IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v20y2000i1p87-100.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Risk Estimation and Value‐of‐Information Analysis for Three Proposed Genetic Screening Programs for Chronic Beryllium Disease Prevention

Author

Listed:
  • Scott M. Bartell
  • Rafael A. Ponce
  • Timothy K. Takaro
  • Richard O. Zerbe
  • Gilbert S. Omenn
  • Elaine M. Faustman

Abstract

Genetic differences (polymorphisms) among members of a population are thought to influence susceptibility to various environmental exposures. In practice, however, this information is rarely incorporated into quantitative risk assessment and risk management. We describe an analytic framework for predicting the risk reduction and value‐of‐information (VOI) resulting from specific risk management applications of genetic biomarkers, and we apply the framework to the example of occupational chronic beryllium disease (CBD), an immune‐mediated pulmonary granulomatous disease. One described Human Leukocyte Antigen gene variant, HLA‐DPβ1*0201, contains a substitution of glutamate for lysine at position 69 that appears to have high sensitivity (∼94%) but low specificity (∼70%) with respect to CBD among individuals occupationally exposed to respirable beryllium. The expected postintervention CBD prevalence rates for using the genetic variant (1) as a required job placement screen, (2) as a medical screen for semiannual in place of annual lymphocyte proliferation testing, or (3) as a voluntary job placement screen are 0.08%, 0.8%, and 0.6%, respectively, in a hypothetical cohort with 1% baseline CBD prevalence. VOI analysis is used to examine the reduction in total social cost, calculated as the net value of disease reduction and financial expenditures, expected for proposed CBD intervention programs based on the genetic susceptibility test. For the example cohort, the expected net VOI per beryllium worker for genetically based testing and intervention is $13,000, $1,800, and $5,100, respectively, based on a health valuation of $1.45 million per CBD case avoided. VOI results for alternative CBD valuations are also presented. Despite large parameter uncertainty, probabilistic analysis predicts generally positive utility for each of the three evaluated programs when avoidance of a CBD case is valued at $1 million or higher. Although the utility of a proposed risk management program may be evaluated solely in terms of risk reduction and financial costs, decisions about genetic testing and program implementation must also consider serious social, legal, and ethical factors.

Suggested Citation

  • Scott M. Bartell & Rafael A. Ponce & Timothy K. Takaro & Richard O. Zerbe & Gilbert S. Omenn & Elaine M. Faustman, 2000. "Risk Estimation and Value‐of‐Information Analysis for Three Proposed Genetic Screening Programs for Chronic Beryllium Disease Prevention," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(1), pages 87-100, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:20:y:2000:i:1:p:87-100
    DOI: 10.1111/0272-4332.00009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/0272-4332.00009
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/0272-4332.00009?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
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Fumie Yokota & Kimberly M. Thompson, 2004. "Value of Information Literature Analysis: A Review of Applications in Health Risk Management," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 24(3), pages 287-298, June.

    More about this item

    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:wly:riskan:v:20:y:2000:i:1:p:87-100. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    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.