IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0160599.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Different Genetic Testing Strategies for Lynch Syndrome in Taiwan

Author

Listed:
  • Ying-Erh Chen
  • Sung-Shuo Kao
  • Ren-Hua Chung

Abstract

Patients with Lynch syndrome (LS) have a significantly increased risk of developing colorectal cancer (CRC) and other cancers. Genetic screening for LS among patients with newly diagnosed CRC aims to identify mutations in the disease-causing genes (i.e., the DNA mismatch repair genes) in the patients, to offer genetic testing for relatives of the patients with the mutations, and then to provide early prevention for the relatives with the mutations. Several genetic tests are available for LS, such as DNA sequencing for MMR genes and tumor testing using microsatellite instability and immunohistochemical analyses. Cost-effectiveness analyses of different genetic testing strategies for LS have been performed in several studies from different countries such as the US and Germany. However, a cost-effectiveness analysis for the testing has not yet been performed in Taiwan. In this study, we evaluated the cost-effectiveness of four genetic testing strategies for LS described in previous studies, while population-specific parameters, such as the mutation rates of the DNA mismatch repair genes and treatment costs for CRC in Taiwan, were used. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios based on discounted life years gained due to genetic screening were calculated for the strategies relative to no screening and to the previous strategy. Using the World Health Organization standard, which was defined based on Taiwan’s Gross Domestic Product per capita, the strategy based on immunohistochemistry as a genetic test followed by BRAF mutation testing was considered to be highly cost-effective relative to no screening. Our probabilistic sensitivity analysis results also suggest that the strategy has a probability of 0.939 of being cost-effective relative to no screening based on the commonly used threshold of $50,000 to determine cost-effectiveness. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first cost-effectiveness analysis for evaluating different genetic testing strategies for LS in Taiwan. The results will be informative for the government when considering offering screening for LS in patients newly diagnosed with CRC.

Suggested Citation

  • Ying-Erh Chen & Sung-Shuo Kao & Ren-Hua Chung, 2016. "Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Different Genetic Testing Strategies for Lynch Syndrome in Taiwan," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(8), pages 1-13, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0160599
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0160599
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160599
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160599&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0160599?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Po-Chuan Chen & Jenq-Chang Lee & Jung-Der Wang, 2015. "Estimation of Life-Year Loss and Lifetime Costs for Different Stages of Colon Adenocarcinoma in Taiwan," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(7), pages 1-11, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Roberta Pastorino & Michele Basile & Alessia Tognetto & Marco Di Marco & Adriano Grossi & Emanuela Lucci-Cordisco & Franco Scaldaferri & Andrea De Censi & Antonio Federici & Paolo Villari & Maurizio G, 2020. "Cost-effectiveness analysis of genetic diagnostic strategies for Lynch syndrome in Italy," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-12, July.
    2. Miriam Kasztura & Aude Richard & Nefti-Eboni Bempong & Dejan Loncar & Antoine Flahault, 2019. "Cost-effectiveness of precision medicine: a scoping review," International Journal of Public Health, Springer;Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), vol. 64(9), pages 1261-1271, December.
    3. Abdul Rahman Ramdzan & Mohd Rizal Abdul Manaf & Azimatun Noor Aizuddin & Zarina A. Latiff & Keng Wee Teik & Gaik-Siew Ch'ng & Kurubaran Ganasegeran & Syed Mohamed Aljunid, 2021. "Cost-Effectiveness of Colorectal Cancer Genetic Testing," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(16), pages 1-17, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      More about this item

      Statistics

      Access and download statistics

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0160599. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.