TY - JOUR
TI - An economic analysis of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy by polar body biopsy in advanced maternal age
AU - Neumann, K.
AU - Sermon, K.
AU - Bossuyt, P.
AU - Goossens, V.
AU - Geraedts, J.
AU - Traeger-Synodinos, J.
AU - Parriego, M.
AU - Schmutzler, A.
AU - van der Ven, K.
AU - Rudolph-Rothfeld, W.
AU - Vonthein, R.
AU - Griesinger, G.
JO - BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology
PY - 2020
VL - 127
TODO - 6
SP - 710-718
PB - Wiley-Blackwell Publishing Ltd
SN - 1470-0328, 1471-0528
TODO - 10.1111/1471-0528.16089
TODO - aneuploidy;  Article;  biopsy;  controlled study;  cost effectiveness analysis;  decision tree;  genetic screening;  health care cost;  human;  hybridization;  in vitro fertilization;  intracytoplasmic sperm injection;  maternal age;  polar body;  pregnancy rate;  priority journal;  sensitivity analysis;  spontaneous abortion;  adult;  cost benefit analysis;  economics;  female;  genetic screening;  genetics;  pregnancy;  preimplantation genetic diagnosis;  randomized controlled trial;  spontaneous abortion;  transplantation, Abortion, Spontaneous;  Adult;  Aneuploidy;  Cost-Benefit Analysis;  Female;  Genetic Testing;  Humans;  Maternal Age;  Polar Bodies;  Pregnancy;  Preimplantation Diagnosis
TODO - Objective: What are the cost per live birth and the incremental cost of preventing a miscarriage with preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) by polar body biopsy and array-based comprehensive genome hybridisation (aCGH) versus regular IVF/ICSI without PGT-A for infertility treatment in women 36–40 years of age?. Design: Decision tree model. Population: A randomised clinical trial on PGT-A (ESTEEM study). Methods: Two treatment strategies were compared: one cycle of IVF/ICSI with or without PGT-A. Costs and effects were analysed with this model for four different cost scenarios: high-, higher medium, lower medium and low-cost. Base case, sensitivity, threshold, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were used to examine the cost-effectiveness implications of PGT-A. Results: PGT-A increased the cost per live birth by approximately 15% in the high-cost scenario to approximately 285% in the low-cost scenario. Threshold analysis revealed that PGT-A would need to be associated with an absolute increase in pregnancy rate by 6% to >39% or, alternatively, would need to be US$2,969 (high-cost scenario) to US$4,888 (low-cost scenario) cheaper. The incremental cost to prevent one miscarriage by PGT-A using the base case assumptions was calculated to be US$34,427 (high-cost scenario) to US$51,146 (low-cost scenario). A probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed cost-effectiveness for PGT-A from 1.9% (high-cost scenario) to 0.0% (low-cost scenario) of calculated samples. Conclusions: While avoiding unnecessary embryo transfers and miscarriages are important goals, patients and doctors need to be aware of the high-cost implications of applying PGT-A using aCGH on polar bodies. Tweetable abstract: PGT-A by polar body biopsy and comprehensive genome hybridisation increases cost per live birth and requires high financial spending per miscarriage averted. © 2020 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists
ER -