Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2004 May 4;90(9):1697-703.
doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6601792.

Cancer genetics services: a systematic review of the economic evidence and issues

Affiliations

Cancer genetics services: a systematic review of the economic evidence and issues

G L Griffith et al. Br J Cancer. .

Abstract

This paper systematically reviews the published economic research upon cancer genetics services for families at risk of having familial breast, ovarian or colorectal cancer. A structured search was made of 15 electronic databases. The search identified 1030 papers, of which 31 fulfilled the inclusion criteria, two were cost-benefit studies, five were cost consequences, four were cost-effectiveness studies, one was a cost analysis, two were cost-minimisation studies, one was a cost-utility study, 10 modelled life years and six were reviews. Modelling studies indicate that surveillance, prophylactic and chemoprevention techniques extend survival for carriers of identified mutations. Genetic testing has been estimated to cost 70-2400 USD [48-1591 UK pounds] and genetic counselling 129-800 USD [89-551 UK pounds]. The technology of genetic testing has been found to be cost effective. Cost effectiveness was particularly influenced by targeting genetic services for patients with a strong family history of cancer rather than screening the entire population. Future economic evaluation must go beyond merely assessing health outcomes and mutation identification, and account for the impact of genetic services upon the individual, the family and society, establish the value of services to these groups and determine the most effective ways of delivering genetic services.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

  • A micro costing of NHS cancer genetic services.
    Griffith GL, Tudor-Edwards R, Gray J, Butler R, Wilkinson C, Turner J, France B, Bennett P; GenQuest Research Team. Griffith GL, et al. Br J Cancer. 2005 Jan 17;92(1):60-71. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6602270. Br J Cancer. 2005. PMID: 15583691 Free PMC article.
  • Validity of self-reported genetic counseling and genetic testing use among breast cancer survivors.
    Hamann HA, Tiro JA, Sanders JM, Melhado TV, Funk RK, Carpentier MY, Bartholomew LK, Argenbright KE, Vernon SW. Hamann HA, et al. J Cancer Surviv. 2013 Dec;7(4):624-9. doi: 10.1007/s11764-013-0301-y. Epub 2013 Aug 23. J Cancer Surviv. 2013. PMID: 23975610
  • Risk-Adjusted Prevention. Perspectives on the Governance of Entitlements to Benefits in the Case of Genetic (Breast Cancer) Risks.
    Meier F, Harney A, Rhiem K, Neusser S, Neumann A, Braun M, Wasem J, Huster S, Dabrock P, Schmutzler RK. Meier F, et al. Recent Results Cancer Res. 2021;218:47-66. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-63749-1_5. Recent Results Cancer Res. 2021. PMID: 34019162
  • A Case for Inclusion of Genetic Counselors in Cardiac Care.
    Arscott P, Caleshu C, Kotzer K, Kreykes S, Kruisselbrink T, Orland K, Rigelsky C, Smith E, Spoonamore K, Larsen Haidle J, Marvin M, Ackerman MJ, Hadi A, Mani A, Ommen S, Cherny S. Arscott P, et al. Cardiol Rev. 2016 Mar-Apr;24(2):49-55. doi: 10.1097/CRD.0000000000000081. Cardiol Rev. 2016. PMID: 26186385 Free PMC article. Review.
  • Role of Genetic Testing for Inherited Prostate Cancer Risk: Philadelphia Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference 2017.
    Giri VN, Knudsen KE, Kelly WK, Abida W, Andriole GL, Bangma CH, Bekelman JE, Benson MC, Blanco A, Burnett A, Catalona WJ, Cooney KA, Cooperberg M, Crawford DE, Den RB, Dicker AP, Eggener S, Fleshner N, Freedman ML, Hamdy FC, Hoffman-Censits J, Hurwitz MD, Hyatt C, Isaacs WB, Kane CJ, Kantoff P, Karnes RJ, Karsh LI, Klein EA, Lin DW, Loughlin KR, Lu-Yao G, Malkowicz SB, Mann MJ, Mark JR, McCue PA, Miner MM, Morgan T, Moul JW, Myers RE, Nielsen SM, Obeid E, Pavlovich CP, Peiper SC, Penson DF, Petrylak D, Pettaway CA, Pilarski R, Pinto PA, Poage W, Raj GV, Rebbeck TR, Robson ME, Rosenberg MT, Sandler H, Sartor O, Schaeffer E, Schwartz GF, Shahin MS, Shore ND, Shuch B, Soule HR, Tomlins SA, Trabulsi EJ, Uzzo R, Vander Griend DJ, Walsh PC, Weil CJ, Wender R, Gomella LG. Giri VN, et al. J Clin Oncol. 2018 Feb 1;36(4):414-424. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2017.74.1173. Epub 2017 Dec 13. J Clin Oncol. 2018. PMID: 29236593 Free PMC article. Review.

References

    1. Bapat B, Noorani H, Cohen Z, Berk T, Mitri A, Gallie B, Pritzker K, Gallinger S, Detsky AS (1999) Cost comparison of predictive genetic testing versus conventional clinical screening for familial adenomatous polyposis. Gut 44: 698–703 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Brain K, Gray J, Norman P, France E, Anglim C, Barton G, Parsons E, Clarke A, Sweetland H, Tischkowitz M, Myring J, Stansfield K, Webster D, Gower-Thomas K, Daoud R, Gateley C, Moneypenny I, Singhal H, Branston L, Sampson J, Roberts E, Newcombe R, Cohen D, Rogers C, Mansel R, Harper P (2000) Randomised trial of a specialist genetic assessment service for familial breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 92: 1345–1351 - PubMed
    1. Brown ML, Kessler LG (1995) The use of gene tests to detect hereditary predisposition to cancer: economic considerations. J Natl Cancer Inst 87: 1131–1136 - PubMed
    1. Brown ML, Kessler LG (1996) Use of gene tests to detect hereditary predisposition to cancer: what do we know about cost-effectiveness?. Int J Cancer 69: 55–57 - PubMed
    1. Chaliki H, Loader S, Levenkron JC, Logan-Young W, Hall WJ, Rowley PT (1995) Women's receptivity to testing for a genetic susceptibility to breast cancer. Am J Public Health 85: 1133–1135 - PMC - PubMed

Publication types