economic analysis of alternative strategies for detection of alk rearrangements in non small cell lung cancer
Clicks: 266
ID: 138150
2016
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Popular Article
30.0
/100
266 views
36 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
PopularRanked #21 of 229 articles by views in Open forum infectious diseases
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 229 in total.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Identification of alterations in ALK gene and development of ALK-directed therapies have increased the need for accurate and efficient detection methodologies. To date, research has focused on the concordance between the two most commonly used technologies, fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) and immunohistochemistry (IHC). However, inter-test concordance reflects only one, albeit important, aspect of the diagnostic process; laboratories, hospitals, and payors must understand the cost and workflow of ALK rearrangement detection strategies. Through literature review combined with interviews of pathologists and laboratory directors in the U.S. and Europe, a cost-impact model was developed that compared four alternative testing strategies—IHC only, FISH only, IHC pre-screen followed by FISH confirmation, and parallel testing by both IHC and FISH. Interviews were focused on costs of reagents, consumables, equipment, and personnel. The resulting model showed that testing by IHC alone cost less ($90.07 in the U.S., $68.69 in Europe) than either independent or parallel testing by both FISH and IHC ($441.85 in the U.S. and $279.46 in Europe). The strategies differed in cost of execution, turnaround time, reimbursement, and number of positive results detected, suggesting that laboratories must weigh the costs and the clinical benefit of available ALK testing strategies.
| Reference Key |
doshi2016diagnosticseconomic
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | ;Shivang Doshi;David Ray;Karen Stein;Jie Zhang;Prasad Koduru;Franz Fogt;Axel Wellman;Ricky Wat;Charles Mathews |
| Journal | Open forum infectious diseases |
| Year | 2016 |
| DOI |
10.3390/diagnostics6010004
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.