Universal Versus Targeted Screening for Lynch Syndrome: Comparing Ascertainment and Costs Based on Clinical Experience.

BACKGROUND: Strategies to screen colorectal cancers (CRCs) for Lynch syndrome are evolving rapidly; the optimal strategy remains uncertain. AIM: We compared targeted versus universal screening of CRCs for Lynch syndrome. METHODS: In 2010-2011, we employed targeted screening (age < 60 and/or Bethesda criteria). From 2012 to 2014, we screened all CRCs. Immunohistochemistry for the four mismatch repair proteins was done in all cases, followed by other diagnostic studies as indicated. We modeled the diagnostic costs of detecting Lynch syndrome and estimated the 5-year costs of preventing CRC by colonoscopy screening, using a system dynamics model. RESULTS: Using targeted screening, 51/175 (29 %) cancers fit criteria and were tested by immunohistochemistry; 15/51 (29 %, or 8.6 % of all CRCs) showed suspicious loss of ≥1 mismatch repair protein. Germline mismatch repair gene mutations were found in 4/4 cases sequenced (11 suspected cases did not have germline testing). Using universal screening, 17/292 (5.8 %) screened cancers had abnormal immunohistochemistry suspicious for Lynch syndrome. Germline mismatch repair mutations were found in only 3/10 cases sequenced (7 suspected cases did not have germline testing). The mean cost to identify Lynch syndrome probands was ~$23,333/case for targeted screening and ~$175,916/case for universal screening at our institution. Estimated costs to identify and screen probands and relatives were: targeted, $9798/case and universal, $38,452/case. CONCLUSIONS: In real-world Lynch syndrome management, incomplete clinical follow-up was the major barrier to do genetic testing. Targeted screening costs 2- to 7.5-fold less than universal and rarely misses Lynch syndrome cases. Future changes in testing costs will likely change the optimal algorithm.

Estimating the Burden of Cost in Chronic Graft-versus-Host Disease: A Human Capital Approach.

With advances in organ matching and preventing acute graft-versus-host-disease (aGvHD), chronic graft-versus-host disease (cGvHD) following allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) has become a focus of transplant-related morbidity and mortality. Given that cGvHD often presents years following a transplant, our objective was to estimate its burden of cost resulting from allogeneic HSCT based on published estimates of incidence, morbidity, the value of lost work time and survivorship. Our choice of a ten-year time horizon is novel to the field of rare disease and was determined to be meaningful after consultations with present co-authors, including five physicians, one of whom is a transplant surgeon. A total of 44 450 cGvHD patients in the United States were estimated to require treatment over the next decade (from 2015 to 2025). This estimate is based on the last 5 years of trends reported in the transplant registries. What is not reported in any registry is that these patients will accrue a total of 605 631 years of lost wages, a collective lost productivity that will cost society over $27 Billion in the decade ahead: more than five times ($27B vs. $5.2B) the estimated ten-year cost of treating the condition.

What Is the Economic Cost of Unplanned Pregnancy Following Hysteroscopic Sterilization in the US? A New National Estimate Based on Essure® Procedure Prevalence, Failure Rates and Workforce Productivity.

OBJECTIVE: Although hysteroscopic sterilization (HS) (Essure ®) has been available in the US since 2002, there is disagreement regarding its efficacy, and there has been no study of the economic impact of HS failure. Our investigation examined the economic consequences of contraceptive failure with Essure in the US. METHODS: Contraceptive failure rates (CFR) of 5.7%, 7.7% and 9.6% were applied to the US cohort of HS patients (n = 600,000). Direct economic impact of productivity losses resulting from unplanned conceptions after HS was calculated by factoring Essure failure rate, the exposed population, US female labour force participation, unemployment rate, time away from work owing to vaginal delivery or pregnancy termination and weekly wages. RESULTS: For the 9.6% CFR scenario, US workforce productivity loss from unplanned pregnancy and delivery was estimated at 771,065 days (2,112 years). Productivity loss secondary to conception and subsequent termination of pregnancy after Essure was approximately 23,725 days (65 years). Assuming CFR at 5.7%, livebirth delivery with total time missed from work at 65 days, this was associated with an aggregate economic impact of $49.2M in lost annual wages. Direct economic impact of unplanned pregnancy after Essure irrespective of outcome (terminations and deliveries) was estimated to result in US productivity losses valued at ~$130M. CONCLUSION: Although not all unplanned pregnancy costs are attributable to failed HS, estimates derived from earlier surveys have not considered this contraceptive method, and the economic consequences of unplanned pregnancy after Essure are not trivial. Quantifying the economic consequences of HS failure would be improved with specific ICD-10 coding for Essure-associated symptoms.