Developing a framework to assess the cost-effectiveness of COMPARE -A global platform for the exchange of sequence-based pathogen data

OIE Revue Scientifique et Technique

Volumn 36, Issue 1, 2017, Pages 311-322

  Alleweldt, F ^a   Kara, S ^a   Osinski, A ^a   Van Baalk, P ^b   Kellerborg, K ^b   Aarestrup, F M ^c   Koopmans, M ^d  

^a Civic Consulting   (Germany)

^b ERASMUS UNIVERSITY ROTTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^c TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF DENMARK   (Denmark)

^d ERASMUS MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

COMPARE; Cost benefit; Cost effectiveness; Detection; Genomic information; Next generation sequencing; Pathogen; Surveillance

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ECONOMICS; GENOMICS; GLOBAL HEALTH; HUMAN; STANDARDS; TIME FACTOR; WHOLE GENOME SEQUENCING;

ANIMALS; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; GENOMICS; GLOBAL HEALTH; HUMANS; TIME FACTORS; WHOLE GENOME SEQUENCING;

EID: 85027496996     PISSN: 02531933     EISSN: 16080645     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.20506/rst.36.1.2631     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Goldberg B., Sichtig H., Geyer C., Ledeboer N. & Weinstock G.M. (2015). - Making the leap from research laboratory to clinic: challenges and opportunities for next- generation sequencing in infectious disease diagnostics. mBio, 6(6), 1-10. doi:10.1128/mBio.01888-15.
2. Woolhouse M.E.J., Rambaut A. & Kellam P. (2015). - Lessons from Ebola: improving infectious disease surveillance to inform outbreak management. Sci. Transl. Med.., 7 (307), 1-8. doi:10.1126/scitranslmed.aabO191.
3. Collaborative Management Platform for detection and Analyses of (Re-) emerging and foodborne outbreaks in Europe (COMPARE) (2014). - Project proposal. COMPARE, Copenhagen. Available at: http://cordis.europa.eu/project/rcn/194068-en.html (accessed on 10 April 2017).
4. Koser C., Holden M., Ellington M., Cartwright E., Brown N., Ogilvy-Stuart A., Hsu L., Chewapreecha C., Croucher N., Harris S., Sanders M., Enright M., Dougan G., Bentley S., Parkhill J., Fraser L., Betley J., Schulz-Trieglaff O., Smith G. & Peacock S. (2012). - Rapid whole-genome sequencing for investigation of a neonatal MRSA outbreak. N. Engl. J. Med., 366 (24), 2267-2275. doi:10.1056/NEJMoall09910.
5. Joensen K., Scheutz E, Lund O., Hasman H., Kaas R., Nielsen E. & Aarestrup F. (2014). - Real-Time whole-genome sequencing for routine typing, surveillance, and outbreak detection of verotoxigenic Escherichia coli. ]. Gin. Microbiol, 52 (5), 1501-1510. doi:10.1128/JCM.03617-13.
6. Harris S., Cartwright E., Teck M., Holden M., Brown N., Ogilvy-Stuart A., Ellington M., Quail M., Bentley S., Parkhill J. & Peacock S. (2013). - Whole-genome sequencing for analysis of an outbreak of meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: A descriptive study. Lancet Infect. Dis., 13 (2), 130-136. doi:10.1016/S1473-3099(12)70268-2.
7. Hendriksen R., Price L., Schupp J., Gillece J., Kaas R., Engelthaler D., Bortolaia V, Pearson T., Waters A., Upadhyay B., Shrestha S., Adhikari S., Shakya G., Keim P. & Aarestrup F. (2011). - Population genetics of Vibrio cholerae from Nepal in 2010: Evidence on the origin of the Haitian outbreak. MBio, 2 (4), 1-6. doi:10.1128/mBio.00157-ll.
8. Zankari E., HasmanH., KaasR., SeyfarthA., AgeraztY., Lund O., Larsen M. & Aarestrup F. (2013). - Genotyping using whole- genome sequencing is a realistic alternative to surveillance based on phenotypic antimicrobial susceptibility testing. J. Antimicrob. Chemother., 68 (4), 771-777. doi:10.1093/jac/dks496.
9. Eyre D., Golubchik T., Gordon N., Bowden R., Piazza P, Batty E., Ip C., Wilson D., Didelot X., O'Connor L., Lay R., Buck D., Kearns A., Shaw A., Paul J., Wilcox M., Donnelly R, Peto T., Walker A. & Crook D. (2012). -A pilot study of rapid benchtop sequencing of Staphylococcus aureus and Clostridium difficile for outbreak detection and surveillance. Br. Med. J. Open, 2 (3), 1-10. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2012-001124.
10. Christensen K, Dukhovny D., Siebert U. & Green R. (2015). -Assessing the costs and cost-effectiveness of genomic sequencing. J. Personal. Med., 5 (4), 470-486. doi:10.3390/jpm5040470.
11. Global Initiative on Sharing All Influenza Data (GISAID) (2017). - Freunde von GISAID, Munich. Available at: http://platform.gisaid.org'epi3/frontend#3fcl6c (accessed on 15 May 2016).
12. Joint World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE)/Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) Worldwide Scientific Network for the Control of Avian Influenza (OFFLU) (2016). - OFFLU guidance on animal influenza sequence databases and links to influenza sequence databases. OIE, Paris & FAO, Rome. Availableat:www.offlu.net/index.php?id=113(accessed on 7 September 2016).
13. Collaborative Management Platform for Detection and Analyses of (Re-) Emerging and Foodborne Outbreaks in Europe (COMPARE) (2016). - Update year 1. COMPARE, Copenhagen. Available at: Www.compare-europe.eu/Library/Project-Documents (accessed on 15 June 2016).
14. Marsh T.L., Pendell D., Knippenberg R. (2017). -Animal health economics: An aid to decision-making on animal health interventions - case studies in the United States of America. In The economics of animal health 0- Rushton, ed.). Rev. Sci. Tech. Off. Int. Epiz., 36 (1), 137-145. doi:10.20506/rst.36.1.2617.
15. Babo Martins S. & Rushton J. (2014). - Cost-effectiveness analysis -Adding value to assessment of animal health, welfare and production. Rev. Sci. Tech. Off. Int. Epiz., 33 (3), 681-689. doi:10.20506/rst.33.3.2312.
16. Tan-Torres Edejer T., Baltussen R., Adam T., Hutubessy R., Acharya A., Evans D.B. & Murray C.J.L. (2003). - Making choices in health: WHO guide to cost-effectiveness analysis. World Health Organization (WHO), Geneva. Available at: Www.who.int/iris/handle/10665/42699 (accessed on 10 April 2017).
17. Gittinger J.P (1982). - Economic analysis of agricultural projects, 2nd Ed. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Maryland.
18. Drummond M.F., Sculpher J., Torrance G.W, O'Brien B.J. & Stoddart G.L. (2005). - Methods for the evaluation of health care programs, 3rd Ed. Oxford University Press, New York.
19. Hutubessy R.C.W, Bendib L.M. & Evans D.B. (2001). - Critical issues in the economic evaluation of interventions against communicable diseases. Acta Trop., 78 (3), 191-206. doi:10.1016/S0001-706X(00)00176-5.
20. Petitti D.B. (2000). - Meta-Analysis, decision-Analysis, and cost-effectiveness analysis - methods for quantitative synthesis in medicine, 2nd Ed. Oxford University Press, New York.
21. Her Majesty's Treasury (2015). -The Green Book: Appraisal and evaluation in central government (last updated on 20 October 2015). HM Treasury, London.
22. Anker M. & World Health Organization (WHO) (2005). - Evaluating the costs and benefits of national surveillance and response systems: methodologies and options. WHO, Lyon, France, 48 pp. Available at: Www.who.int/iris/handle/10665/69335(accessed on 10 April 2017).
23. Cellini S. & Kee J. (2010). - Cost-effectiveness and cost- benefit analysis. In Handbook of practical program evaluation 0- Wholey, H. Hatry & K. Newcomer, eds). Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 493-530.
24. European Commission (EC) (2015). - Better regulation toolbox. EC, Brussels. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/smart-regulation/guidelines/toc-Tool-en.htm (accessed on 15 June 2016).
25. Levin H.M. (1995). - Cost-effectiveness analysis. In International encyclopedia of economics of education, 2nd Ed. (M. Carnoy, ed.). Pergamon Press, Oxford, 381-386. Available at: Www.c31.uni-oldenburg.de/cde/econ/readings/levin95.pdf (accessed on 1 June 2016).
26. Buchanan J., Wordsworth S. & Schuh A. (2013). - Issues surrounding the health economic evaluation of genomic technologies. Pharmacogenomics, 14 (15), 1833-1847. doi:10.2217/pgs, 13.183.
27. Hasler B, Howe K.S., Hauser R. & Stark K.D.C. (2012). -A qualitative approach to measure the effectiveness of active avian influenza virus surveillance with respect to its cost: A case study from Switzerland. Prev. Vet. Med., 105 (3), 209-222. doi:10.1016/j.prevetmed.2011.12.010.
28. Somda Z.C., Perry H.N., Messonnier N.R., Djingarey M.H., Ki S.Q. & Meltzer M.I. (2010). -Modeling the cost-effectiveness of the integrated disease surveillance and response (IDSR) system: meningitis in Burkina Faso. PLoS ONE, 5 (9), e 13044. doi:10.1371/joumal.pone.0013044.
29. Harris J.R., Marston B.J., Sangrujee N., DuPlessis D. & Park B. (2011). - Cost-effectiveness analysis of diagnostic options for Pneumocystis pneumonia (PCP). PLoS ONE, 6 (8), e23158. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0023158.
30. Scharff R.L., Besser J., Sharp D.J., Jones T.F., Peter G.S. & Hedberg C.W (2015). -An economic evaluation of PulseNet: A network for foodborne disease surveillance. Am. J. Prev. Med., 50 (5, Suppl. 1), S66-S73. doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2015.09.018.
31. Civic Consulting (2016). - Study on cost-benefit analysis of reference laboratories for human pathogens: draft final report. European Commission, Brussels, 272 pp. doi:10.2818/788468.
32. Elbasha E., Fitzsimmons T. & Meltzer M. (2000). - Costs and benefits of a subtype-specific surveillance system for identifying Escherichia coli 0157:H7 outbreaks. Emerg. Infect. Dis., 6 (3), 293-297. doi:10.3201/eid0603.000310.
33. Moran D. & Fofana A. (2007). -An economic evaluation of the control of three notifiable fish diseases in the United Kingdom. Prev. Vet. Med., 80 (2-3), 193-208. doi:10.1016/j.prevetmed.2007.02.009.
34. Gold M Stevenson D. & Fryback D. (2002). - HALYS and QALYS and DALYS, Oh My: Similarities and differences in summary measures of population health. Annu. Rev. Public Hlth, 23, 115-134. doi:10.1146/annurev.publhealth.23.100901.140513.
35. Rushton J., Upton M. (2006). - Investment in preventing and preparing for biological emergencies and disasters: social and economic costs of disasters versus costs of surveillance and response preparedness. In Biological disasters of animal origin. The role and preparedness of veterinary and public health services (M. Hugh-Jones, ed.). Rev. Sci. Tech. Off. Int. Epiz., 25 (1), 375-388. doi:10.20506/rst.25.1.1671.
36. Pratt J., Raiffa H. & Schlaifer R. (1995). - Statistical decision theory. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
37. Claxton K. (1999). -The irrelevance of inference: A decisionmaking approach to the stochastic evaluation of health care technologies. J. Hlth Econ., 18 (3), 341-364. doi:10.1016/sO167-6296(98)00039-3.
38. Yokota E, Thompson K. (2004). - Value of information analysis in environmental health risk management decisions: past, present, and future. Risk Anal., 24 (3), 635-650. doi: 10.1111/j.0272-4332.2004.00464.x.