Servicio de Evaluación, Servicio Canario de la Salud, Camino Candelaria Nº 44, 1ª planta, El Rosario, 38109, Santa Cruz De Tenerife, Canary Islands, Spain.
Fundación Canaria de Investigación Sanitaria (FUNCANIS), Camino Candelaria Nº 44, 1ª planta, El Rosario, 38109, Santa Cruz De Tenerife, Canary Islands, Spain.
Eur J Health Econ. 2018 Sep;19(7):979-991. doi: 10.1007/s10198-017-0946-y. Epub 2017 Dec 16.
The aim of this paper was to conduct a systematic review of the cost-effectiveness of the analysis of cell-free DNA in maternal blood, often called the non-invasive prenatal test (NIPT), in the prenatal screening of trisomy in chromosomes 21, 18 and 13. MEDLINE, MEDLINE in process, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched in April 2017. We selected: (1) economic evaluations that estimated the costs and detected cases of trisomy 21, 18 or 13; (2) comparisons of prenatal screening with NIPT (universal or contingent strategies) and the usual screening without NIPT, (3) in pregnant women with any risk of foetal anomalies. Studies were reviewed by two researchers. Data were extracted, the methodological quality was assessed and a narrative synthesis was prepared. In total, 12 studies were included, four of them performed in Europe. Three studies evaluated NIPT as a contingent test, three studies evaluated a universal NIPT, and six studies evaluated both. The results are heterogeneous, especially for the contingent NIPT where the results range from NIPT being dominant to a dominated strategy. Universal NIPT was found to be more effective but also costlier than the usual screening, with very high incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. One advantage of screening with NIPT is lower invasive procedure-related foetal losses than with usual screening. In conclusion, the cost-effectiveness of contingent NIPT is uncertain according to several studies, while the universal NIPT is not cost-effective currently.
本文旨在对游离于母体外循环中的 DNA 分析(通常被称为无创性产前检测,NIPT)在染色体 21、18 和 13 三体症产前筛查中的成本效益进行系统评价。2017 年 4 月检索了 MEDLINE、MEDLINE 正在处理的文献、EMBASE 和 Cochrane Library。我们选择了以下内容:(1)评估成本和检测出 21 号、18 号或 13 号三体症病例的经济评估;(2)NIPT(普遍或有条件策略)与无 NIPT 的常规筛查的比较;(3)在有胎儿异常任何风险的孕妇中进行。由两名研究人员对研究进行了回顾。提取数据,评估方法学质量,并进行了叙述性综合分析。共纳入 12 项研究,其中 4 项在欧洲进行。三项研究评估了 NIPT 作为有条件检测,三项研究评估了普遍 NIPT,六项研究评估了两者。结果具有异质性,尤其是在有条件 NIPT 中,结果范围从 NIPT 占主导地位到占主导地位的策略。与常规筛查相比,普遍 NIPT 更有效但也更昂贵,增量成本效益比非常高。与常规筛查相比,NIPT 筛查的一个优势是与侵入性程序相关的胎儿丢失率较低。总之,根据几项研究,有条件 NIPT 的成本效益不确定,而普遍 NIPT 目前并不具有成本效益。