Cost-effectiveness of diagnosing and treating patients with early Alzheimer's disease with anti-amyloid treatment in a clinical setting.

BackgroundThe introduction of anti-amyloid treatments (AAT) for Alzheimer's disease (AD) has put the cost-effectiveness into focus.ObjectiveEstimate the potential cost-effectiveness of diagnostic pathways combined with AAT for early AD.MethodsDiagnostic accuracy of blood-based (BBM) and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers was obtained from Norwegian memory clinics using positron emission tomography (PET) as reference standard. In a health-economic model, the cost-effectiveness of three diagnostic strategies was estimated relying either on BBM (p-tau 217), CSF (Aβ42/40 ratio), and BBM with CSF confirmatory testing and compared with standard of care (SoC) and compared with CSF-AAT. The model consisted of a decision tree reflecting the diagnostic process and a subsequent Markov cohort model starting at mild cognitive impairment due to AD. All strategies except SoC were combined with AAT including costs of treatment (assumed €5000/year), infusions and monitoring.ResultsCompared with SoC all three strategies (CSF-AAT, BBM-AAT, and BBM-CSF-AAT) resulted in QALY gains at higher costs, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of 110k€, 141k€ and 110k€ respectively. Compared with CSF-AAT both BBM-AAT and BBM-CSF-AAT strategies resulted in QALYs lost at lower costs, with an ICER of 27k€ and 109k€ respectively. Results were particularly sensitive to the price of AAT and possible subcutaneous administration.ConclusionsCompared with SoC all three strategies are potentially not cost-effective as they exceeded the Swedish maximum willingness to pay threshold of €94,800 per QALY gained. BBM-CSF-AAT versus CSF-AAT is potentially cost-effective if willing to accept its QALY loss. Discussions on budget impact on different payers are needed after introducing AAT.