Purpose:Implementation of novel genetic diagnostic tests is generally driven by technological advances because they promise shorter turnaround times and/or higher diagnostic yields. Other aspects, including impact on clinical management or cost-effectiveness, are often not assessed in detail prior to implementation.Methods:We studied the clinical utility of whole-exome sequencing (WES) in complex pediatric neurology in terms of diagnostic yield and costs. We analyzed 150 patients (and their parents) presenting with complex neurological disorders of suspected genetic origin. In a parallel study, all patients received both the standard diagnostic workup (e.g., cerebral imaging, muscle biopsies or lumbar punctures, and sequential gene-by-gene–based testing) and WES simultaneously.Results:Our unique study design allowed direct comparison of diagnostic yield of both trajectories and provided insight into the economic implications of implementing WES in this diagnostic trajectory. We showed that WES identified significantly more conclusive diagnoses (29.3%) than the standard care pathway (7.3%) without incurring higher costs. Exploratory analysis of WES as a first-tier diagnostic test indicates that WES may even be cost-saving, depending on the extent of other tests being omitted.Conclusion:Our data support such a use of WES in pediatric neurology for disorders of presumed genetic origin.Genet Med advance online publication 23 March 2017

BACKGROUND:The substantial technological advancements in next-generation sequencing (NGS), combined with dropping costs, have allowed for a swift diffusion of NGS applications in clinical settings. Although several commercial parties report to have broken the $1000 barrier for sequencing an entire human genome, a valid cost overview for NGS is currently lacking. This study provides a complete, transparent and up-to-date overview of the total costs of different NGS applications.

Given the introduction of new therapies targeting specific immune pathways for atopic dermatitis, information on the economic burden of patients with atopic dermatitis is needed. In 90 adult patients with atopic dermatitis indicated for systemic treatment, direct costs (including medication use and healthcare resource utilization) and costs due to reduced work productivity were calculated. Total costs (including directs and costs of productivity loss) were €15,231 per patient per year for the total group and €20,695 for patients with uncontrolled disease vs. €11,287 for patients with controlled disease. Costs of productivity loss had the larger impact on total costs. These data indicate that patients with atopic dermatitis using systemic immunosuppressive treatment incur considerable direct costs and costs of productivity loss. Given the introduction of new therapies targeting specific immune pathways for atopic dermatitis (AD), information on the economic burden of AD patients is needed. Direct costs (medication use and healthcare resource utilization) and costs of productivity loss were studied in 90 adult patients with AD indicated for systemic treatment. Costs were calculated for patients with controlled (Investigator Global Assessment (IGA) 0-2) and uncontrolled (IGA 3-5) disease at inclusion. Mean (95% confidence interval (95% CI)) total direct costs were €5,191 (€4,382-6,019) per patient per year (PPY), €4,401 (€3,695-5,215) for patients with controlled AD vs. €6,993 (€5,552-8,406), mean difference €2,593 (€820-4,282) (p=0.014) for patients with uncontrolled AD. Costs of productivity loss were €10,040 (€6,260-14,012) PPY for the total group, €6,886 (€4,188-10,129) PPY for patients with controlled AD vs. €13,702 (€6,124-22,996) for patients with uncontrolled AD, mean difference €6,816 (-€1,638-16,677; p=0.148). Total costs (direct costs+costs of productivity loss) were €15,231 (€11,487-19,455) PPY for the total group, €11,287 (€7,974-15,436) for patients with controlled AD vs. €20,695 (€14,068-34,564), mean difference €9,408 (-€119-19,964) (p=0.077) for patients with uncontrolled AD. Patients with AD using systemic immunosuppressive treatment incur considerable direct costs and costs of productivity loss.

No abstract

No abstract