Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Cost and cost-effectiveness of tuberculosis tre...

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Cost and cost-effectiveness of tuberculosis treatment shortening: a model-based analysis

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Published
  • GB Gomez
  • David Wesley Dowdy
  • ML Bastos
  • A Zwerling
  • S Sweeney
  • N Foster
  • A Trajman
  • MA Islam
  • S Kapiga
  • E Sinanovic
Close
Article number726
<mark>Journal publication date</mark>1/12/2016
<mark>Journal</mark>BMC Infectious Diseases
Issue number1
Volume16
Number of pages13
Publication StatusPublished
<mark>Original language</mark>English

Abstract

Background
Despite improvements in treatment success rates for tuberculosis (TB), current six-month regimen duration remains a challenge for many National TB Programmes, health systems, and patients. There is increasing investment in the development of shortened regimens with a number of candidates in phase 3 trials.

Methods
We developed an individual-based decision analytic model to assess the cost-effectiveness of a hypothetical four-month regimen for first-line treatment of TB, assuming non-inferiority to current regimens of six-month duration. The model was populated using extensive, empirically-collected data to estimate the economic impact on both health systems and patients of regimen shortening for first-line TB treatment in South Africa, Brazil, Bangladesh, and Tanzania. We explicitly considered ‘real world’ constraints such as sub-optimal guideline adherence.

Results
From a societal perspective, a shortened regimen, priced at USD1 per day, could be a cost-saving option in South Africa, Brazil, and Tanzania, but would not be cost-effective in Bangladesh when compared to one gross domestic product (GDP) per capita. Incorporating ‘real world’ constraints reduces cost-effectiveness. Patient-incurred costs could be reduced in all settings. From a health service perspective, increased drug costs need to be balanced against decreased delivery costs. The new regimen would remain a cost-effective option, when compared to each countries’ GDP per capita, even if new drugs cost up to USD7.5 and USD53.8 per day in South Africa and Brazil; this threshold was above USD1 in Tanzania and under USD1 in Bangladesh.

Conclusion
Reducing the duration of first-line TB treatment has the potential for substantial economic gains from a patient perspective. The potential economic gains for health services may also be important, but will be context-specific and dependent on the appropriate pricing of any new regimen.