Suely Conceição Alves da Silva1, Maria Claudia Vater1,2, Daniela Maria de Paula Ramalho1, Isabela Neves de Almeida3,4, Silvana Spíndola de Miranda3, Afrânio Kritski1. 1. Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Programa Acadêmico de Tuberculose, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil. 2. Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Núcleo de Bioética e Ética Aplicada, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil. 3. Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Faculdade de Medicina, Laboratório de Pesquisa em Micobactérias, Departamento de Clínica Médica, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brasil. 4. Universidade Federal de Ouro Preto, Escola de Farmácia, Departamento de Análises Clínicas, Ouro Preto, MG, Brasil.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The intensification of research and innovation with the creation of networks of rapid and effective molecular tests as strategies for the end of tuberculosis are essential to avoid late diagnosis and for the eradication of the disease. We aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of Xpert®MTB/RIF (Xpert) in the diagnosis of drug-resistant tuberculosis in reference units, in scenarios with and without subsidies, and the respective cost adjustment for today. METHODS: The analyses were performed considering as criterion of effectiveness, negative culture or clinical improvement in the sixth month of follow-up. The comparison was performed using two diagnostic strategies for the drug susceptibility test (DST), BactecTMMGITTM960 System, versus Xpert. The cost effectiveness and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) were calculated and dollar-corrected for American inflation (US$ 1.00 = R$ 5,29). RESULTS: Subsidized Xpert had the lowest cost of US$ 33.48 (R$67,52) and the highest incremental average efficiency (13.57), thus being a dominated analysis. After the inflation was calculated, the mean cost was DST-MGIT=US$ 74.85 (R$ 396,73) and Xpert = US$ 37.33 (R$197,86) with subsidies. CONCLUSIONS: The Xpert in the diagnosis of TB-DR in these reference units was cost-effective with subsidies. In the absence of a subsidy, Xpert in TB-DR is not characterized as cost effective. This factor reveals the vulnerability of countries dependent on international organizations' subsidy policies.
INTRODUCTION: The intensification of research and innovation with the creation of networks of rapid and effective molecular tests as strategies for the end of tuberculosis are essential to avoid late diagnosis and for the eradication of the disease. We aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of Xpert®MTB/RIF (Xpert) in the diagnosis of drug-resistant tuberculosis in reference units, in scenarios with and without subsidies, and the respective cost adjustment for today. METHODS: The analyses were performed considering as criterion of effectiveness, negative culture or clinical improvement in the sixth month of follow-up. The comparison was performed using two diagnostic strategies for the drug susceptibility test (DST), BactecTMMGITTM960 System, versus Xpert. The cost effectiveness and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) were calculated and dollar-corrected for American inflation (US$ 1.00 = R$ 5,29). RESULTS: Subsidized Xpert had the lowest cost of US$ 33.48 (R$67,52) and the highest incremental average efficiency (13.57), thus being a dominated analysis. After the inflation was calculated, the mean cost was DST-MGIT=US$ 74.85 (R$ 396,73) and Xpert = US$ 37.33 (R$197,86) with subsidies. CONCLUSIONS: The Xpert in the diagnosis of TB-DR in these reference units was cost-effective with subsidies. In the absence of a subsidy, Xpert in TB-DR is not characterized as cost effective. This factor reveals the vulnerability of countries dependent on international organizations' subsidy policies.
Authors: Catharina C Boehme; Pamela Nabeta; Doris Hillemann; Mark P Nicol; Shubhada Shenai; Fiorella Krapp; Jenny Allen; Rasim Tahirli; Robert Blakemore; Roxana Rustomjee; Ana Milovic; Martin Jones; Sean M O'Brien; David H Persing; Sabine Ruesch-Gerdes; Eduardo Gotuzzo; Camilla Rodrigues; David Alland; Mark D Perkins Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2010-09-01 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: David J Horne; Mikashmi Kohli; Jerry S Zifodya; Ian Schiller; Nandini Dendukuri; Deanna Tollefson; Samuel G Schumacher; Eleanor A Ochodo; Madhukar Pai; Karen R Steingart Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2019-06-07
Authors: D M P Ramalho; P F C Miranda; M K Andrade; T Brígido; M P Dalcolmo; E Mesquita; C F Dias; A N Gambirasio; J Ueleres Braga; A Detjen; P P J Phillips; I Langley; P I Fujiwara; S B Squire; M M Oliveira; A L Kritski Journal: BMC Infect Dis Date: 2017-08-15 Impact factor: 3.090
Authors: Pren Naidoo; Rory Dunbar; Carl Lombard; Elizabeth du Toit; Judy Caldwell; Anne Detjen; S Bertel Squire; Donald A Enarson; Nulda Beyers Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-03-01 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Gian Luca Di Tanna; Ali Raza Khaki; Grant Theron; Kerrigan McCarthy; Helen Cox; Lucy Mupfumi; Anete Trajman; Lynn Sodai Zijenah; Peter Mason; Tsitsi Bandason; Betina Durovni; Wilbert Bara; Michael Hoelscher; Petra Clowes; Chacha Mangu; Duncan Chanda; Alexander Pym; Peter Mwaba; Frank Cobelens; Mark P Nicol; Keertan Dheda; Gavin Churchyard; Katherine Fielding; John Z Metcalfe Journal: Lancet Glob Health Date: 2019-02 Impact factor: 26.763