Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34767113›Full record

ArticleThe European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care2022

Cost-utility analysis of risk-reducing strategies to prevent breast and ovarian cancer in BRCA-mutation carriers in Switzerland.

Claudine Bommer, Judith Lupatsch, Nicole Bürki, Matthias Schwenkglenks

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) of ovarian cancer preventive strategies for women with BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants: the role of surveillance.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Prevention of Epithelial Ovarian Cancer.Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in medicine · 2023
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Claudine BommerUniversity of Zurich, Zürich, Switzerland. claudine.bommer@usb.ch.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3643-6821
Judith LupatschInstitute of Pharmaceutical Medicine (ECPM), University of Basel, Klingelbergstrasse 61, 4056, Basel, Switzerland.
Nicole BürkiGynaecological Tumor Center, University Hospital Basel, Spitalstrasse 21, 4031, Basel, Switzerland.
Matthias SchwenkglenksInstitute of Pharmaceutical Medicine (ECPM), University of Basel, Klingelbergstrasse 61, 4056, Basel, Switzerland.
University of Basel · CHUniversity Hospital of Basel · CHUniversity of Zurich · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveWe aimed to identify the most cost-effective of all prophylactic measures available in Switzerland for women not yet affected by breast and ovarian cancer who tested positive for a BRCA1/2 mutation.

methodsProphylactic bilateral mastectomy (PBM), salpingo-oophorectomy (PBSO), combined PBM&PBSO and chemoprevention (CP) initiated at age 40 years were compared with intensified surveillance (IS). A Markov model with a life-long time horizon was developed from the perspective of the Swiss healthcare system using mainly literature-derived data to evaluate costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and survival. Costs and QALYs were discounted by 3% per year. Robustness of the results was tested with deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.

resultsAll prophylactic measures were found to be cost-saving with an increase in QALYs and life years (LYs) compared to IS. PBM&PBSO were found to be most cost-effective and dominated all other strategies in women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. Lifetime costs averaged to 141,293 EUR and 14.5 QALYs per woman with a BRCA1 mutation under IS, versus 76,639 EUR and 19.2 QALYs for PBM&PBSO. Corresponding results for IS per woman with a BRCA2 mutation were 102,245 EUR and 15.5 QALYs, versus 60,770 EUR and 19.9 QALYs for PBM&PBSO. The results were found to be robust in sensitivity analysis; no change in the dominant strategy for either BRCA-mutation was observed.

conclusionAll more invasive strategies were found to increase life expectancy and quality of life of women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation and were cost-saving for the Swiss healthcare system compared to IS.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsOvarian NeoplasmsAdultCost-Benefit AnalysisFemaleGenes, BRCA1Genes, BRCA2HeterozygoteHumansMastectomyMutationQuality of LifeSwitzerlandBRCABreast cancerCost-effectivenessHealth economic modellingOvarian cancerRisk reduction

Identifiers

PMID34767113
PMCPMC9170622
OpenAlexW3212415197

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.