Abstract

Background and ObjectivePrecision (stratified or personalised) medicine is underpinned by the premise that it is feasible to identify known heterogeneity using a specific test or algorithm in patient populations and to use this information to guide patient care to improve health and well-being. This study aimed to understand if, and how, previous economic evaluations of precision medicine had taken account of the impact of capacity constraints.MethodsA meta-review was conducted of published systematic reviews of economic evaluations of precision medicine (test–treat interventions) and individual studies included in these reviews. Due to the volume of studies identified, a sample of papers published from 2007 to 2015 was collated. A narrative analysis identified whether potential capacity constraints were discussed qualitatively in the studies and, if relevant, which quantitative methods were used to account for capacity constraints.ResultsA total of 45 systematic reviews of economic evaluations of precision medicine were identified, from which 222 studies focusing on test–treat interventions, published between 2007 and 2015, were extracted. Of these studies, 33 (15%) qualitatively discussed the potential impact of capacity constraints, including budget constraints; quality of tests and the testing process; ease of use of tests in clinical practice; and decision uncertainty. Quantitative methods (nine studies) to account for capacity constraints included static methods such as capturing inefficiencies in trials or models and sensitivity analysis around model parameters; and dynamic methods, which allow the impact of capacity constraints on cost effectiveness to change over time.ConclusionsUnderstanding the cost effectiveness of precision medicine is necessary, but not sufficient, evidence for its successful implementation. There are currently few examples of evaluations that have quantified the impact of capacity constraints, which suggests an area of focus for future research.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1007/s40273-019-00801-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Highlights

  • Precision medicine is underpinned by the premise that it is feasible to identify known heterogeneity using a specific test or algorithm in patient populations to guide patient care to improve health and well-being [1]

  • Three reviews were subsequently excluded from data extraction because they did not report the citations for the individual studies included in their review, and one study was removed as on closer inspection it became clear it was not a systematic review of economic evaluations

  • While this review has focused on the impact of capacity constraints for the economic evaluation of precision medicine, such constraints in the healthcare system may have a significant impact on the cost effectiveness of interventions in other medical areas

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Precision (stratified or personalised) medicine is underpinned by the premise that it is feasible to identify known heterogeneity using a specific test or algorithm in patient populations to guide patient care to improve health and well-being [1]. Precision (stratified or personalised) medicine is underpinned by the premise that it is feasible to identify known heterogeneity using a specific test or algorithm in patient populations and to use this information to guide patient care to improve health and well-being. Results A total of 45 systematic reviews of economic evaluations of precision medicine were identified, from which 222 studies focusing on test–treat interventions, published between 2007 and 2015, were extracted. Of these studies, 33 (15%) qualitatively discussed the potential impact of capacity constraints, including budget constraints; quality of tests and the testing process; ease of use of tests in clinical practice; and decision uncertainty. There are currently few examples of evaluations that have quantified the impact of capacity constraints, which suggests an area of focus for future research

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call