ArticleJAMA network open2024
Cost-Effectiveness of Gene-Specific Prevention Strategies for Ovarian and Breast Cancer.
Article in JAMA network open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) of ovarian cancer preventive strategies for women with BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants: the role of surveillance.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2026Article
- Multimorbidity quantification from the perspective of precision management: challenges and strategies.Annals of medicine · 2025Review
- Trends and projections of global gynaecological cancer burden: age-period-cohort insights from Global Burden of Disease 2021.BMC women's health · 2025Article
- Opportunistic salpingectomy for prevention of ovarian cancer among the general population.Current opinion in obstetrics & gynecology · 2025Review
- Estimands for Clinical Effectiveness of Risk-Reducing Early Salpingectomy in Women With High Risk of Ovarian Cancer.JAMA network open · 2025Observational
- Defining Lifetime Risk Thresholds for Breast Cancer Surgical Prevention.JAMA oncology · 2025Article
- Economic evaluation of personalised versus conventional risk assessment for women who have undergone testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer genes: a modelling study.Journal of medical genetics · 2025Article
- Comprehensive analysis of molecular characteristics between primary and breast-derived metastatic ovarian cancer.Translational cancer research · 2025Article
- Role of solute carrier transporters in ovarian cancer (Review).International journal of molecular medicine · 2025Review
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of population-basedFrontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Applying whole-genome and whole-exome sequencing in breast cancer: a review of the landscape.Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan) · 2024Review
- Economic Evaluation of Population-Based BRCA1 and BRCA2 Testing in Canada.JAMA network open · 2024Article
- Online Provision ofCancers · 2024Article
- Utility Scores for Risk-Reducing Mastectomy and Risk-Reducing Salpingo-Oophorectomy: Mapping to EQ-5D.Cancers · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors at 10 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Pathogenic variants (PVs) in BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, RAD51C, RAD51D, and BRIP1 cancer susceptibility genes (CSGs) confer an increased ovarian cancer (OC) risk, with BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, RAD51C, and RAD51D PVs also conferring an elevated breast cancer (BC) risk. Risk-reducing surgery, medical prevention, and BC surveillance offer the opportunity to prevent cancers and deaths, but their cost-effectiveness for individual CSGs remains poorly addressed. Objective: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of prevention strategies for OC and BC among individuals carrying PVs in the previously listed CSGs. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this economic evaluation, a decision-analytic Markov model evaluated the cost-effectiveness of risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) and, where relevant, risk-reducing mastectomy (RRM) compared with nonsurgical interventions (including BC surveillance and medical prevention for increased BC risk) from December 1, 2022, to August 31, 2023. The analysis took a UK payer perspective with a lifetime horizon. The simulated cohort consisted of women aged 30 years who carried BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, RAD51C, RAD51D, or BRIP1 PVs. Appropriate sensitivity and scenario analyses were performed. Exposures: CSG-specific interventions, including RRSO at age 35 to 50 years with or without BC surveillance and medical prevention (ie, tamoxifen or anastrozole) from age 30 or 40 years, RRM at age 30 to 40 years, both RRSO and RRM, BC surveillance and medical prevention, or no intervention. Main Outcomes and Measures: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated as incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. OC and BC cases and deaths were estimated. Results: In the simulated cohort of women aged 30 years with no cancer, undergoing both RRSO and RRM was most cost-effective for individuals carrying BRCA1 (RRM at age 30 years; RRSO at age 35 years), BRCA2 (RRM at age 35 years; RRSO at age 40 years), and PALB2 (RRM at age 40 years; RRSO at age 45 years) PVs. The corresponding ICERs were -£1942/QALY (-$2680/QALY), -£89/QALY (-$123/QALY), and £2381/QALY ($3286/QALY), respectively. RRSO at age 45 years was cost-effective for RAD51C, RAD51D, and BRIP1 PV carriers compared with nonsurgical strategies. The corresponding ICERs were £962/QALY ($1328/QALY), £771/QALY ($1064/QALY), and £2355/QALY ($3250/QALY), respectively. The most cost-effective preventive strategy per 1000 PV carriers could prevent 923 OC and BC cases and 302 deaths among those carrying BRCA1; 686 OC and BC cases and 170 deaths for BRCA2; 464 OC and BC cases and 130 deaths for PALB2; 102 OC cases and 64 deaths for RAD51C; 118 OC cases and 76 deaths for RAD51D; and 55 OC cases and 37 deaths for BRIP1. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated both RRSO and RRM were most cost-effective in 96.5%, 89.2%, and 84.8% of simulations for BRCA1, BRCA2, and PALB2 PVs, respectively, while RRSO was cost-effective in approximately 100% of simulations for RAD51C, RAD51D, and BRIP1 PVs. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cost-effectiveness study, RRSO with or without RRM at varying optimal ages was cost-effective compared with nonsurgical strategies for individuals who carried BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, RAD51C, RAD51D, or BRIP1 PVs. These findings support personalizing risk-reducing surgery and guideline recommendations for individual CSG-specific OC and BC risk management.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.