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.     

Patient navigation across the cancer care continuum: An overview of systematic reviews and emerging literature

Patient navigation is a strategy for overcoming barriers to reduce disparities and to improve access and outcomes. The aim of this umbrella review was to identify, critically appraise, synthesize, and present the best available evidence to inform policy and planning regarding patient navigation across the cancer continuum. Systematic reviews examining navigation in cancer care were identified in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed, Embase, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health (CINAHL), Epistemonikos, and Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) databases and in the gray literature from January 1, 2012, to April 19, 2022. Data were screened, extracted, and appraised independently by two authors. The JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Systematic Review and Research Syntheses was used for quality appraisal. Emerging literature up to May 25, 2022, was also explored to capture primary research published beyond the coverage of included systematic reviews. Of the 2062 unique records identified, 61 systematic reviews were included. Fifty-four reviews were quantitative or mixed-methods reviews, reporting on the effectiveness of cancer patient navigation, including 12 reviews reporting costs or cost-effectiveness outcomes. Seven qualitative reviews explored navigation needs, barriers, and experiences. In addition, 53 primary studies published since 2021 were included. Patient navigation is effective in improving participation in cancer screening and reducing the time from screening to diagnosis and from diagnosis to treatment initiation. Emerging evidence suggests that patient navigation improves quality of life and patient satisfaction with care in the survivorship phase and reduces hospital readmission in the active treatment and survivorship care phases. Palliative care data were extremely limited. Economic evaluations from the United States suggest the potential cost-effectiveness of navigation in screening programs.     

Cribado de cáncer de pulmón: Supervivencia en un amplio programa de detección precoz en España (I-ELCAP)

IntroductionLung cancer (LC) is usually diagnosed at advanced stages with only a 12% 5-year survival. Trials as NLST and NELSON show a mortality decrease, which justifies implementation of lung cancer screening in risk population. Our objective was to show survival results of the largest LC screening program in Spain with low dosage computed tomography (LDCT).MethodsClinical records from International Early Lung Cancer Detection Program (IELCAP) at Valencia, Spain were analysed. This program recruited volunteers, ever-smokers aged 40-80 years, since 2008. Results are compared to those from other similar sizeable programs.ResultsA total of 8278 participants were screened with at least two-rounds until November 2020. A mean of 6 annual screening rounds were performed. We detected 239 tumours along 12-year follow-up. Adenocarcinoma was the most common histology, being 61.3% at stage I. The lung cancer prevalence and incidence proportion was 1.5% and 1.4%, respectively with an annual detection rate of 0.17. One-year survival and 10-year survival were 90% and 80.1%, respectively. Adherence was 96.84%.ConclusionLargest lung cancer screening in Spain shows that survival is improved when is performed in multidisciplinary team experienced in management of LC, and is comparable to similar screening programs.     

死亡结构域相关蛋白及其在宫颈病变中的研究进展

宫颈癌对妇女健康构成严重威胁,人乳头瘤病毒感染与宫颈病变及宫颈癌的发生密切相关。关于宫颈癌发生发展的机制仍在研究中。近年研究发现一种多功能核蛋白,即死亡结构域相关蛋白(death domain associated protein,Daxx),其与细胞内蛋白或病毒蛋白相互作用,参与调节细胞凋亡、转录调控、抗病毒等细胞活动,在不同途径中发挥不同的生理或病理作用。通过对Daxx功能及其作用机制的研究有助于进一步阐明宫颈癌发生发展的机制,有助于发现新的预防和治疗方法。综述Daxx的一般特性和研究现况及其在宫颈病变的研究进展。     

Cardiovascular risk assessment tools: A scoping review

ObjectivesThe objective of this review was to describe cardiovascular risk (CVR) assessment methods and to identify evidence-based practice recommendations when dealing with population at risk of developing cardiovascular diseases.Review methods and data sourcesA literature review following the Arksey and O'Malley scoping review methodology was conducted. By using appropriate key terms, literature searches were conducted in PubMed, SciELO, Cochrane Library, Dialnet, ENFISPO, Medigraphic, ScienceDirect, Cuiden, and Lilacs databases. A complementary search on websites related to the area of interest was conducted. Articles published in English or Spanish in peer-review journals between 2010 and 2017. Critical appraisal for methodological quality was conducted. Data was extracted using ad-hoc tables and qualitatively synthesized.ResultsAfter eliminating duplicates, 55 325 records remained, and 1432 records were selected for screening. Out of these, 88 full-text articles were selected for eligibility criteria, and finally, 67 studies were selected for this review, and 25 studies were selected for evidence synthesis. In total, 23 CVR assessment tools have been identified, pioneered by the Framingham study. Qualitative findings were grouped into four thematic areas: assessment tools and scores, CVR indicators, comparative models, and evidence-based recommendations.ConclusionsIt is necessary to adapt the instruments to the epidemiological reality of the population. The most appropriate way to estimate CVR is to choose the assessment tool that best suits individual conditions, accompanied by a comprehensive assessment of the patient. More research is required to determine a single, adequate, and reliable tool.     

Improving State-Mandated Breast Density Notifications

PurposeEffective written communication directly affects health care outcomes. Since 2016, the complex language of state-mandated breast density notifications (BDNs) has been challenged, because it is perceived to be beyond the comprehension of most patients. The aim of this study was to assess whether a revised BDN written at a lower reading grade level improves understanding compared with the current state-mandated BDN.MethodsA revised notification with similar content to the current state-mandated BDN was developed. Both notifications were presented to patients for direct comparison, using a paper survey asking questions that evaluated patients’ perceptions and convictions associated with breast density. Surveys were distributed at four outpatient imaging centers to screening mammography patients.ResultsThe current BDN’s mean readability metric was 13.4, and that of the revised BDN was 6.6. Five hundred surveys were analyzed. Survey data demonstrated that 56.6% of all women perceived that dense breast tissue results indicated a “high” associated lifetime breast cancer risk from the current state-mandated BDN compared with only 2.2% with the revised notification (P < .001). Nearly all women were more likely to initiate discussions with their providers regarding their breast tissue density after reading the revised notification (96.0%) as opposed to the current state-mandated BDN (32.8%; P < .001).ConclusionsA significant portion of women misinterpret the intended messages of the current state-mandated BDN. Thus, a revised notification at a lower reading grade level may improve understanding of breast density, leading to improved individualized breast cancer screening for women with dense breasts.