It has been suggested that health economists need to improve their methods in order to meet the challenges of evaluating genomic/genetic tests. In this article, we set out twelve challenges identified from a rapid review of the literature and suggest solutions to the challenges identified. Two challenges were common to all economic evaluations: choice of perspective and time-horizon. Five challenges were relevant for all diagnostic technologies: complexity of analysis; range of costs; under-developed evidence base; behavioral aspects; and choice of outcome metrics. The final five challenges were pertinent for genomic tests and only these may require methodological development: heterogeneity of tests and platforms, increasing stratification, capturing personal utility; incidental findings; and spillover effects. Current methods of economic evaluation are generally able to cope with genomic/genetic tests, although a renewed focus on specific decision-makers’ needs and a willingness to move away from cost-utility analysis may be required. Certain analysts may be constrained by reference cases developed primarily for the assessment of pharmaceuticals. The combined impact of multiple challenges may require analysts to be particularly careful in setting the scope of their analysis in order to ensure that feasibility is balanced with usefulness to the decision maker. A key issue is the under-developed evidence-base and it may be necessary to rethink translation processes to ensure sufficient, relevant evidence is available to support economic evaluation and adoption of genomic/genetic tests.
IntroductionIt has been suggested that health economists need to adapt their methods in order to meet the challenges of evaluating molecular diagnostics. The aim of this review is to categorize and critically examine the challenges and methodological developments identified from the literature and to suggest how such challenges may be addressed.MethodsWe identified challenges and suggested methodological improvements using a systematic rapid review of the literature. We categorized challenges into those common to all economic evaluations, those common to all diagnostic technologies and those relevant to molecular diagnostics. We assessed whether development in the methods of economic evaluation or alternative action was required.ResultsWe found forty-one papers which identified twelve challenges. Choice of perspective and time-horizon were challenges common to all economic evaluations. Five challenges were relevant for all diagnostic technologies: complexity of analysis; range of costs; under-developed evidence base; behavioral aspects; and choice of outcome metrics. The final five challenges were specific to molecular diagnostics: heterogeneity of tests and platforms; increasing stratification; capturing personal utility; incidental findings and spill-over effects. The final five challenges may require methodological development. For example, although methods exist to capture the value of a diagnostic test over and above any health gain captured in a quality adjusted life year (‘personal utility’), there is currently no agreed method of incorporating this into a cost-utility analysis. For the other challenges development of evaluation processes is key. In particular, the weak evidence base for diagnostic technologies may require processes to evolve.ConclusionsCurrent methods of economic evaluation are generally able to cope with molecular diagnostics although a renewed focus on specific decision-makers’ needs and a willingness to move away from cost-utility analysis may be required. A key issue is the under-developed evidence-base and it may be necessary to rethink translation processes to ensure sufficient, relevant evidence is available to support economic evaluation and adoption of molecular diagnostics.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.