Is universal HLA-B*15:02 screening a cost-effective option in an ethnically diverse population? A case study of Malaysia.

BACKGROUND: A strong association has been documented between HLA-B*15:02 and carbamazepine-induced severe cutaneous adverse reactions (SCARs) in Asians. Human leucocyte antigen testing is potentially valuable in many countries to facilitate early recognition of patient susceptibility to SCARs. OBJECTIVES: To determine the cost-effectiveness of universal HLA-B*15:02 screening in preventing carbamazepine-induced Stevens-Johnson syndrome/toxic epidermal necrolysis in an ethnically diverse Malaysian population. METHODS: A hybrid model of a decision tree and Markov model was developed to evaluate three strategies for treating newly diagnosed epilepsy among adults: (i) carbamazepine initiation without HLA-B*15:02 screening (current practice); (ii) universal HLA-B*15:02 screening prior to carbamazepine initiation; and (iii) alternative treatment [sodium valproate (VPA)] prescribing without HLA-B*15:02 screening. Base-case analysis and sensitivity analyses were performed over a lifetime time horizon. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated. RESULTS: Both universal HLA-B*15:02 screening and VPA prescribing were dominated by current practice. Compared with current practice, universal HLA-B*15:02 screening resulted in a loss of 0·0255 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) at an additional cost of 707 U.S. dollars (USD); VPA prescribing resulted in a loss of 0·2622 QALYs at an additional cost of USD 4127, owing to estimated differences in antiepileptic treatment efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: Universal HLA-B*15:02 screening is unlikely to be a cost-effective intervention in Malaysia. However, with the emergence of an ethnically diverse population in many other countries, this may render HLA-B*15:02 screening a viable intervention when an increasing proportion of the population is at risk and an equally effective yet safer antiepileptic drug is available.

Understanding chemotherapy treatment pathways of advanced colorectal cancer patients to inform an economic evaluation in the United Kingdom.

BACKGROUND: Accurate description of current practice within advanced colorectal cancer (CRC) specialties were needed to inform an economic evaluation of the UGT1A1 pharmacogenetic test for irinotecan in the United Kingdom. METHODS: The study was based on a literature review and elicitation of expert opinion. The expert panel comprised 44 consultant oncologists in NHS Hospital Trusts across England. RESULTS: Ten first-line, 10 second-line and 12 third-line chemotherapy regimens were reported, reflecting wide variations in treatment pathways. Predominant pathways emerged with: first-line treatment with oxaliplatin-based regimens, second-line treatment with irinotecan-based regimens and third-line treatment with mitomycin-based regimens. Experts estimated the frequency of febrile neutropaenia 8.4% (95% CI: 6.7-10.0), septic neutropaenia 4.7% (95% CI: 3.4-6.0) and severe diarrhoea 13.1% (95% CI: 10.8-15.5). Approaches for the clinical management of neutropaenia within the NHS were described. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified wide variations in the clinical management of advanced CRC patients. Descriptions of current treatment pathways are necessary for economic evaluations. Variations in clinical practice must be reflected in the model to ensure the findings from an economic evaluation of UGT1A1 testing are sufficient to inform policy regarding the cost-effective use of NHS resources.