IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v42y2022i4p474-486.html

A Value-of-Information Framework for Personalizing the Timing of Surveillance Testing

Author

Listed:
  • Aasthaa Bansal

    (The Comparative Health Outcomes, Policy, and Economics Institute, School of Pharmacy, University of Washington, Seattle WA, USA)

  • Patrick J. Heagerty

    (Department of Biostatistics, University of Washington, Seattle WA, USA)

  • Lurdes Y. T. Inoue

    (Department of Biostatistics, University of Washington, Seattle WA, USA)

  • David L. Veenstra

    (The Comparative Health Outcomes, Policy, and Economics Institute, School of Pharmacy, University of Washington, Seattle WA, USA)

  • Charles J. Wolock

    (Department of Biostatistics, University of Washington, Seattle WA, USA)

  • Anirban Basu

    (The Comparative Health Outcomes, Policy, and Economics Institute, School of Pharmacy, University of Washington, Seattle WA, USA)

Abstract

Background Patient surveillance using repeated biomarker measurements presents an opportunity to detect and treat disease progression early. Frequent surveillance testing using biomarkers is recommended and routinely conducted in several diseases, including cancer and diabetes. However, frequent testing involves tradeoffs. Although surveillance tests provide information about current disease status, the complications and costs of frequent tests may not be justified for patients who are at low risk of progression. Predictions based on patients’ earlier biomarker values may be used to inform decision making; however, predictions are uncertain, leading to decision uncertainty. Methods We propose the Personalized Risk-Adaptive Surveillance (PRAISE) framework, a novel method for embedding predictions into a value-of-information (VOI) framework to account for the cost of uncertainty over time and determine the time point at which collection of biomarker data would be most valuable. The proposed sequential decision-making framework is innovative in that it leverages the patient’s longitudinal history, considers individual benefits and harms, and allows for dynamic tailoring of surveillance intervals by considering the uncertainty in current information and estimating the probability that new information may change treatment decisions, as well as the impact of this change on patient outcomes. Results When applied to data from cystic fibrosis patients, PRAISE lowers costs by allowing some patients to skip a visit, compared to an “always test†strategy. It does so without compromising expected survival, by recommending less frequent testing among those who are unlikely to be treated at the skipped time point. Conclusions A VOI-based approach to patient monitoring is feasible and could be applied to several diseases to develop more cost-effective and personalized strategies for ongoing patient care. Highlights In many patient-monitoring settings, the complications and costs of frequent tests are not justified for patients who are at low risk of disease progression. Predictions based on patient history may be used to individualize the timing of patient visits based on evolving risk. We propose Personalized Risk-Adaptive Surveillance (PRAISE), a novel method for personalizing the timing of surveillance testing, where prediction modeling projects the disease trajectory and a value-of-information (VOI)–based pragmatic decision-theoretic framework quantifies patient- and time-specific benefit-harm tradeoffs. A VOI-based approach to patient monitoring could be applied to several diseases to develop more personalized and cost-effective strategies for ongoing patient care.

Suggested Citation

  • Aasthaa Bansal & Patrick J. Heagerty & Lurdes Y. T. Inoue & David L. Veenstra & Charles J. Wolock & Anirban Basu, 2022. "A Value-of-Information Framework for Personalizing the Timing of Surveillance Testing," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 42(4), pages 474-486, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:42:y:2022:i:4:p:474-486
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X211049213
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X211049213
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X211049213?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jagpreet Chhatwal & Oguzhan Alagoz & Elizabeth S. Burnside, 2010. "Optimal Breast Biopsy Decision-Making Based on Mammographic Features and Demographic Factors," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 58(6), pages 1577-1591, December.
    2. David O. Meltzer & Ties Hoomans & Jeanette W. Chung & Anirban Basu, 2011. "Minimal Modeling Approaches to Value of Information Analysis for Health Research," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 31(6), pages 1-22, November.
    3. Turgay Ayer & Oguzhan Alagoz & Natasha K. Stout, 2012. "OR Forum---A POMDP Approach to Personalize Mammography Screening Decisions," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 60(5), pages 1019-1034, October.
    4. David O. Meltzer & Ties Hoomans & Jeannette W. Chung & Anirban Basu & Kathryn J. Aikin & Amie C. O’Donoghue & John L. Swasy & Helen W. Sullivan & David G. T. Whitehurst & Stirling Bryan & Martyn Lew, 2011. "Minimal Modeling Approaches to Value of Information Analysis for Health Research," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 31(6), pages 785-786, November.
    5. Oguzhan Alagoz & Jagpreet Chhatwal & Elizabeth S. Burnside, 2013. "Optimal Policies for Reducing Unnecessary Follow-Up Mammography Exams in Breast Cancer Diagnosis," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 10(3), pages 200-224, September.
    6. Jingyu Zhang & Brian T. Denton & Hari Balasubramanian & Nilay D. Shah & Brant A. Inman, 2012. "Optimization of Prostate Biopsy Referral Decisions," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 14(4), pages 529-547, October.
    7. Briggs, Andrew & Sculpher, Mark & Claxton, Karl, 2006. "Decision Modelling for Health Economic Evaluation," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198526629.
    8. Oguzhan Alagoz & Heather Hsu & Andrew J. Schaefer & Mark S. Roberts, 2010. "Markov Decision Processes: A Tool for Sequential Decision Making under Uncertainty," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 30(4), pages 474-483, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Eike Nohdurft & Elisa Long & Stefan Spinler, 2017. "Was Angelina Jolie Right? Optimizing Cancer Prevention Strategies Among BRCA Mutation Carriers," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 14(3), pages 139-169, September.
    2. Robert Kraig Helmeczi & Can Kavaklioglu & Mucahit Cevik & Davood Pirayesh Neghab, 2023. "A multi-objective constrained partially observable Markov decision process model for breast cancer screening," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 1-42, June.
    3. Malek Ebadi & Raha Akhavan-Tabatabaei, 2021. "Personalized Cotesting Policies for Cervical Cancer Screening: A POMDP Approach," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-20, March.
    4. del Campo, Cristina & Bai, Jiaru & Keller, L. Robin, 2025. "Modeling cost-effectiveness analysis of treatment sequencing," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    5. Elliot Lee & Mariel Lavieri & Michael Volk & Yongcai Xu, 2015. "Applying reinforcement learning techniques to detect hepatocellular carcinoma under limited screening capacity," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 363-375, September.
    6. Blythe Adamson & Dobromir Dimitrov & Beth Devine & Ruanne Barnabas, 2017. "The Potential Cost-Effectiveness of HIV Vaccines: A Systematic Review," PharmacoEconomics - Open, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 1-12, March.
    7. Haitham Tuffaha & Claire Rothery & Natalia Kunst & Chris Jackson & Mark Strong & Stephen Birch, 2021. "A Review of Web-Based Tools for Value-of-Information Analysis," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 19(5), pages 645-651, September.
    8. Mehmet A. Ergun & Ali Hajjar & Oguzhan Alagoz & Murtuza Rampurwala, 2022. "Optimal breast cancer risk reduction policies tailored to personal risk level," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 25(3), pages 363-388, September.
    9. Wang, Fan & Zhang, Shengfan & Henderson, Louise M., 2018. "Adaptive decision-making of breast cancer mammography screening: A heuristic-based regression model," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 70-84.
    10. Jagpreet Chhatwal & Suren Jayasuriya & Elamin H. Elbasha, 2016. "Changing Cycle Lengths in State-Transition Models," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 36(8), pages 952-964, November.
    11. David Glynn & Vijay S. Gc & Karl Claxton & Chris Littlewood & Claire Rothery, 2024. "Rapid Assessment of the Need for Evidence: Applying the Principles of Value of Information to Research Prioritisation," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 42(9), pages 919-928, September.
    12. Kotas, Jakob & Ghate, Archis, 2018. "Bayesian learning of dose–response parameters from a cohort under response-guided dosing," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 265(1), pages 328-343.
    13. Sait Tunç & Oguzhan Alagoz & Elizabeth S. Burnside, 2022. "A new perspective on breast cancer diagnostic guidelines to reduce overdiagnosis," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 31(5), pages 2361-2378, May.
    14. Hossein Kamalzadeh & Vishal Ahuja & Michael Hahsler & Michael E. Bowen, 2021. "An Analytics‐Driven Approach for Optimal Individualized Diabetes Screening," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 30(9), pages 3161-3191, September.
    15. Jing Li & Ming Dong & Yijiong Ren & Kaiqi Yin, 2015. "How patient compliance impacts the recommendations for colorectal cancer screening," Journal of Combinatorial Optimization, Springer, vol. 30(4), pages 920-937, November.
    16. Majed Hadid & Adel Elomri & Tarek Mekkawy & Laoucine Kerbache & Abdelfatteh Omri & Halima Omri & Ruba Y. Taha & Anas Ahmad Hamad & Mohammed Hamad J. Thani, 2022. "Bibliometric analysis of cancer care operations management: current status, developments, and future directions," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 166-185, March.
    17. M. Reza Skandari & Steven M. Shechter, 2021. "Patient-Type Bayes-Adaptive Treatment Plans," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 69(2), pages 574-598, March.
    18. M. Reza Skandari & Steven M. Shechter & Nadia Zalunardo, 2015. "Optimal Vascular Access Choice for Patients on Hemodialysis," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 17(4), pages 608-619, October.
    19. Anirudh Tomer & Daan Nieboer & Monique J. Roobol & Ewout W. Steyerberg & Dimitris Rizopoulos, 2019. "Personalized schedules for surveillance of low‐risk prostate cancer patients," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 75(1), pages 153-162, March.
    20. Sina Ansari & Shakiba Enayati & Raha Akhavan-Tabatabaei & Julie M. Kapp, 2024. "Curbing the Opioid Crisis: Optimal Dynamic Policies for Preventive and Mitigating Interventions," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 21(3), pages 165-193, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:42:y:2022:i:4:p:474-486. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.