A systematic review of the methodological quality of economic evaluations in genetic screening and testing for monogenic disorders

PurposeUnderstanding the value of genetic screening and testing for monogenic disorders requires high-quality, methodologically robust economic evaluations. This systematic review sought to assess the methodological quality among such studies and examined opportunities for improvement.MethodsWe searched PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and Web of Science for economic evaluations of genetic screening/testing (2013-2019). Methodological rigor and adherence to best practices were systematically assessed using the British Medical Journal checklist.ResultsAcross the 47 identified studies, there were substantial variations in modeling approaches, reporting detail, and sophistication. Models ranged from simple decision trees to individual-level microsimulations that compared between 2 and >20 alternative interventions. Many studies failed to report sufficient detail to enable replication or did not justify modeling assumptions, especially for costing methods and utility values. Meta-analyses, systematic reviews, or calibration were rarely used to derive parameter estimates. Nearly all studies conducted some sensitivity analysis, and more sophisticated studies implemented probabilistic sensitivity/uncertainty analysis, threshold analysis, and value of information analysis.ConclusionWe describe a heterogeneous body of work and present recommendations and exemplar studies across the methodological domains of (1) perspective, scope, and parameter selection; (2) use of uncertainty/sensitivity analyses; and (3) reporting transparency for improvement in the economic evaluation of genetic screening/testing.     

An overview of existing mesothelioma registries worldwide,and the need for a US Registry

The association between asbestos exposure, mainly in occupational settings, and malignant mesothelioma has been well established; this has prompted several countries to establish mesothelioma epidemiologic surveillance programs often at the request of national agencies. This review compares currently existing mesothelioma registries worldwide to develop a concept model for a US real-time case capture mesothelioma registry. Five countries were identified with a mesothelioma specific registry, including Italy, France, UK, Australia, and South Korea. All, except the UK, used interviews to collect exposure data. Linkage with the national death index was available or was in future plans for all registries. The registries have limited information on treatment, quality of life, and other patient-centered outcomes such as symptoms and pain management. To thoroughly collect exposure data, “real-time” enrollment is preferable; to maximize the capture of mesothelioma cases, optimal coverage, and a simplified consent process are needed.