ArticleAnnals of internal medicine2023
Population Genomic Screening for Three Common Hereditary Conditions : A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.
Article in Annals of internal medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07052266 (Feasibility of Obstetric and Cancer Universal Screening), which is not on this map. Cited by 45 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Feasibility of Obstetric and Cancer Universal Screening
Who cites it
45 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 66 citations in OpenAlex.
- Approaches to Incorporation of Preferences into Health Economic Models of Genomic Medicine: A Critical Interpretive Synthesis and Conceptual Framework.Applied health economics and health policy · 2025Pooled it
- Opportunistic Genomic Screening for Familial Hypercholesterolemia to Improve Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2026Trial
- Population Genomic Screening for Hereditary Cancer Risk: Patient Experience, Perceptions, and Downstream Clinical Outcomes.Journal of genetic counseling · 2026Article
- Evaluating the Acceptability of Virtual Preventive Genetic Counseling Supporting Adult Primary Care Practices.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Article
- Protecting the health of donor-conceived offspring.Familial cancer · 2026Article
- Economic Evaluation of GARDE: A Digital Health Platform for Population-Level Hereditary Cancer Risk Assessment.JCO oncology practice · 2026Article
- The impact of genetic testing on physician practice in specialized cardiovascular clinics.Journal of clinical lipidology · 2026Article
- Genomic risk model to implement precision prostate cancer screening in clinical care: the ProGRESS study.Nature cancer · 2026Article
- Cascade counselling and testing. Recommendations of the European Society of Human Genetics.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2026Article
- Ethically Integrating Genomics in Primary Care: An Invitation to Share Implementation Best Practices.Mayo Clinic proceedings · 2026Article
- Article
- Feasibility and outcomes of the DNA Screen nationwide adult genomic screening pilot.Nature health · 2026Article
- Stakeholder engagement in genetics research development in diverse urban communities in the Midwestern United States: process and considerations.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Implications and ramifications of using the CDC tier 1 genetic screening concept in East Asian populations.Genetics in medicine open · 2026Article
- Hereditary Hemochromatosis and Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy as Tier 1 Genomic Conditions: Implications for Adult Population Genomic Screening.Public health genomics · 2026Article
- Multi-omics profiling and AI-driven clinically deployable risk models in MGUS and smoldering myeloma.Clinical and experimental medicine · 2025Review
- Mastering genetics for your clinic: A step-by-step guide.The Journal of allergy and clinical immunology · 2025Review
- Electronic health records-based algorithms to screen for U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention tier 1 genetic diseases: a scoping review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2025Article
- Opportunistic salpingectomy for prevention of ovarian cancer among the general population.Current opinion in obstetrics & gynecology · 2025Review
- Geno4ME Study: implementation of whole genome sequencing for population screening in a large healthcare system.NPJ genomic medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe cost-effectiveness of screening the U.S. population for Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Tier 1 genomic conditions is unknown.
objectiveTo estimate the cost-effectiveness of simultaneous genomic screening for Lynch syndrome (LS), hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome (HBOC), and familial hypercholesterolemia (FH).
designDecision analytic Markov model. DATA SOURCES: Published literature. TARGET POPULATION: Separate age-based cohorts (ages 20 to 60 years at time of screening) of racially and ethnically representative U.S. adults. TIME HORIZON: Lifetime. PERSPECTIVE: U.S. health care payer.
interventionPopulation genomic screening using clinical sequencing with a restricted panel of high-evidence genes, cascade testing of first-degree relatives, and recommended preventive interventions for identified probands. OUTCOME MEASURES: Incident breast, ovarian, and colorectal cancer cases; incident cardiovascular events; quality-adjusted survival; and costs. RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS: Screening 100 000 unselected 30-year-olds resulted in 101 (95% uncertainty interval [UI], 77 to 127) fewer overall cancer cases and 15 (95% UI, 4 to 28) fewer cardiovascular events and an increase of 495 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) (95% UI, 401 to 757) at an incremental cost of $33.9 million (95% UI, $27.0 million to $41.1 million). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $68 600 per QALY gained (95% UI, $41 800 to $88 900). RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS: Screening 30-, 40-, and 50-year-old cohorts was cost-effective in 99%, 88%, and 19% of probabilistic simulations, respectively, at a $100 000-per-QALY threshold. The test costs at which screening 30-, 40-, and 50-year-olds reached the $100 000-per-QALY threshold were $413, $290, and $166, respectively. Variant prevalence and adherence to preventive interventions were also highly influential parameters. LIMITATIONS: Population averages for model inputs, which were derived predominantly from European populations, vary across ancestries and health care environments.
conclusionPopulation genomic screening with a restricted panel of high-evidence genes associated with 3 CDC Tier 1 conditions is likely to be cost-effective in U.S. adults younger than 40 years if the testing cost is relatively low and probands have access to preventive interventions. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Human Genome Research Institute.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.