An Economic Analysis of Cell-Free DNA Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing in the US General Pregnancy Population

Objective Analyze the economic value of replacing conventional fetal aneuploidy screening approaches with non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) in the general pregnancy population. Methods Using decision-analysis modeling, we compared conventional screening to NIPT with cell-free DNA (cfDNA) analysis in the annual US pregnancy population. Sensitivity and specificity for fetal aneuploidies, trisomy 21, trisomy 18, trisomy 13, and monosomy X, were estimated using published data and modeling of both first- and second trimester screening. Costs were assigned for each prenatal test component and for an affected birth. The overall cost to the healthcare system considered screening costs, the number of aneuploid cases detected, invasive procedures performed, procedure-related euploid losses, and affected pregnancies averted. Sensitivity analyses evaluated the effect of variation in parameters. Costs were reported in 2014 US Dollars. Results Replacing conventional screening with NIPT would reduce healthcare costs if it can be provided for $744 or less in the general pregnancy population. The most influential variables were timing of screening entry, screening costs, and pregnancy termination rates. Of the 13,176 affected pregnancies undergoing screening, NIPT detected 96.5% (12,717/13,176) of cases, compared with 85.9% (11,314/13,176) by conventional approaches. NIPT reduced invasive procedures by 60.0%, with NIPT and conventional methods resulting in 24,596 and 61,430 invasive procedures, respectively. The number of procedure-related euploid fetal losses was reduced by 73.5% (194/264) in the general screening population. Conclusion Based on our analysis, universal application of NIPT would increase fetal aneuploidy detection rates and can be economically justified. Offering this testing to all pregnant women is associated with substantial prenatal healthcare benefits.

[1]  L. Dugoff,et al.  Position statement from the Chromosome Abnormality Screening Committee on behalf of the Board of the International Society for Prenatal Diagnosis , 2015, Prenatal diagnosis.

[2]  Ken Song,et al.  Prenatal screening for fetal aneuploidies with cell-free DNA in the general pregnancy population: a cost-effectiveness analysis , 2015, The journal of maternal-fetal & neonatal medicine : the official journal of the European Association of Perinatal Medicine, the Federation of Asia and Oceania Perinatal Societies, the International Society of Perinatal Obstetricians.

[3]  R. Schmidt,et al.  A cost‐effectiveness analysis of cell free DNA as a replacement for serum screening for Down syndrome , 2015, Prenatal diagnosis.

[4]  Y. Gao,et al.  Non‐invasive prenatal testing for trisomies 21, 18 and 13: clinical experience from 146 958 pregnancies , 2015, Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

[5]  G. Lambert-Messerlian,et al.  Circulating cell free DNA testing: are some test failures informative? , 2015, Prenatal diagnosis.

[6]  T. Hallahan,et al.  Cell‐free fetal DNA screening in the USA: a cost analysis of screening strategies , 2015, Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

[7]  W. Gyselaers,et al.  Introducing the non-invasive prenatal test for trisomy 21 in Belgium: a cost-consequences analysis , 2014, BMJ Open.

[8]  B. Faas,et al.  The consequences of implementing non-invasive prenatal testing in Dutch national health care: a cost-effectiveness analysis. , 2014, European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology.

[9]  Matthew Rabinowitz,et al.  Clinical experience and follow-up with large scale single-nucleotide polymorphism-based noninvasive prenatal aneuploidy testing. , 2014, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[10]  J. Whitty,et al.  A cost‐effectiveness analysis comparing different strategies to implement noninvasive prenatal testing into a Down syndrome screening program , 2014, The Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology.

[11]  A. Siddiqui,et al.  Single-Nucleotide Polymorphism–Based Noninvasive Prenatal Screening in a High-Risk and Low-Risk Cohort , 2014, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[12]  R. Wallerstein,et al.  A New Model for Providing Cell-Free DNA and Risk Assessment for Chromosome Abnormalities in a Public Hospital Setting , 2014, Journal of pregnancy.

[13]  P. Benn Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing Using Cell Free DNA in Maternal Plasma: Recent Developments and Future Prospects , 2014, Journal of clinical medicine.

[14]  S. Morris,et al.  Model-Based Analysis of Costs and Outcomes of Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing for Down’s Syndrome Using Cell Free Fetal DNA in the UK National Health Service , 2014, PloS one.

[15]  Tianhua Huang,et al.  The price of performance: a cost and performance analysis of the implementation of cell‐free fetal DNA testing for Down syndrome in Ontario, Canada , 2014, Prenatal diagnosis.

[16]  K. Nicolaides,et al.  Prenatal Detection of Fetal Triploidy from Cell-Free DNA Testing in Maternal Blood , 2013, Fetal Diagnosis and Therapy.

[17]  D. Hendrie,et al.  Prenatal screening for Down syndrome in Australia: Costs and benefits of current and novel screening strategies , 2013, The Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology.

[18]  L. Dugoff,et al.  Position statement from the Aneuploidy Screening Committee on behalf of the Board of the International Society for Prenatal Diagnosis , 2013, Prenatal diagnosis.

[19]  H. Cuckle,et al.  Maternal cfDNA screening for Down syndrome – a cost sensitivity analysis , 2013, Prenatal diagnosis.

[20]  A. Caughey,et al.  The role of noninvasive prenatal testing as a diagnostic versus a screening tool – a cost‐effectiveness analysis , 2013, Prenatal diagnosis.

[21]  J. Haddow,et al.  Screening for down syndrome in the United States: results of surveys in 2011 and 2012. , 2013, Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine.

[22]  J. Martin,et al.  Births: final data for 2011. , 2013, National vital statistics reports : from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics, National Vital Statistics System.

[23]  M. Watson,et al.  ACMG statement on noninvasive prenatal screening for fetal aneuploidy , 2013, Genetics in Medicine.

[24]  A. Caughey,et al.  Clinical utility and cost of non-invasive prenatal testing with cfDNA analysis in high-risk women based on a US population , 2013, The journal of maternal-fetal & neonatal medicine : the official journal of the European Association of Perinatal Medicine, the Federation of Asia and Oceania Perinatal Societies, the International Society of Perinatal Obstetricians.

[25]  S. Nelson,et al.  DNA sequencing of maternal plasma to detect Down syndrome: An international clinical validation study , 2011, Genetics in Medicine.

[26]  H. Cuckle,et al.  Practical strategies in contingent sequential screening for Down syndrome , 2005, Prenatal diagnosis.

[27]  J. Biggio,et al.  An outcomes analysis of five prenatal screening strategies for trisomy 21 in women younger than 35 years. , 2004, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[28]  J. Martin,et al.  Births: final data for 2002. , 2003, National vital statistics reports : from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics, National Vital Statistics System.

[29]  A. Caughey,et al.  Variation in the decision to terminate pregnancy in the setting of fetal aneuploidy , 2003, Prenatal diagnosis.

[30]  K. Nicolaides,et al.  A first trimester trisomy 13/trisomy 18 risk algorithm combining fetal nuchal translucency thickness, maternal serum free β‐hCG and PAPP‐A , 2002, Prenatal diagnosis.

[31]  A. Pasquino,et al.  Recommendations for the diagnosis and management of Turner syndrome. , 2001, The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism.

[32]  James B. Brown,et al.  THE AUSTRALIAN & NEW ZEALAND JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS & GYNAECOLOGY , 1991 .

[33]  Diana Miglioretti,et al.  Cell-free DNA Analysis for Noninvasive Examination of Trisomy. , 2015, The New England journal of medicine.

[34]  R. Rava,et al.  Circulating fetal cell-free DNA fractions differ in autosomal aneuploidies and monosomy X. , 2014, Clinical chemistry.

[35]  Kang Zhang,et al.  DNA sequencing versus standard prenatal aneuploidy screening. , 2014, The New England journal of medicine.

[36]  Committee Opinion No. 545: Noninvasive prenatal testing for fetal aneuploidy. , 2012, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[37]  S. Armstrong Clinical and Cost Consequences of Incorporating a Novel Non-Invasive Prenatal Test into the Diagnostic Pathway for Fetal Trisomies , 2012 .

[38]  ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 77: screening for fetal chromosomal abnormalities. , 2007, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[39]  N J Wald,et al.  First and second trimester antenatal screening for Down's syndrome: the results of the Serum, Urine and Ultrasound Screening Study (SURUSS). , 2003, Health technology assessment.

[40]  P. Romano,et al.  Estimates of the economic costs of birth defects. , 1994, Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financing.