RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Integrating a Polygenic Risk Score for Coronary Artery Disease as a Risk Enhancing Factor in the Pooled Cohort Equation is Cost-effective in a US Health System
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2021.06.21.21259210
DO 10.1101/2021.06.21.21259210
A1 Mujwara, Deo
A1 Henno, Geoffrey
A1 Vernon, Stephen T
A1 Peng, Siyang
A1 Di Domenico, Paolo
A1 Schroeder, Brock
A1 Busby, George B
A1 Figtree, Gemma A
A1 Bottà, Giordano
YR 2021
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/06/25/2021.06.21.21259210.abstract
AB Importance The pooled cohort equation (PCE) is used to determine an individual’s 10-year risk (low, borderline, intermediate, or high) of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) but it fails to identify all individuals at high risk. Those with borderline or intermediate risk require additional risk enhancing factors to guide preventive therapy decisions. Including a polygenic risk score (PRS) for coronary artery disease as a risk enhancing factor improves precision in determining the risk of ASCVD and informs decisions for prevention therapy.Objective To assess the cost-effectiveness of integrating PRS for coronary artery disease with the PCE to determine an individual’s 10-year risk for ASCVD compared to the PCE-alone.Design, setting, and population A Markov model was developed on a hypothetical cohort of 40-year-old individuals in the US with borderline or intermediate PCE 10-year risk for ASCVD who fall in the top quintile of the PRS distribution and are not on preventive therapy (e.g., statins). Model transition probabilities and economic costs came from existing literature with costs reflecting a payer perspective and inflation-adjusted to 2019 US$.Interventions The modeled strategies were: (1) the PCE-alone and (2) the PCE with PRS for coronary artery disease as a risk enhancing factor. Analyses were performed at 5 year, 10 year, and lifetime time horizons.Main outcomes and measures Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained, acute coronary syndromes and ischemic stroke events prevented, mean costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were measured. One-way, two-way, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were used to assess uncertainty in parameter estimates. Future costs and health benefits were discounted at an annual rate of 3%.Results Compared to the PCE-alone, PCE+PRS was cost-saving, effective and cost-effective (dominant). A health system would save more than $500, $2,300, and $9,000 per additional high-risk individual identified using PCE+PRS and prevent 27, 47 and 83 acute CAD or ischemic stroke events per 1,000 persons in 5 year, 10 year, and lifetime time horizons, respectively.Conclusions and relevance Implementing PRS as a risk enhancing factor for CAD among individuals with borderline or intermediate 10-year risk reclassifies individuals as high-risk who would otherwise remain unidentified, prevents future acute CAD and ischemic stroke events, and both saves money and is cost-effective for health systems.Question Is it cost-effective to use polygenic risk scores (PRS) for coronary artery disease (CAD) among individuals with borderline or intermediate risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) to inform preventive therapy decisions?Findings We modeled a hypothetical cohort of individuals with borderline or intermediate risk of ASCVD who fall in the top quintile of the CAD-PRS distribution but not on preventive therapy. Integrating CAD-PRS in the pooled cohort equation improved quality-adjusted life-years, saved money and was cost-effective.Meaning Integrating PRS as an enhancing factor in the pooled cohort equation risk assessment for ASCVD used in current clinical practice was cost-effective.Competing Interest StatementSTV, GAF have not competing interests DM, GB, GBB, PD are employed by Allelica Inc GB, GBB, PD have stock in Allelica Inc GH, SP, BS are employed by Illumina IncFunding Statementno external funding was receivedAuthor DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:No IRB neededAll necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesData are available from the literature