Kavina Manalan1, Nathan Green2, Amber Arnold3, Graham S Cooke2, Martin Dedicoat4, Marc Lipman5, Angela Loyse6, Tom S Harrison6, Onn Min Kon1. 1. Division of Medicine, Imperial College London, United Kingdom; Tuberculosis Service, St Mary's Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, United Kingdom. 2. Division of Medicine, Imperial College London, United Kingdom. 3. Institute for Infection and Immunity, St. George's University of London, London, United Kingdom; Clinical Infection Unit, St George's Healthcare NHS Trust, London SW17 0QT, United Kingdom. Electronic address: amber.arnold@doctors.org.uk. 4. Department of Infectious Diseases, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, United Kingdom. 5. Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust and UCL Respiratory, Division of Medicine, University College London, United Kingdom. 6. Institute for Infection and Immunity, St. George's University of London, London, United Kingdom; Clinical Infection Unit, St George's Healthcare NHS Trust, London SW17 0QT, United Kingdom.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Prioritisation of oral bedaquiline over the injectable agents in the treatment of multidrug-resistant Tuberculosis (MDR-TB) in the World Health Organisations (WHO) 2019 guidelines prompted this UK analysis of cost implications. The objective was to estimate the costs of amikacin versus bedaquiline in MDR TB treatment regimens using a historical cohort where the injectable agents were the standard of care. METHODS: This was a retrospective study using a known cohort of UK patients treated with an injectable agent, with data available on resource use, costs for the use of amikacin were compared with those for bedaquiline, based on recommended monitoring for bedaquiline. RESULTS: The estimated cost of treatment per patient had mean (sd) of £27,236 (4952) for the observed injectable group, £30,264 (3392) and 36,309 (3901) for the 6 and 8 month amikacin groups, and £31,760 (2092) for the bedaquiline group. The cost in the bedaquiline group was £30,772 (1855) with a 10% reduction and £27,079 (1234) with a 33% reduction in-patient stay. CONCLUSIONS: In most scenarios, bedaquiline is close to cost neutral compared with injectable therapy, especially if, as expected, some reduction in duration of admission is possible as a result of bedaquiline's more rapid culture conversion.
OBJECTIVES: Prioritisation of oral bedaquiline over the injectable agents in the treatment of multidrug-resistant Tuberculosis (MDR-TB) in the World Health Organisations (WHO) 2019 guidelines prompted this UK analysis of cost implications. The objective was to estimate the costs of amikacin versus bedaquiline in MDR TB treatment regimens using a historical cohort where the injectable agents were the standard of care. METHODS: This was a retrospective study using a known cohort of UK patients treated with an injectable agent, with data available on resource use, costs for the use of amikacin were compared with those for bedaquiline, based on recommended monitoring for bedaquiline. RESULTS: The estimated cost of treatment per patient had mean (sd) of £27,236 (4952) for the observed injectable group, £30,264 (3392) and 36,309 (3901) for the 6 and 8 month amikacin groups, and £31,760 (2092) for the bedaquiline group. The cost in the bedaquiline group was £30,772 (1855) with a 10% reduction and £27,079 (1234) with a 33% reduction in-patient stay. CONCLUSIONS: In most scenarios, bedaquiline is close to cost neutral compared with injectable therapy, especially if, as expected, some reduction in duration of admission is possible as a result of bedaquiline's more rapid culture conversion.