Alternative cascade-testing protocols for identifying and managing patients with familial hypercholesterolaemia: systematic reviews, qualitative study and cost-effectiveness analysis

Author:

Qureshi Nadeem1ORCID,Woods Bethan2ORCID,Neves de Faria Rita2ORCID,Saramago Goncalves Pedro2ORCID,Cox Edward2ORCID,Leonardi-Bee Jo1ORCID,Condon Laura1ORCID,Weng Stephen3ORCID,Akyea Ralph K1ORCID,Iyen Barbara1ORCID,Roderick Paul4ORCID,Humphries Steve E5ORCID,Rowlands William6ORCID,Watson Melanie7ORCID,Haralambos Kate8ORCID,Kenny Ryan9ORCID,Datta Dev10ORCID,Miedzybrodzka Zosia11ORCID,Byrne Christopher12ORCID,Kai Joe1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. PRISM Research Group, Centre for Academic Primary Care, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK

2. Centre for Health Economics, University of York, York, UK

3. Cardiovascular and Metabolism, Janssen Research and Development, High Wycombe, UK

4. Primary Care, Population Sciences and Medical Education, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK

5. Centre for Cardiovascular Genetics, Institute for Cardiovascular Science, University College London, London, UK

6. Patient representative

7. Wessex Clinical Genetics Service, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK

8. Familial Hypercholesterolaemia Service, University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff, UK

9. Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK

10. Lipid Unit, University Hospital Llandough, Penarth, UK

11. Division of Applied Medicine, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK

12. Southampton National Institute for Health and Care Research Biomedical Research Centre, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK

Abstract

Background Cascade testing the relatives of people with familial hypercholesterolaemia is an efficient approach to identifying familial hypercholesterolaemia. The cascade-testing protocol starts with identifying an index patient with familial hypercholesterolaemia, followed by one of three approaches to contact other relatives: indirect approach, whereby index patients contact their relatives; direct approach, whereby the specialist contacts the relatives; or a combination of both direct and indirect approaches. However, it is unclear which protocol may be most effective. Objectives The objectives were to determine the yield of cases from different cascade-testing protocols, treatment patterns, and short- and long-term outcomes for people with familial hypercholesterolaemia; to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of alternative protocols for familial hypercholesterolaemia cascade testing; and to qualitatively assess the acceptability of different cascade-testing protocols to individuals and families with familial hypercholesterolaemia, and to health-care providers. Design and methods This study comprised systematic reviews and analysis of three data sets: PASS (PASS Software, Rijswijk, the Netherlands) hospital familial hypercholesterolaemia databases, the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD)–Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) linked primary–secondary care data set, and a specialist familial hypercholesterolaemia register. Cost-effectiveness modelling, incorporating preceding analyses, was undertaken. Acceptability was examined in interviews with patients, relatives and health-care professionals. Result Systematic review of protocols: based on data from 4 of the 24 studies, the combined approach led to a slightly higher yield of relatives tested [40%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 37% to 42%] than the direct (33%, 95% CI 28% to 39%) or indirect approaches alone (34%, 95% CI 30% to 37%). The PASS databases identified that those contacted directly were more likely to complete cascade testing (p < 0.01); the CPRD–HES data set indicated that 70% did not achieve target treatment levels, and demonstrated increased cardiovascular disease risk among these individuals, compared with controls (hazard ratio 9.14, 95% CI 8.55 to 9.76). The specialist familial hypercholesterolaemia register confirmed excessive cardiovascular morbidity (standardised morbidity ratio 7.17, 95% CI 6.79 to 7.56). Cost-effectiveness modelling found a net health gain from diagnosis of –0.27 to 2.51 quality-adjusted life-years at the willingness-to-pay threshold of £15,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. The cost-effective protocols cascaded from genetically confirmed index cases by contacting first- and second-degree relatives simultaneously and directly. Interviews found a service-led direct-contact approach was more reliable, but combining direct and indirect approaches, guided by index patients and family relationships, may be more acceptable. Limitations Systematic reviews were not used in the economic analysis, as relevant studies were lacking or of poor quality. As only a proportion of those with primary care-coded familial hypercholesterolaemia are likely to actually have familial hypercholesterolaemia, CPRD analyses are likely to underestimate the true effect. The cost-effectiveness analysis required assumptions related to the long-term cardiovascular disease risk, the effect of treatment on cholesterol and the generalisability of estimates from the data sets. Interview recruitment was limited to white English-speaking participants. Conclusions Based on limited evidence, most cost-effective cascade-testing protocols, diagnosing most relatives, select index cases by genetic testing, with services directly contacting relatives, and contacting second-degree relatives even if first-degree relatives have not been tested. Combined approaches to contact relatives may be more suitable for some families. Future work Establish a long-term familial hypercholesterolaemia cohort, measuring cholesterol levels, treatment and cardiovascular outcomes. Conduct a randomised study comparing different approaches to contact relatives. Study registration This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42018117445 and CRD42019125775. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 27, No. 16. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Funder

Health Technology Assessment programme

Publisher

National Institute for Health and Care Research

Subject

Health Policy

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3