Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
AIM: Microarray technology has a significantly higher clinical yield than karyotyping in individuals with global developmental delay (GDD). Despite this, it has not yet been routinely implemented as a screening test owing to the perception that this approach is more expensive. We aimed to evaluate the effect that replacing karyotype with array-based comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) would have on the total cost of the workup for GDD. METHOD: We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of aCGH compared with karyotyping by retrospectively analysing the cost of workup in a cohort of 114 children (69 males; 45 females) representing a consecutive series of children diagnosed with GDD. RESULTS: The average increase in cost if aCGH had been performed instead of karyotyping as a first test was $442 per individual when performed by a private company (98% confidence interval $238-604). In contrast, $106 (98% confidence interval -$17 to $195) would have been saved if aCGH was performed locally in a laboratory already possessing the required technology. The incremental cost per additional diagnosis was estimated to be $12,874 if aCGH was performed in a private laboratory, but <$1379 if performed locally. (Costs reported in Canadian dollars, using 2010 prices.) INTERPRETATION: aCGH would be cost-effective as a first genetic test in the clinical evaluation of individuals with GDD.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Trakadis et al. (2011) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: