Abstract

A financial analysis is carried out to assess costs and benefits of providing cell-free DNA screening in Finland, using different strategies. Three cell-free DNA screening strategies are considered: Primary, all women; Secondary, those with positive Combined test; and Contingent, the 10-30% with the highest Combined test risks. Three costs are estimated: additional cost for 10,000 pregnancies compared with the Combined test; 'marginal' cost of avoiding a Down syndrome birth which occurs in a pregnancy that would have been false-negative using the Combined test; and marginal cost of preventing the iatrogenic loss of a non-Down syndrome birth which occurs in a pregnancy that would have been false-positive. Primary cell-free DNA will require additional funds of €250,000. The marginal cost per Down syndrome birth avoided is considerably less than the lifetime medical and indirect cost; the marginal cost per unaffected iatrogenic fetal loss prevented is higher than one benefit measure but lower than another. If the ultrasound component of the Combined test is retained, as would be in Finland, the additional funds required rise to €992,000. Secondary cell-free DNA is cost-saving as is a Contingent strategy with 10% selected but whilst when 20-30% costs rise they aremuch less than for the Primary strategy and are cost-beneficial. When considering the place of cell-free DNA screening it is important to make explicit the additional and marginal costs of different screening strategies and the associated benefits. Under most assumptions the balance is favorable for Contingent screening.

Highlights

  • A single maternal plasma marker of Down syndrome (‘Trisomy 21’), cell-freeDNA, has considerably better screening performance than all conventional multi-marker screening tests

  • Three costs are estimated: additional cost for 10,000 pregnancies compared with the Combined test; ‘marginal’ cost of avoiding a Down syndrome birth which occurs in a pregnancy that would have been false-negative using the Combined test; and marginal cost of preventing the iatrogenic loss of a non-Down syndrome birth which occurs in a pregnancy that would have been falsepositive

  • The marginal cost per Down syndrome birth avoided is considerably less than the lifetime medical and indirect cost; the marginal cost per unaffected iatrogenic fetal loss prevented is higher than one benefit measure but lower than another

Read more

Summary

Introduction

A single maternal plasma marker of Down syndrome (‘Trisomy 21’), cell-free (cf)DNA, has considerably better screening performance than all conventional multi-marker screening tests. It has a detection rate above 99% and a falsepositive rate below 0.2% [1]. In Finland all women are offered free of charge a Combined test for Down syndrome and Edwards syndrome (‘Trisomy 18’), including measurement of NT and fetal anatomical assessment. Women with a singleton pregnancy and either a positive Combined test (Down syndrome risk 1 in 10–250, Edwards syndrome risk ≥1 in 150) or an NT measurement in the range 3.0–3.4 mm could choose between cfDNA for Down syndrome, Edwards syndrome, Patau syndrome (‘Trisomy 13’) and fetal gender or an invasive

Objectives
Methods
Findings
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