ArticleThe European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care2026
Is next generation sequencing for the diagnosis of rare diseases worth its cost? A user-based approach to valuation.
Article in The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNext generation sequencing (NGS) can decrease the diagnostic odyssey for patients with rare diseases. However, valuing the combination of health and non-health outcomes associated with NGS is challenging. While stated preference methods can be used for monetary valuation of outcomes, frameworks that jointly account for both costs and benefits to determine cost-acceptability are limited. Insights into cost-acceptability can help inform pricing and access decisions where competition among NGS alternatives is imperfect or diagnostics are provided as a public good.
methodsWe used stated preference data to estimate the cost-acceptability of exome sequencing (ES) (i.e., cost at which ES provides value and users are willing-to-pay) in a user-based valuation. We estimated the benefit of ES as an alternative to all other diagnostic tests using a compensating variation model. Based on estimated net-benefit, we determined the proportion of users with positive expected net-benefit for varying cost (CAD$0-$15,000) and chance of diagnosis (10%-90%). We created a cost-acceptability frontier of costs and chance of diagnosis for a range of scenarios. Expected net-benefit and cost-acceptability were estimated for low-cost (CAD$1,600) and high-cost (CAD$11,660) ES scenarios.
resultsWe find that at least half of users consider costs of up to CAD$10,000 acceptable if the chance of obtaining a diagnosis of ES is at least 50%. However, at least some users are willing to accept a chance of diagnosis below 50%, even if the associated cost are high.
conclusionOur proposed valuation framework suggests that many potential users of ES are willing to accept various combinations of cost and chance of diagnosis. Cost-acceptability is especially high if the chance of diagnosis is larger the 50%.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41222854What 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.