Format

Send to:

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2013 Jun;13(3):371-80. doi: 10.1586/erp.13.22. Epub 2013 May 15.

Cost-effectiveness of a FISH assay for the diagnosis of melanoma in the USA.

Author information

  • 1United BioSource Corp., Modeling and Simulation, Bethesda, MD, USA. anuraag.kansal@unitedbiosource.com

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:

The authors evaluated the cost-effectiveness of a FISH assay in melanoma diagnosis in the USA.

METHOD:

A model was developed simulating the addition of FISH to the diagnosis of suspected melanoma. A decision analytic module simulated diagnosis using microscopic assessment alone versus addition of FISH (sensitivity: 92%; specificity: 94%). The authors simulated a clinical setting in which an initial excisional biopsy microscopic assessment (sensitivity: 73%; specificity: 78%) was followed by dermatopathologist assessment (sensitivity: 89%; specificity: 79%) for inconclusive results. Diagnostic strategies 1 and 2 added FISH to the initial and dermatopathologist assessments, respectively. A Markov outcomes module simulated patients' remaining lifetime, including treatment.

RESULTS:

In diagnostic strategies 1 and 2, the cost per quality-adjusted life year gained was US$14,930 and 43,925, respectively, versus no FISH. Cost per misdiagnosis avoided was US$3292 and 3759, respectively. Sensitivity and specificity without FISH were both ≥88%; however, addition of FISH exceeded US$100,000/quality-adjusted life year.

CONCLUSION:

In specific clinical settings, FISH could be cost effective for melanoma diagnosis.

PMID:
23672374
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Informa Healthcare
    Loading ...
    Write to the Help Desk