Prospective comparison of the cost-effectiveness of clinical whole-exome sequencing with that of usual care overwhelmingly supports early use and reimbursement

Genetics in Medicine

Volumn 19, Issue 8, 2017, Pages 867-874

  Stark, Zornitza ^a   Schofield, Deborah ^a,b,c   Alam, Khurshid ^a,d   Wilson, William ^e,f   Mupfeki, Nessie ^a,e   Macciocca, Ivan ^a,e   Shrestha, Rupendra ^b   White, Susan M ^a,d,e   Gaff, Clara ^d,e  

^a MURDOCH CHILDREN'S RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

^c GARVAN INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL RESEARCH   (Australia)

^d UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

^e Melbourne Genomics Health Alliance   (Australia)

^f CSIRO   (Australia)

Author keywords

Cost effectiveness; Genetic testing; Mendelian disorders; Prospective; Whole exome sequencing

Indexed keywords

BOOTSTRAPPING; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DIAGNOSIS; FEMALE; GENETIC SCREENING; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HUMAN; INFANT; MALE; PUBLICATION; REIMBURSEMENT; WHOLE EXOME SEQUENCING; COHORT ANALYSIS; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DIAGNOSTIC TEST; EARLY DIAGNOSIS; ECONOMICS; GENETIC DISORDER; GENETICS; NEWBORN; PRESCHOOL CHILD; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; WHOLE GENOME SEQUENCING;

CHILD, PRESCHOOL; COHORT STUDIES; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DIAGNOSTIC TESTS, ROUTINE; EARLY DIAGNOSIS; FEMALE; GENETIC DISEASES, INBORN; HUMANS; INFANT; INFANT, NEWBORN; INSURANCE, HEALTH, REIMBURSEMENT; MALE; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; WHOLE GENOME SEQUENCING;

EID: 85026835361     PISSN: 10983600     EISSN: 15300366     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/gim.2016.221     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Manolio TA, Abramowicz M, Al-Mulla F, et al. Global implementation of genomic medicine: We are not alone. Sci Transl Med 2015;7:290ps13.
2. Sawyer SL, Hartley T, Dyment DA, et al.; FORGE Canada Consortium; Care4Rare Canada Consortium. Utility of whole-exome sequencing for those near the end of the diagnostic odyssey: time to address gaps in care. Clin Genet 2016;89:275-284.
3. Lee H, Deignan JL, Dorrani N, et al. Clinical exome sequencing for genetic identification of rare Mendelian disorders. JAMA 2014;312:1880-1887.
4. Yang Y, Muzny DM, Reid JG, et al. Clinical whole-exome sequencing for the diagnosis of mendelian disorders. N Engl J Med 2013;369:1502-1511.
5. Yang Y, Muzny DM, Xia F, et al. Molecular findings among patients referred for clinical whole-exome sequencing. JAMA 2014;312:1870-1879.
6. Farwell KD, Shahmirzadi L, El-Khechen D, et al. Enhanced utility of familycentered diagnostic exome sequencing with inheritance model-based analysis: results from 500 unselected families with undiagnosed genetic conditions. Genet Med 2015;17:578-586.
7. Soden SE, Saunders CJ, Willig LK, et al. Effectiveness of exome and genome sequencing guided by acuity of illness for diagnosis of neurodevelopmental disorders. Sci Transl Med 2014;6:265ra168.
8. Monroe GR, Frederix GW, Savelberg SM, et al. Effectiveness of whole-exome sequencing and costs of the traditional diagnostic trajectory in children with intellectual disability. Genet Med 2016;18:949-956.
9. Stark Z, Tan TY, Chong B, et al. A prospective evaluation of whole-exome sequencing as a first-tier molecular test in infants with suspected monogenic disorders. Genet Med 2016;18:1090-1096.
10. Chapko MK, Liu CF, Perkins M, Li YF, Fortney JC, Maciejewski ML. Equivalence of two healthcare costing methods: bottom-up and top-down. Health Econ 2009;18:1188-1201.
11. Mercier G, Naro G. Costing hospital surgery services: the method matters. PLoS One 2014;9:e97290.
12. Vallejo-Torres L, Morris S, Kinge JM, Poirier V, Verne J. Measuring current and future cost of skin cancer in England. J Public Health (Oxf) 2014;36:140-148.
13. Gertler PJ, Martinez S, Premand P, Rawlings LB, Vermeersch CM. Impact evaluation in practice. World Bank Publications; 2011. https://siteresources. worldbank.org/EXTHDOFFICE/Resources/5485726-1295455628620/Impact- Evaluation-in-Practice.pdf.
14. Khandker SR, Koolwal GB, Samad HA. Handbook on Impact Evaluation: Quantitative Methods and Practices. World Bank Publications, 2010. https:// openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/2693.
15. World Health Organization. WHO Guide to Identifying the Economic Consequences of Disease and Injury. 2009.
16. Sadedin SP, Dashnow H, James PA, et al.; Melbourne Genomics Health Alliance. Cpipe: a shared variant detection pipeline designed for diagnostic settings. Genome Med 2015;7:68.
17. Briggs AH, Wonderling DE, Mooney CZ. Pulling cost-effectiveness analysis up by its bootstraps: a non-parametric approach to confidence interval estimation. Health Econ 1997;6:327-340.
18. Wright CF, Fitzgerald TW, Jones WD, et al.; DDD study. Genetic diagnosis of developmental disorders in the DDD study: a scalable analysis of genome-wide research data. Lancet 2015;385:1305-1314.
19. Yang W, Lee PP, Thong MK, et al. Compound heterozygous mutations in TTC7A cause familial multiple intestinal atresias and severe combined immunodeficiency. Clin Genet 2015;88:542-549.
20. Saunders CJ, Miller NA, Soden SE, et al. Rapid whole-genome sequencing for genetic disease diagnosis in neonatal intensive care units. Sci Transl Med 2012;4:154ra135.
21. Willig LK, Petrikin JE, Smith LD, et al. Whole-genome sequencing for identification of Mendelian disorders in critically ill infants: a retrospective analysis of diagnostic and clinical findings. Lancet Respir Med 2015;3:377-387.
22. Daoud H, Luco SM, Li R, et al. Next-generation sequencing for diagnosis of rare diseases in the neonatal intensive care unit. CMAJ 2016;188:E254-E260.