Suppr超能文献

70 基因签名与 21 基因检测的头对头比较:成本效益和依从性的影响。

Head-to-head comparison of the 70-gene signature versus the 21-gene assay: cost-effectiveness and the effect of compliance.

机构信息

Department of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

出版信息

Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2012 Jan;131(2):627-36. doi: 10.1007/s10549-011-1769-7. Epub 2011 Sep 24.

Abstract

Both the 70-gene signature and the 21-gene assay are novel prognostic tests used to guide adjuvant chemotherapy decisions in patients with early breast cancer. Although the results of ongoing prospective trials will only become available in some years, the tests have already been included in clinical guidelines such as St. Gallen's. In literature, the cost-effectiveness (CE) of both tests as compared to conventional prognostic tests has been described. We report on a direct comparison of CE; as different compliance rates were reported, we also taken these into account. A Markov decision model with a time horizon of 20 years was developed to assess the effects, costs and CE of three alternatives; 21-gene, 70-gene, and St. Gallen (SG) or Adjuvant Online (AO), dependent on the dataset used in patients with early, node-negative, breast cancer. Sensitivity and specificity were based on two datasets, incorporating compliances rates based on literature. For both datasets, whereas the 70-gene signature yielded more quality adjusted life years (QALYs) and was less costly; the 21-gene amounted more life years (LYs) but was more costly. The decision uncertainty surrounding the probability of CE of the Thomassen-series amounted 55% for both cost/LY and cost/QALY, for the Fan-series 80% for LY and 65% for QALYs. Taking reported compliance with discordant test results into account, in general, the effect of all strategies decreased, while the costs increased, without relatively influencing the CEA performance. This comparison indicates that the performances of the 70-gene and the 21-gene based on reported studies are close. The 21-gene has the highest probability of being cost-effective when focusing on cost/LY, while focusing on cost/QALY, the 70-gene signature was most cost-effective. The level of compliance can have serious impact on the CE. With additional data, preferably from head-to-head outcome studies and especially on compliance concerning discordant test results, calculations can be made with higher degrees of certainty.

摘要

70 基因签名和 21 基因检测都是新型的预后检测方法,用于指导早期乳腺癌患者的辅助化疗决策。尽管正在进行的前瞻性试验结果要过几年才会公布,但这些检测方法已经被纳入了圣加仑等临床指南。文献中已经描述了这两种检测方法与传统预后检测方法相比的成本效益(CE)。我们报告了直接比较 CE 的结果;由于报告了不同的依从率,我们也考虑了这些因素。我们开发了一个具有 20 年时间范围的马尔可夫决策模型,以评估三种替代方案的效果、成本和 CE;21 基因、70 基因和圣加仑(SG)或辅助在线(AO),取决于用于早期、淋巴结阴性乳腺癌患者的数据集。灵敏度和特异性基于两个数据集,纳入了基于文献的依从率。对于两个数据集,尽管 70 基因签名产生了更多的质量调整生命年(QALYs)且成本更低;但 21 基因产生了更多的生命年(LYs)但成本更高。Thomassen 系列的 CE 概率的决策不确定性对成本/LY 和成本/QALY 为 55%,对 Fan 系列为 LY 80%和 QALYs 为 65%。考虑到对不一致测试结果的报告依从性,总体而言,所有策略的效果都降低了,而成本增加了,但对 CEA 性能的影响相对较小。这项比较表明,基于报告的研究,70 基因和 21 基因的性能相近。当关注成本/LY 时,21 基因具有最高的成本效益概率,而当关注成本/QALY 时,70 基因签名最具成本效益。依从率可能会对 CE 产生严重影响。有了更多的数据,最好是来自头对头的结果研究,特别是关于不一致测试结果的依从性,计算可以更有把握地进行。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验