Preimplantation Genetic Testing for Sickle Cell Disease: a Cost-effectiveness Analysis

Overview

Journal F S Rep

Specialty Reproductive Medicine

Date 2023 Sep 18

PMID 37719105

Authors

Joshua C Combs

Maura Dougherty

Meghan U Yamasaki

Alan H DeCherney

Kate M Devine

Micah J Hill

Erin Rothwell

Jeanne E OBrien

Richard E Nelson

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of in vitro fertilization with preimplantation genetic testing for monogenic disease (IVF + PGT-M) in the conception of a nonsickle cell disease (non-SCD) individual compared with standard of care treatment for a naturally conceived, sickle cell disease (SCD)-affected individual.

Design: A Markov simulation model was constructed to evaluate a one-time IVF + PGT-M treatment compared with the lifetime standard of care costs of treatment for an individual potentially born with SCD. Using an annual discount rate of 3% for cost and outcome measures, quality-adjusted life years were constructed from utility weights and life expectancy values and then used as the effectiveness measurement. An incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was calculated for both treatment arms, and a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000 per quality-adjusted life year was assumed.

Setting: Tertiary care or university medical center.

Patients: A hypothetical cohort of 10,000 patients was analzyed over a lifetime horizon using yearly cycles.

Interventions: In vitro fertilization with preimplantation genetic testing for monogenic disease use in conception of a non-SCD individual.

Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcomes of interest were the incremental cost and effectiveness of an IVF+PGT-M conception compared with the SOC treatment of an SCD-affected individual.

Results: In vitro fertilization with preimplantation genetic testing for monogenic disease was the optimal strategy in 93.17% of the iterations. An incremental savings of $137,594 was demonstrated with a gain of 1.96 QALYs and 3.69 life years over a lifetime. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated that SOC treatment never met equivalent cost-effectiveness.

Conclusions: Our model demonstrates that IVF + PGT-M for selection against SCD, compared with lifetime SOC treatment for those affected, is the most cost-effective strategy within the United States healthcare sector.

References

Pirtea P, de Ziegler D, Tao X, Sun L, Zhan Y, Ayoubi J . Rate of true recurrent implantation failure is low: results of three successive frozen euploid single embryo transfers. Fertil Steril. 2020; 115(1):45-53. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2020.07.002. View

. The use of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A): a committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2018; 109(3):429-436. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.01.002. View

Alemayehu B, Warner K . The lifetime distribution of health care costs. Health Serv Res. 2004; 39(3):627-42. PMC: 1361028. DOI: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2004.00248.x. View

. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 78: hemoglobinopathies in pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol. 2007; 109(1):229-37. DOI: 10.1097/00006250-200701000-00055. View

Lipton J, Zargar M, Warner E, Greenblatt E, Lee E, Chan K . Cost effectiveness of in vitro fertilisation and preimplantation genetic testing to prevent transmission of BRCA1/2 mutations. Hum Reprod. 2020; 35(2):434-445. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/dez203. View

Piel F, Steinberg M, Rees D . Sickle Cell Disease. N Engl J Med. 2017; 376(16):1561-1573. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMra1510865. View

Meier E . Treatment Options for Sickle Cell Disease. Pediatr Clin North Am. 2018; 65(3):427-443. DOI: 10.1016/j.pcl.2018.01.005. View

Khorshid A, Boyd A, Behr B, Zhao Q, Alvero R, Bavan B . Cost-effectiveness of IVF with PGT-M/A to prevent transmission of spinal muscular atrophy in offspring of carrier couples. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2023; 40(4):793-801. PMC: 10224878. DOI: 10.1007/s10815-023-02738-7. View

Paulukonis S, Eckman J, Snyder A, Hagar W, Feuchtbaum L, Zhou M . Defining Sickle Cell Disease Mortality Using a Population-Based Surveillance System, 2004 through 2008. Public Health Rep. 2016; 131(2):367-75. PMC: 4765986. DOI: 10.1177/003335491613100221. View

10.

Reig A, Franasiak J, Scott Jr R, Seli E . The impact of age beyond ploidy: outcome data from 8175 euploid single embryo transfers. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2020; 37(3):595-602. PMC: 7125286. DOI: 10.1007/s10815-020-01739-0. View

11.

Pinto V, Balocco M, Quintino S, Forni G . Sickle cell disease: a review for the internist. Intern Emerg Med. 2019; 14(7):1051-1064. DOI: 10.1007/s11739-019-02160-x. View

12.

Katz P, Showstack J, Smith J, Nachtigall R, Millstein S, Wing H . Costs of infertility treatment: results from an 18-month prospective cohort study. Fertil Steril. 2010; 95(3):915-21. PMC: 3043157. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.11.026. View

13.

Attia M, Kripalani S, Darbari I, Nickel R . Parents of Children with Sickle Cell Disease Are Interested in Preimplantation Genetic Testing. J Pediatr. 2020; 223:178-182.e2. DOI: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2020.04.027. View

14.

De Rycke M, Berckmoes V . Preimplantation Genetic Testing for Monogenic Disorders. Genes (Basel). 2020; 11(8). PMC: 7463885. DOI: 10.3390/genes11080871. View

15.

Rees D, Williams T, Gladwin M . Sickle-cell disease. Lancet. 2010; 376(9757):2018-31. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)61029-X. View

16.

Wu A, Odisho A, Washington 3rd S, Katz P, Smith J . Out-of-pocket fertility patient expense: data from a multicenter prospective infertility cohort. J Urol. 2013; 191(2):427-32. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2013.08.083. View

17.

Antero M, Singh B, Pradhan A, Gornet M, Kearns W, Baker V . Cost-effectiveness of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy for fresh donor oocyte cycles. F S Rep. 2021; 2(1):36-42. PMC: 8244284. DOI: 10.1016/j.xfre.2020.11.005. View

18.

Gregg A, Aarabi M, Klugman S, Leach N, Bashford M, Goldwaser T . Screening for autosomal recessive and X-linked conditions during pregnancy and preconception: a practice resource of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG). Genet Med. 2021; 23(10):1793-1806. PMC: 8488021. DOI: 10.1038/s41436-021-01203-z. View

19.

Neal S, Morin S, Franasiak J, Goodman L, Juneau C, Forman E . Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy is cost-effective, shortens treatment time, and reduces the risk of failed embryo transfer and clinical miscarriage. Fertil Steril. 2018; 110(5):896-904. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.06.021. View

20.

Stocker E, Johal S, Rippel L, Darrah R . Frequency of embryos appropriate for transfer following preimplantation genetic testing for monogenic disease. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2022; 39(9):2043-2050. PMC: 9474744. DOI: 10.1007/s10815-022-02571-4. View