Abstract
AbstractNovel developments in genomic medicine may reduce the length of the diagnostic odyssey for patients with rare diseases. Health providers must thus decide whether to offer genome sequencing for the diagnosis of rare conditions in a routine clinical setting. We estimated the costs of singleton standard genetic testing and trio-based whole genome sequencing (WGS), in the context of the Scottish Genomes Partnership (SGP) study. We also explored what users value about genomic sequencing. Insights from the costing and value assessments will inform a subsequent economic evaluation of genomic medicine in Scotland. An average cost of £1,841 per singleton was estimated for the standard genetic testing pathway, with significant variability between phenotypes. WGS cost £6625 per family trio, but this estimate reflects the use of WGS during the SGP project and large cost savings may be realised if sequencing was scaled up. Patients and families valued (i) the chance of receiving a diagnosis (and the peace of mind and closure that brings); (ii) the information provided by WGS (including implications for family planning and secondary findings); and (iii) contributions to future research. Our costings will be updated to address limitations of the current study for incorporation in budget impact modelling and cost-effectiveness analysis (cost per diagnostic yield). Our insights into the benefits of WGS will guide the development of a discrete choice experiment valuation study. This will inform a user-perspective cost–benefit analysis of genome-wide sequencing, accounting for the broader non-health outcomes. Taken together, our research will inform the long-term strategic development of NHS Scotland clinical genetics testing services, and will be of benefit to others seeking to undertake similar evaluations in different contexts.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Genetics(clinical),Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,Epidemiology
Reference56 articles.
1. Bennette C, Trinidad S, Fullerton S, Patrick D, Amendola L, Burke W, Hisama F, Jarvik G, Regier D, Veenstra D (2013) Return of Incidental Findings in Genomic Medicine: measuring what patients value – development of an instrument to measure preferences for information from next-generations testing (IMPRINT). Genet Med 15(11) https://doi.org/10.1038/gim.2013.63
2. Boycott K, Vanstone M, Bulman D, MacKenzie A (2013) Rare-disease genetics in the era of next-generation sequencing: discovery to translation. Nature 14. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg3555
3. Braun V, Clarke V (2014) What can “thematic analysis” offer health and wellbeing researchers? Int J Qual Stud Health Well-Being 9:26152. https://doi.org/10.3402/qhw.v9.26152
4. Buchanan J, Wordsworth S, Schuh A (2016) Patients’ preferences for genomic diagnostic testing in chronic lymphocytic leukaemia: a discrete choice experiment. Patient 9:525–536
5. Buchanan J, Gavan S, Ryan M, Thompson A, Wordsworth S (2021) Moving exome and genome sequencing into clinical practice in England and Scotland: is the current health economics evidence base sufficient. Journal of Community Genetics: Special Issue on Resource Allocation in Genomic Medicine
Cited by
6 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献