Objective: To evaluate the economical benefit of preimplantation genetic testing of aneuploidies (PGT-A) when applied in an extended culture and stringent elective single ET framework. Design: Theoretical cost-effectiveness study. Setting: Not applicable. Patients/Animal(s): None. Intervention(s): Comparison of the cost-effectiveness between two IVF treatment strategies: serial transfer of all available blastocysts without genetic testing (first fresh transfer and subsequent frozen-thawed transfer); and systematic use of genetic testing (trophectoderm biopsy, freeze-all, and frozen-thawed transfers of euploid blastocysts). The costs considered for this analysis are based on regional public health system provider. Main Outcome Measure(s): Costs per live birth. Result(s): Cost-effectiveness profile of PGT-A improves with female age and number of available blastocysts. Sensitivity analyses varying the costs of ET, the costs of genetic analyses, the magnitude of the detrimental impact of PGT-A on live birth rate, and the crude live birth rates change to some extent the thresholds for effectiveness but generally confirm the notion that PGT-A can be economically advantageous in some specific subgroups. Conclusion(s): PGT-A can be cost-effective in specific clinical settings and population groups. Economic considerations deserve attention in the debate regarding the clinical utility of PGT-A.

Cost-effectiveness of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidies

Busnelli A;
2019-01-01

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the economical benefit of preimplantation genetic testing of aneuploidies (PGT-A) when applied in an extended culture and stringent elective single ET framework. Design: Theoretical cost-effectiveness study. Setting: Not applicable. Patients/Animal(s): None. Intervention(s): Comparison of the cost-effectiveness between two IVF treatment strategies: serial transfer of all available blastocysts without genetic testing (first fresh transfer and subsequent frozen-thawed transfer); and systematic use of genetic testing (trophectoderm biopsy, freeze-all, and frozen-thawed transfers of euploid blastocysts). The costs considered for this analysis are based on regional public health system provider. Main Outcome Measure(s): Costs per live birth. Result(s): Cost-effectiveness profile of PGT-A improves with female age and number of available blastocysts. Sensitivity analyses varying the costs of ET, the costs of genetic analyses, the magnitude of the detrimental impact of PGT-A on live birth rate, and the crude live birth rates change to some extent the thresholds for effectiveness but generally confirm the notion that PGT-A can be economically advantageous in some specific subgroups. Conclusion(s): PGT-A can be cost-effective in specific clinical settings and population groups. Economic considerations deserve attention in the debate regarding the clinical utility of PGT-A.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11699/73737
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 63
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 55
social impact