Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
Dalya Marks a London School of Hygiene and
Tropical Medicine, London WC1E 7HT, b Department of Social Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol
BS8 2PR, c Centre for Cardiovascular Genetics, University College London
Medical School, London WC1E 6JF, d Oxford Centre for
Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolism, Radcliffe Infirmary, Oxford OX2
6HE
Correspondence to: M Thorogood Margaret.Thorogood{at}lshtm.ac.uk
Objectives:
To assess the cost effectiveness of
strategies to screen for and treat familial hypercholesterolaemia.
What is already known on this topic
Without identification and treatment, over half of these people will
have a fatal or non-fatal coronary heart disease event by the age of 50 (men) or 60 (women) Effective treatment of high cholesterol concentrations reduces total
and coronary heart disease mortality No recommended screening strategy currently exists in the United
Kingdom for familial hypercholesterolaemia What this study adds
Identifying relatives of people with familial hypercholesterolaemia is
the most cost effective screening option for all age groups As technology improves and the cost of statins falls all strategies
will become more cost effective
Design:
Cost effectiveness analysis. A care pathway for each patient was delineated and the associated probabilities, benefits, and costs were calculated.
Participants:
Simulated population aged 16-54 years
in England and Wales.
Interventions:
Identification and treatment of
patients with familial hypercholesterolaemia by universal screening,
opportunistic screening in primary care, screening of people admitted
to hospital with premature myocardial infarction, or tracing family
members of affected patients.
Main outcome measure:
Cost effectiveness calculated
as cost per life year gained (extension of life expectancy resulting
from intervention) including estimated costs of screening and treatment.
Results:
Tracing of family members was the most cost effective strategy (£3097 (
5066, $4479) per life year gained) as
2.6 individuals need to be screened to identify one case at a cost of
£133 per case detected. If the genetic mutation was known within the
family then the cost per life year gained (£4914) was only slightly
increased by genetic confirmation of the diagnosis. Universal
population screening was least cost effective (£13 029 per life year
gained) as 1365 individuals need to be screened at a cost of £9754 per
case detected. For each strategy it was more cost effective to screen
younger people and women. Targeted strategies were more expensive per
person screened, but the cost per case detected was lower. Population
screening of 16 year olds only was as cost effective as family tracing
(£2777 with a clinical confirmation).
Conclusions:
Screening family members of people with
familial hypercholesterolaemia is the most cost effective option for
detecting cases across the whole population.
In the United Kingdom there are an estimated 110 000 men and women
with familial hypercholesterolaemia, only a small percentage of whom
have been identified to date
Computer modelling has shown that the earlier familial
hypercholesterolaemia is diagnosed the more cost effective the
screening strategy becomes
Read all Rapid Responses