Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Economic evaluation of population-based brca1/brca2 mutation testing across multiple countries and health systems

  • Ranjit Manchanda*
  • , Li Sun
  • , Shreeya Patel
  • , Olivia Evans
  • , Janneke Wilschut
  • , Ana Carolina De Freitas Lopes
  • , Faiza Gaba
  • , Adam Brentnall
  • , Stephen Duffy
  • , Bin Cui
  • , Patricia Coelho De Soarez
  • , Zakir Husain
  • , John Hopper
  • , Zia Sadique
  • , Asima Mukhopadhyay
  • , Li Yang
  • , Johannes Berkhof
  • , Rosa Legood
  • *Corresponding author for this work
  • Queen Mary University of London
  • Royal London Hospital
  • University College London
  • London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine
  • Universidade de São Paulo
  • Peking University
  • Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur
  • Presidency College India
  • University of Melbourne
  • Tata Medical Centre
  • Newcastle University

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

12 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Clinical criteria/Family history-based BRCA testing misses a large proportion of BRCA carriers who can benefit from screening/prevention. We estimate the cost-effectiveness of population-based BRCA testing in general population women across different countries/health systems. A Markov model comparing the lifetime costs and effects of BRCA1/BRCA2 testing all general population women ≥30 years compared with clinical criteria/FH-based testing. Separate analyses are undertaken for the UK/USA/Netherlands (high-income countries/HIC), China/Brazil (upper–middle income countries/UMIC) and India (low–middle income countries/LMIC) using both health system/payer and societal perspectives. BRCA carriers undergo appropriate screening/prevention interventions to reduce breast cancer (BC) and ovarian cancer (OC) risk. Outcomes include OC, BC, and additional heart disease deaths and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER)/quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Probabilistic/one-way sensitivity analyses evaluate model uncertainty. For the base case, from a societal perspective, we found that population-based BRCA testing is cost-saving in HIC (UK-ICER = $−5639/QALY; USA-ICER = $−4018/QALY; Netherlands-ICER = $−11,433/QALY), and it appears cost-effective in UMIC (China-ICER = $18,066/QALY; Brazil-ICER = $13,579/QALY), but it is not cost-effective in LMIC (India-ICER = $23,031/QALY). From a payer perspective, population-based BRCA testing is highly cost-effective in HIC (UK-ICER = $21,191/QALY, USA-ICER = $16,552/QALY, Netherlands-ICER = $25,215/QALY), and it is cost-effective in UMIC (China-ICER = $23,485/QALY, Brazil−ICER = $20,995/QALY), but it is not cost-effective in LMIC (India-ICER = $32,217/QALY). BRCA testing costs below $172/test (ICER = $19,685/QALY), which makes it cost-effective (from a societal perspective) for LMIC/India. Population-based BRCA testing can prevent an additional 2319 to 2666 BC and 327 to 449 OC cases per million women than the current clinical strategy. Findings suggest that population-based BRCA testing for countries evaluated is extremely cost-effective across HIC/UMIC health systems, is cost-saving for HIC health systems from a societal perspective, and can prevent tens of thousands more BC/OC cases.

Original languageEnglish
Article number1929
Pages (from-to)1-38
Number of pages38
JournalCancers
Volume12
Issue number7
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jul 2020

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

  1. SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being
    SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being

Keywords

  • BRCA
  • Breast cancer
  • Cancer prevention
  • Cost-effectiveness
  • Ovarian cancer
  • Population testing

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Economic evaluation of population-based brca1/brca2 mutation testing across multiple countries and health systems'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this