Cargando…

Cost analysis of rapid diagnostics for drug-resistant tuberculosis

BACKGROUND: Growth-based drug susceptibility testing (DST) is the reference standard for diagnosing drug-resistant tuberculosis (TB), but standard time to result (TTR) is typically ≥ 3 weeks. Rapid tests can reduce that TTR to days or hours, but accuracy may be lowered. In addition to the TTR and te...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Groessl, Erik J., Ganiats, Theodore G., Hillery, Naomi, Trollip, Andre, Jackson, Roberta L., Catanzaro, Donald G., Rodwell, Timothy C., Garfein, Richard S., Rodrigues, Camilla, Crudu, Valeriu, Victor, Thomas C., Catanzaro, Antonino
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5833048/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29499645
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12879-018-3013-0
_version_ 1783303413515157504
author Groessl, Erik J.
Ganiats, Theodore G.
Hillery, Naomi
Trollip, Andre
Jackson, Roberta L.
Catanzaro, Donald G.
Rodwell, Timothy C.
Garfein, Richard S.
Rodrigues, Camilla
Crudu, Valeriu
Victor, Thomas C.
Catanzaro, Antonino
author_facet Groessl, Erik J.
Ganiats, Theodore G.
Hillery, Naomi
Trollip, Andre
Jackson, Roberta L.
Catanzaro, Donald G.
Rodwell, Timothy C.
Garfein, Richard S.
Rodrigues, Camilla
Crudu, Valeriu
Victor, Thomas C.
Catanzaro, Antonino
author_sort Groessl, Erik J.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Growth-based drug susceptibility testing (DST) is the reference standard for diagnosing drug-resistant tuberculosis (TB), but standard time to result (TTR) is typically ≥ 3 weeks. Rapid tests can reduce that TTR to days or hours, but accuracy may be lowered. In addition to the TTR and test accuracy, the cost of a diagnostic test may affect whether it is adopted in clinical settings. We examine the cost-effectiveness of rapid diagnostics for extremely drug-resistant TB (XDR-TB) in three different high-prevalence settings. METHODS: 1128 patients with confirmed TB were enrolled at clinics in Mumbai, India; Chisinau, Moldova; and Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Patient sputum samples underwent DST for first and second line TB drugs using 2 growth-based (MGIT, MODS) and 2 molecular (Pyrosequencing [PSQ], line-probe assays [LPA]) assays. TTR was the primary measure of effectiveness. Sensitivity and specificity were also evaluated. The cost to perform each test at each site was recorded and included test-specific materials, personnel, and equipment costs. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated in terms of $/day saved. Sensitivity analyses examine the impact of batch size, equipment, and personnel costs. RESULTS: Our prior results indicated that the LPA and PSQ returned results in a little over 1 day. Mean cost per sample without equipment or overhead was $23, $28, $33, and $41 for the MODS, MGIT, PSQ, and LPA, respectively. For diagnosing XDR-TB, MODS was the most accurate, followed by PSQ, and LPA. MODS was quicker and less costly than MGIT. PSQ and LPA were considerably faster but cost more than MODS. Batch size and personnel costs were the main drivers of cost variation. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple factors must be weighed when selecting a test for diagnosis of XDR-TB. Rapid tests can greatly improve the time required to diagnose drug-resistant TB, potentially improving treatment success, and preventing the spread of XDR-TB. Faster time to result must be weighed against the potential for reduced accuracy, and increased costs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02170441. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12879-018-3013-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5833048
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-58330482018-03-05 Cost analysis of rapid diagnostics for drug-resistant tuberculosis Groessl, Erik J. Ganiats, Theodore G. Hillery, Naomi Trollip, Andre Jackson, Roberta L. Catanzaro, Donald G. Rodwell, Timothy C. Garfein, Richard S. Rodrigues, Camilla Crudu, Valeriu Victor, Thomas C. Catanzaro, Antonino BMC Infect Dis Research Article BACKGROUND: Growth-based drug susceptibility testing (DST) is the reference standard for diagnosing drug-resistant tuberculosis (TB), but standard time to result (TTR) is typically ≥ 3 weeks. Rapid tests can reduce that TTR to days or hours, but accuracy may be lowered. In addition to the TTR and test accuracy, the cost of a diagnostic test may affect whether it is adopted in clinical settings. We examine the cost-effectiveness of rapid diagnostics for extremely drug-resistant TB (XDR-TB) in three different high-prevalence settings. METHODS: 1128 patients with confirmed TB were enrolled at clinics in Mumbai, India; Chisinau, Moldova; and Port Elizabeth, South Africa. Patient sputum samples underwent DST for first and second line TB drugs using 2 growth-based (MGIT, MODS) and 2 molecular (Pyrosequencing [PSQ], line-probe assays [LPA]) assays. TTR was the primary measure of effectiveness. Sensitivity and specificity were also evaluated. The cost to perform each test at each site was recorded and included test-specific materials, personnel, and equipment costs. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated in terms of $/day saved. Sensitivity analyses examine the impact of batch size, equipment, and personnel costs. RESULTS: Our prior results indicated that the LPA and PSQ returned results in a little over 1 day. Mean cost per sample without equipment or overhead was $23, $28, $33, and $41 for the MODS, MGIT, PSQ, and LPA, respectively. For diagnosing XDR-TB, MODS was the most accurate, followed by PSQ, and LPA. MODS was quicker and less costly than MGIT. PSQ and LPA were considerably faster but cost more than MODS. Batch size and personnel costs were the main drivers of cost variation. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple factors must be weighed when selecting a test for diagnosis of XDR-TB. Rapid tests can greatly improve the time required to diagnose drug-resistant TB, potentially improving treatment success, and preventing the spread of XDR-TB. Faster time to result must be weighed against the potential for reduced accuracy, and increased costs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02170441. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12879-018-3013-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2018-03-02 /pmc/articles/PMC5833048/ /pubmed/29499645 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12879-018-3013-0 Text en © The Author(s). 2018 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Groessl, Erik J.
Ganiats, Theodore G.
Hillery, Naomi
Trollip, Andre
Jackson, Roberta L.
Catanzaro, Donald G.
Rodwell, Timothy C.
Garfein, Richard S.
Rodrigues, Camilla
Crudu, Valeriu
Victor, Thomas C.
Catanzaro, Antonino
Cost analysis of rapid diagnostics for drug-resistant tuberculosis
title Cost analysis of rapid diagnostics for drug-resistant tuberculosis
title_full Cost analysis of rapid diagnostics for drug-resistant tuberculosis
title_fullStr Cost analysis of rapid diagnostics for drug-resistant tuberculosis
title_full_unstemmed Cost analysis of rapid diagnostics for drug-resistant tuberculosis
title_short Cost analysis of rapid diagnostics for drug-resistant tuberculosis
title_sort cost analysis of rapid diagnostics for drug-resistant tuberculosis
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5833048/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29499645
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12879-018-3013-0
work_keys_str_mv AT groesslerikj costanalysisofrapiddiagnosticsfordrugresistanttuberculosis
AT ganiatstheodoreg costanalysisofrapiddiagnosticsfordrugresistanttuberculosis
AT hillerynaomi costanalysisofrapiddiagnosticsfordrugresistanttuberculosis
AT trollipandre costanalysisofrapiddiagnosticsfordrugresistanttuberculosis
AT jacksonrobertal costanalysisofrapiddiagnosticsfordrugresistanttuberculosis
AT catanzarodonaldg costanalysisofrapiddiagnosticsfordrugresistanttuberculosis
AT rodwelltimothyc costanalysisofrapiddiagnosticsfordrugresistanttuberculosis
AT garfeinrichards costanalysisofrapiddiagnosticsfordrugresistanttuberculosis
AT rodriguescamilla costanalysisofrapiddiagnosticsfordrugresistanttuberculosis
AT cruduvaleriu costanalysisofrapiddiagnosticsfordrugresistanttuberculosis
AT victorthomasc costanalysisofrapiddiagnosticsfordrugresistanttuberculosis
AT catanzaroantonino costanalysisofrapiddiagnosticsfordrugresistanttuberculosis