The budgetary impact of genetic testing for hereditary breast cancer for the statutory health insurance.

Objectives: Potential opportunities and challenges of predictive genetic risk classification of healthy persons are currently discussed. However, the budgetary impact of rising demand is uncertain. This project aims to evaluate budgetary consequences of predictive genetic risk classification for statutory health insurance in Germany.Methods: A Markov model was developed in the form of a cohort simulation. It analyzes a population of female relatives of hereditary breast cancer patients. Mutation carriers are offered intensified screening, women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation can decide on prophylactic mastectomy and/or ovarectomy. The model considers the following scenarios: (a) steady demand for predictive genetic testing, and (b) rising demand. Most input parameters are based on data of the German Consortium for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer. The model contains 49 health states, starts in 2015, and runs for 10 years. Prices were evaluated from the perspective of statutory health insurance.Results: Steady demand leads to an expenditure of €49.8 million during the 10-year period. Rising demands lead to additional expenses of €125.5 million. The model reveals the genetic analysis to be the main cost driver while cost savings in treatment costs of breast and ovarian cancer are indicated.Conclusions: The results contribute to close the knowledge gap concerning the budgetary consequences due to genetic risk classification. A rising demand leads to additional costs especially due to costs for genetic analysis. The model indicates budget shifts with cost savings due to breast and ovarian cancer treatment in the scenario of rising demands.

[Cost-effectiveness of risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy in cases of BRCA1 gene mutation in Colombia]. / Costo efectividad de la cirugía reductora de riesgo en trompas y ovarios en casos con mutación del gen BRCAI en Colombia.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the usefulness of risk reduction salpingo-oophorectomy in cases with mutation of the BRCA1 gene in Colombia. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Cost-effectiveness analysis in which three processes are incorporated: a. Patients with screening tests for breast and ovarian cancer. b. Risk reduction surgery in the fallopian tubes and ovaries c. Reductive surgery in the fallopian tubes and ovaries with bilateral mastectomy. The outcome is evaluated as the gain in years of survival. RESULTS: The cohort with risk reduction surgery in the fallopian tubes and ovaries and bilateral mastectomy is the one with the highest gain with 13 years, while the risk reduction surgery in the fallopian tubes and ovaries gain 4.95 years with respect to the follow-up group. CONCLUSIONS: The three options evaluated are acceptable, but of them the one with the greatest gain in survival is the combination of risk-reducing surgery in the fallopian tubes and ovaries with bilateral mastectomy.

OBJETIVO: Evaluar la utilidad de la cirugía reductora de riesgo en trompas y ovarios en casos con mutación del gen BRCA1 en Colombia. MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS: Análisis de costo-efectividad en el que se incorporan tres procesos: a. Pacientes con pruebas de tamización para cáncer de mama y ovario. b. cirugía reductora de riesgo en trompas y ovarios c. cirugía reductora de riesgo en trompas y ovarios con mastectomía bilateral. Se evalúa como desenlace la ganancia en años de supervivencia. RESULTADOS: La cohorte con cirugía reductora de riesgo en trompas y ovarios y mastectomía bilateral es la de mayor ganancia con 13 años mientras que la cirugía reductora de riesgo en trompas y ovarios gana 4,95 años con respecto al grupo de seguimiento. CONCLUSIONES: Las tres opciones evaluadas son aceptables, pero de ellas la de mayor ganancia en la supervivencia es la combinación de cirugía reductora de riesgo en trompas y ovarios con mastectomía bilateral.

Changing landscape of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer germline genetic testing in Australia.

Federal funding for germline genetic testing in hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) was recently introduced. Germline testing for HBOC under Medicare Benefits Schedule items 73296/73297 can be requested by any specialist, whereas the previous state- and territory-funded testing was limited to those operating within a familial cancer service. The impact of this decentralisation of HBOC testing on health and economic outcomes is uncertain, primarily as it has potential to significantly disrupt the clinical framework that generated the evidence used to justify clinical implementation of the Medicare Benefits Schedules.

Cost-effectiveness of population based BRCA testing with varying Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry.

BACKGROUND: Population-based BRCA1/BRCA2 testing has been found to be cost-effective compared with family history-based testing in Ashkenazi-Jewish women were >30 years old with 4 Ashkenazi-Jewish grandparents. However, individuals may have 1, 2, or 3 Ashkenazi-Jewish grandparents, and cost-effectiveness data are lacking at these lower BRCA prevalence estimates. We present an updated cost-effectiveness analysis of population BRCA1/BRCA2 testing for women with 1, 2, and 3 Ashkenazi-Jewish grandparents. STUDY DESIGN: Decision analysis model. METHODS: Lifetime costs and effects of population and family history-based testing were compared with the use of a decision analysis model. 56% BRCA carriers are missed by family history criteria alone. Analyses were conducted for United Kingdom and United States populations. Model parameters were obtained from the Genetic Cancer Prediction through Population Screening trial and published literature. Model parameters and BRCA population prevalence for individuals with 3, 2, or 1 Ashkenazi-Jewish grandparent were adjusted for the relative frequency of BRCA mutations in the Ashkenazi-Jewish and general populations. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated for all Ashkenazi-Jewish grandparent scenarios. Costs, along with outcomes, were discounted at 3.5%. The time horizon of the analysis is "life-time," and perspective is "payer." Probabilistic sensitivity analysis evaluated model uncertainty. RESULTS: Population testing for BRCA mutations is cost-saving in Ashkenazi-Jewish women with 2, 3, or 4 grandparents (22-33 days life-gained) in the United Kingdom and 1, 2, 3, or 4 grandparents (12-26 days life-gained) in the United States populations, respectively. It is also extremely cost-effective in women in the United Kingdom with just 1 Ashkenazi-Jewish grandparent with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £863 per quality-adjusted life-years and 15 days life gained. Results show that population-testing remains cost-effective at the £20,000-30000 per quality-adjusted life-years and $100,000 per quality-adjusted life-years willingness-to-pay thresholds for all 4 Ashkenazi-Jewish grandparent scenarios, with ≥95% simulations found to be cost-effective on probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Population-testing remains cost-effective in the absence of reduction in breast cancer risk from oophorectomy and at lower risk-reducing mastectomy (13%) or risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (20%) rates. CONCLUSION: Population testing for BRCA mutations with varying levels of Ashkenazi-Jewish ancestry is cost-effective in the United Kingdom and the United States. These results support population testing in Ashkenazi-Jewish women with 1-4 Ashkenazi-Jewish grandparent ancestry.

Cost-effectiveness of risk-reducing surgeries in preventing hereditary breast and ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Risk-reducing surgeries are a feasible option for mitigating the risk in individuals with inherited susceptibility to cancer, but are the procedures cost-effective in the current health-care system in Germany? This study compared the health-care costs for bilateral risk-reducing mastectomy (BRRM) and risk-reducing (bilateral) salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) with cancer treatment costs that could potentially be prevented. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The analysis is based on interdisciplinary consultations with individuals with a high familial risk for breast and ovarian cancer at the University Breast Center for Franconia (Germany) between 2009 and 2013 (370 consultations; 44 patients with BRCA1 mutations and 26 with BRCA2 mutations). Health-care costs for risk-reducing surgeries in BRCA mutation carriers were calculated as reimbursements in the German diagnosis-related groups (DRG) hospital pricing system. These costs for the health-care system were compared with the potential cancer treatment costs that could possibly be prevented by risk-reducing surgeries. RESULTS: Long-term health-care costs can be reduced by risk-reducing surgeries after genetic testing in BRCA mutation carriers. The health-care system in Germany would have saved € 136,295 if BRRM had been performed and € 791,653 if RRSO had been performed before the development of cancer in only 50% of the 70 mutation carriers seen in our center. Moreover, in patients with combined RRSO and BRRM (without breast reconstruction), one further life-year for a 40-year-old BRCA mutation carrier would cost € 2,183. CONCLUSION: Intensive care, including risk-reducing surgeries in BRCA mutation carriers, is cost-effective from the point of view of the health-care system in Germany.