of preimplantation genetic screening and in vitro fertilization versus expectant management in patients with unexplained recurrent pregnancy loss.
Murugappan Gayathree et al. Fertil. Steril. 2015 Mar 12. (Posted: Apr 19, 2015 2PM)

Cost-effectiveness analysis of HLA-B*5801 testing in preventing allopurinol-induced SJS/TEN in Thai population.
Saokaew Surasak et al. PLoS ONE 2014 (4) e94294 (Posted: Mar 13, 2015 2PM)

Societal cost-effectiveness analysis of the 21-gene assay in estrogen-receptor-positive, lymph-node-negative early-stage breast cancer in Japan.
Yamauchi Hideko et al. BMC Health Serv Res 2014 372 (Posted: Mar 12, 2015 3PM)

Genomic profile of breast cancer: cost-effectiveness analysis from the Spanish National Healthcare System perspective.
Seguí Miguel Ángel et al. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res 2014 Dec (6) 889-99 (Posted: Mar 12, 2015 3PM)


Disclaimer: Articles listed in Hot Topics of the Day are selected by Public Health Genomics Branch to provide current awareness of the scientific literature and news. Inclusion in the update does not necessarily represent the views of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention nor does it imply endorsement of the article's methods or findings. CDC and DHHS assume no responsibility for the factual accuracy of the items presented. The selection, omission, or content of items does not imply any endorsement or other position taken by CDC or DHHS. Opinion, findings and conclusions expressed by the original authors of items included in the Clips, or persons quoted therein, are strictly their own and are in no way meant to represent the opinion or views of CDC or DHHS. References to publications, news sources, and non-CDC Websites are provided solely for informational purposes and do not imply endorsement by CDC or DHHS.
TOP