EconPapers    
Economics at your fingertips  
 

Demand for Precision Medicine: A Discrete-Choice Experiment and External Validation Study

Dean A. Regier (), David L. Veenstra, Anirban Basu and Josh J. Carlson
Additional contact information
Dean A. Regier: BC Cancer
David L. Veenstra: University of Washington
Anirban Basu: University of Washington
Josh J. Carlson: University of Washington

PharmacoEconomics, 2020, vol. 38, issue 1, No 5, 57-68

Abstract: Abstract Background A limited evidence base and lack of clear clinical guidelines challenge healthcare systems’ adoption of precision medicine. The effect of these conditions on demand is not understood. Objective This research estimated the public’s preferences and demand for precision medicine outcomes. Methods A discrete-choice experiment survey was conducted with an online sample of the US public who had recent healthcare experience. Statistical analysis was undertaken using an error components mixed logit model. The responsiveness of demand in the context of a changing evidence base was estimated through the price elasticity of demand. External validation was examined using real-world demand for the 21-gene recurrence score assay for breast cancer. Results In total, 1124 (of 1849) individuals completed the web-based survey. The most important outcomes were survival gains with statistical uncertainty, cost of testing, and medical expert agreement on changing care based on test results. The value ($US, year 2017 values) for a test where most (vs. few) experts agreed to changing treatment based on test results was $US1100 (95% confidence interval [CI] 916–1286). Respondents were willing to pay $US265 (95% CI 46–486) for a test that could result in greater certainty around life-expectancy gains. The predicted demand of the assay was 9% in 2005 and 66% in 2014, compared with real-world uptake of 7% and 71% (root-mean-square prediction error 0.11). Demand was sensitive to price (1% increase in price resulted in > 1% change in demand) when first introduced and insensitive to price (1% increase in price resulted in

Date: 2020
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40273-019-00834-0 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:pharme:v:38:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1007_s40273-019-00834-0

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/40273

DOI: 10.1007/s40273-019-00834-0

Access Statistics for this article

PharmacoEconomics is currently edited by Timothy Wrightson and Christopher I. Carswell

More articles in PharmacoEconomics from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().

 
Page updated 2025-04-25
Handle: RePEc:spr:pharme:v:38:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1007_s40273-019-00834-0