Benjamin P Linas1, Angela Y Wong, Kenneth A Freedberg, C Robert Horsburgh. 1. HIV Epidemiology and Outcomes Research Unit, Boston Medical Center, Section of Infectious Disease, Evans Biomedical Research Center, 650 Albany St. Rm 647, Boston, MA 02118, USA. benjamin.linas@bmc.org
Abstract
RATIONALE: To improve the effectiveness of tuberculosis (TB) control programs in the United States by identifying cost-effective priorities for screening for latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI). OBJECTIVES: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of LTBI screening using the tuberculin skin test (TST)and interferon-g release assays (IGRAs). METHODS: A Markov model of screening for LTBI with TST and IGRA in risk-groups considered in current LTBI screening guidelines. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: In all risk-groups, TST and IGRA screening resulted in increased mean life expectancy, ranging from 0.03–0.24 life-months per person screened. IGRA screening resulted in greater life expectancy gains than TST. Screening always cost more than not screening, but IGRA was cost-saving compared with TST in some groups. Four patterns of cost-effectiveness emerged, related to four risk categories. (1) Individuals at highest risk of TB reactivation (close contacts and those infected with HIV): the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of IGRA compared with TST was less than $100,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. (2) The foreign-born: IGRA was cost-saving compared with TST and cost-effective compared with no screening (ICER ,$100,000 per QALY gained). (3) Vulnerable populations (e.g., homeless, drug user, or former prisoner): the ICER of TST screening was approximately $100,000–$150,000 per QALY gained, but IGRA was not cost-effective. (4) Medical comorbidities (e.g., diabetes): the ICER of screening with TST or IGRA was greater than $100,000 per QALY. CONCLUSIONS: LTBI screening guidelines could make progress toward TB elimination by prioritizing screening for close contacts, those infected with HIV, and the foreign-born regardless of time living in the United States. For these groups, IGRA screening was more cost-effective than TST screening.
RATIONALE: To improve the effectiveness of tuberculosis (TB) control programs in the United States by identifying cost-effective priorities for screening for latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI). OBJECTIVES: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of LTBI screening using the tuberculin skin test (TST)and interferon-g release assays (IGRAs). METHODS: A Markov model of screening for LTBI with TST and IGRA in risk-groups considered in current LTBI screening guidelines. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: In all risk-groups, TST and IGRA screening resulted in increased mean life expectancy, ranging from 0.03–0.24 life-months per person screened. IGRA screening resulted in greater life expectancy gains than TST. Screening always cost more than not screening, but IGRA was cost-saving compared with TST in some groups. Four patterns of cost-effectiveness emerged, related to four risk categories. (1) Individuals at highest risk of TB reactivation (close contacts and those infected with HIV): the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of IGRA compared with TST was less than $100,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. (2) The foreign-born: IGRA was cost-saving compared with TST and cost-effective compared with no screening (ICER ,$100,000 per QALY gained). (3) Vulnerable populations (e.g., homeless, drug user, or former prisoner): the ICER of TST screening was approximately $100,000–$150,000 per QALY gained, but IGRA was not cost-effective. (4) Medical comorbidities (e.g., diabetes): the ICER of screening with TST or IGRA was greater than $100,000 per QALY. CONCLUSIONS: LTBI screening guidelines could make progress toward TB elimination by prioritizing screening for close contacts, those infected with HIV, and the foreign-born regardless of time living in the United States. For these groups, IGRA screening was more cost-effective than TST screening.
Authors: P M Small; P C Hopewell; S P Singh; A Paz; J Parsonnet; D C Ruston; G F Schecter; C L Daley; G K Schoolnik Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1994-06-16 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: D Shepardson; S M Marks; H Chesson; A Kerrigan; D P Holland; N Scott; X Tian; A S Borisov; N Shang; C M Heilig; T R Sterling; M E Villarino; W R Mac Kenzie Journal: Int J Tuberc Lung Dis Date: 2013-12 Impact factor: 2.373
Authors: Jason E Stout; Shereen Katrak; Neela D Goswami; Brianna L Norton; Ellen R Fortenberry; Evelyn Foust; Peter A Leone Journal: Public Health Rep Date: 2014 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 2.792
Authors: Gompol Suwanpimolkul; Leah G Jarlsberg; Jennifer A Grinsdale; Dennis Osmond; L Masae Kawamura; Philip C Hopewell; Midori Kato-Maeda Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2013-05-01 Impact factor: 21.405