BMJ global health · 2025
Cost-effectiveness of modified fully oral 9-month treatment regimens for rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis in Belarus, Georgia, Kazakhstan and the Republic of Moldova.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Allel Kasim, Palmer Tom, Abou Jaoude Gerard Joseph, Korotych Oleksandr, Yedilbayev Askar, Vilc Valentina, Corloteanu Andrei, Macari Mariana, Evghenia Cula, Laticevschi Dumitru, Shakhimurat-Shaimovich Ismailov, Anar-Saduakasovna Rakisheva, Gulzhan-Elbrusovna Tulepova, Anatolievna-Ryazanet Daria, Shahrizada-Yergalymovna Aimbekova, Yatskevich Natalia, Skrahina Alena, Zhurkin Dmitry, Avaliani Zaza, Kiria Nana, Lomtadze Nino, Kiria Nino, Avaliani Teona, Khonelidze Irma, Danelia Maka, Maxim Corina, Haghparast-Bidgoli Hassan, Skordis Jolene
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Prior to 2020, treatment options for multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) were limited and typically involved long treatment durations and high financial burdens. In the eastern European and central Asian (EECA) region, traditional inpatient tuberculosis (TB) care models, alongside high MDR-TB rates, escalate nosocomial transmission risks and treatment costs. Modified, fully oral, shorter treatment regimens (mSTR) implemented in the WHO European Region under operational research conditions offered a potential reduction in the burden of MDR-TB treatment for both patients and health systems.
METHODS: We conducted the first regional evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of the novel mSTR treatment regimen compared with the standard of care (SOC) in Belarus, Georgia, Kazakhstan and Republic of Moldova. We used cohort data on mSTR efficacy and WHO data on SOC in patients with MDR-TB. We used a Markov model, with treatment costs calculated from the provider perspective. Outcomes were measured in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) calculated per QALY gained in each country. An annual 3% discount rate was used for both costs and outcomes. We performed univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) to assess the robustness of our cost-effectiveness calculations under varying assumptions. Finally, we estimated potential cost savings if mSTR was implemented nationally and we evaluated the incremental net monetary benefit (iNMB) and willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds based on Wood et al's country-level cost-effectiveness thresholds. All costs were reported in 2022 USD.
RESULTS: We estimated that mSTR can reduce TB treatment costs by between 23% and 47% and drug costs by 39% to 74%, compared with SOC in the countries studied. mSTR resulted in cost savings of between $3596 and $8174 per patient and offered additional health gains of between 0.56 to 2.69 QALYs per patient. mSTR remained cost-effective (iNMB>0) compared with SOC in 78%, 85%, 91% and 92% of PSA simulations in Belarus, Georgia, Kazakhstan and Republic of Moldova, respectively, when compared with their country-level WTP threshold. Implementing mSTR in up to 80% of MDR/rifampicin-resistant TB patients may result in cost savings of $20.5, 2.5, 0.7 and 0.2 million in Kazakhstan, Belarus, Republic of Moldova and Georgia; equivalent to 17%, 3%, 4% and 1% of their national TB budgets, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Compared with SOC, mSTR is a more cost-effective treatment option for MDR/RR-TB, which should be considered by policymakers in the EECA region. Using insights from current implementations to scale up, plan operational changes and reallocate savings from mSTR could greatly enhance TB services and patient care.
METHODS: We conducted the first regional evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of the novel mSTR treatment regimen compared with the standard of care (SOC) in Belarus, Georgia, Kazakhstan and Republic of Moldova. We used cohort data on mSTR efficacy and WHO data on SOC in patients with MDR-TB. We used a Markov model, with treatment costs calculated from the provider perspective. Outcomes were measured in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) calculated per QALY gained in each country. An annual 3% discount rate was used for both costs and outcomes. We performed univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) to assess the robustness of our cost-effectiveness calculations under varying assumptions. Finally, we estimated potential cost savings if mSTR was implemented nationally and we evaluated the incremental net monetary benefit (iNMB) and willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds based on Wood et al's country-level cost-effectiveness thresholds. All costs were reported in 2022 USD.
RESULTS: We estimated that mSTR can reduce TB treatment costs by between 23% and 47% and drug costs by 39% to 74%, compared with SOC in the countries studied. mSTR resulted in cost savings of between $3596 and $8174 per patient and offered additional health gains of between 0.56 to 2.69 QALYs per patient. mSTR remained cost-effective (iNMB>0) compared with SOC in 78%, 85%, 91% and 92% of PSA simulations in Belarus, Georgia, Kazakhstan and Republic of Moldova, respectively, when compared with their country-level WTP threshold. Implementing mSTR in up to 80% of MDR/rifampicin-resistant TB patients may result in cost savings of $20.5, 2.5, 0.7 and 0.2 million in Kazakhstan, Belarus, Republic of Moldova and Georgia; equivalent to 17%, 3%, 4% and 1% of their national TB budgets, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Compared with SOC, mSTR is a more cost-effective treatment option for MDR/RR-TB, which should be considered by policymakers in the EECA region. Using insights from current implementations to scale up, plan operational changes and reallocate savings from mSTR could greatly enhance TB services and patient care.