Cargando…
A systematic review of cost-utility analyses of screening methods in latent tuberculosis infection in high-risk populations
BACKGROUND: The World Health Organisation (WHO) recommends that testing and treatment for latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) should be undertaken in high-risk groups using either interferon gamma release assays (IGRAs) or a tuberculin skin test (TST). As IGRAs are more expensive than TST, an asses...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9533619/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36199061 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12890-022-02149-x |
_version_ | 1784802383561228288 |
---|---|
author | Mahon, James Beale, Sophie Holmes, Hayden Arber, Mick Nikolayevskyy, Vladyslav Alagna, Riccardo Manissero, Davide Dowdy, David Migliori, Giovanni Battista Sotgiu, Giovanni Duarte, Raquel |
author_facet | Mahon, James Beale, Sophie Holmes, Hayden Arber, Mick Nikolayevskyy, Vladyslav Alagna, Riccardo Manissero, Davide Dowdy, David Migliori, Giovanni Battista Sotgiu, Giovanni Duarte, Raquel |
author_sort | Mahon, James |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The World Health Organisation (WHO) recommends that testing and treatment for latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) should be undertaken in high-risk groups using either interferon gamma release assays (IGRAs) or a tuberculin skin test (TST). As IGRAs are more expensive than TST, an assessment of the cost-effectiveness of IGRAs can guide decision makers on the most appropriate choice of test for different high-risk populations. This current review aimed to provide the most up to date evidence on the cost-effectiveness evidence on LTBI testing in high-risk groups—specifically evidence reporting the costs per QALY of different testing strategies. METHODS: A comprehensive search of databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE and NHS-EED was undertaken from 2011 up to March 2021. Studies were screened and extracted by two independent reviewers. The study quality was assessed using the Bias in Economic Evaluation Checklist (ECOBIAS). A narrative synthesis of the included studies was undertaken. RESULTS: Thirty-two studies reported in thirty-three documents were included in this review. Quality of included studies was generally high, although there was a weakness across all studies referencing sources correctly and/or justifying choices of parameter values chosen or assumptions where parameter values were not available. Inclusions of IGRAs in testing strategies was consistently found across studies to be cost-effective but this result was sensitive to underlying LTBI prevalence rates. CONCLUSION: While some concerns remain about uncertainty in parameter values used across included studies, the evidence base since 2010 has grown with modelling approaches addressing the weakness pointed out in previous reviews but still reaching the same conclusion that IGRAs are likely to be cost-effective in high-income countries for high-risk populations. Evidence is also required on the cost-effectiveness of different strategies in low to middle income countries and countries with high TB burden. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12890-022-02149-x. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9533619 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-95336192022-10-06 A systematic review of cost-utility analyses of screening methods in latent tuberculosis infection in high-risk populations Mahon, James Beale, Sophie Holmes, Hayden Arber, Mick Nikolayevskyy, Vladyslav Alagna, Riccardo Manissero, Davide Dowdy, David Migliori, Giovanni Battista Sotgiu, Giovanni Duarte, Raquel BMC Pulm Med Research BACKGROUND: The World Health Organisation (WHO) recommends that testing and treatment for latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) should be undertaken in high-risk groups using either interferon gamma release assays (IGRAs) or a tuberculin skin test (TST). As IGRAs are more expensive than TST, an assessment of the cost-effectiveness of IGRAs can guide decision makers on the most appropriate choice of test for different high-risk populations. This current review aimed to provide the most up to date evidence on the cost-effectiveness evidence on LTBI testing in high-risk groups—specifically evidence reporting the costs per QALY of different testing strategies. METHODS: A comprehensive search of databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE and NHS-EED was undertaken from 2011 up to March 2021. Studies were screened and extracted by two independent reviewers. The study quality was assessed using the Bias in Economic Evaluation Checklist (ECOBIAS). A narrative synthesis of the included studies was undertaken. RESULTS: Thirty-two studies reported in thirty-three documents were included in this review. Quality of included studies was generally high, although there was a weakness across all studies referencing sources correctly and/or justifying choices of parameter values chosen or assumptions where parameter values were not available. Inclusions of IGRAs in testing strategies was consistently found across studies to be cost-effective but this result was sensitive to underlying LTBI prevalence rates. CONCLUSION: While some concerns remain about uncertainty in parameter values used across included studies, the evidence base since 2010 has grown with modelling approaches addressing the weakness pointed out in previous reviews but still reaching the same conclusion that IGRAs are likely to be cost-effective in high-income countries for high-risk populations. Evidence is also required on the cost-effectiveness of different strategies in low to middle income countries and countries with high TB burden. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12890-022-02149-x. BioMed Central 2022-10-05 /pmc/articles/PMC9533619/ /pubmed/36199061 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12890-022-02149-x Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Mahon, James Beale, Sophie Holmes, Hayden Arber, Mick Nikolayevskyy, Vladyslav Alagna, Riccardo Manissero, Davide Dowdy, David Migliori, Giovanni Battista Sotgiu, Giovanni Duarte, Raquel A systematic review of cost-utility analyses of screening methods in latent tuberculosis infection in high-risk populations |
title | A systematic review of cost-utility analyses of screening methods in latent tuberculosis infection in high-risk populations |
title_full | A systematic review of cost-utility analyses of screening methods in latent tuberculosis infection in high-risk populations |
title_fullStr | A systematic review of cost-utility analyses of screening methods in latent tuberculosis infection in high-risk populations |
title_full_unstemmed | A systematic review of cost-utility analyses of screening methods in latent tuberculosis infection in high-risk populations |
title_short | A systematic review of cost-utility analyses of screening methods in latent tuberculosis infection in high-risk populations |
title_sort | systematic review of cost-utility analyses of screening methods in latent tuberculosis infection in high-risk populations |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9533619/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36199061 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12890-022-02149-x |
work_keys_str_mv | AT mahonjames asystematicreviewofcostutilityanalysesofscreeningmethodsinlatenttuberculosisinfectioninhighriskpopulations AT bealesophie asystematicreviewofcostutilityanalysesofscreeningmethodsinlatenttuberculosisinfectioninhighriskpopulations AT holmeshayden asystematicreviewofcostutilityanalysesofscreeningmethodsinlatenttuberculosisinfectioninhighriskpopulations AT arbermick asystematicreviewofcostutilityanalysesofscreeningmethodsinlatenttuberculosisinfectioninhighriskpopulations AT nikolayevskyyvladyslav asystematicreviewofcostutilityanalysesofscreeningmethodsinlatenttuberculosisinfectioninhighriskpopulations AT alagnariccardo asystematicreviewofcostutilityanalysesofscreeningmethodsinlatenttuberculosisinfectioninhighriskpopulations AT manisserodavide asystematicreviewofcostutilityanalysesofscreeningmethodsinlatenttuberculosisinfectioninhighriskpopulations AT dowdydavid asystematicreviewofcostutilityanalysesofscreeningmethodsinlatenttuberculosisinfectioninhighriskpopulations AT migliorigiovannibattista asystematicreviewofcostutilityanalysesofscreeningmethodsinlatenttuberculosisinfectioninhighriskpopulations AT sotgiugiovanni asystematicreviewofcostutilityanalysesofscreeningmethodsinlatenttuberculosisinfectioninhighriskpopulations AT duarteraquel asystematicreviewofcostutilityanalysesofscreeningmethodsinlatenttuberculosisinfectioninhighriskpopulations AT mahonjames systematicreviewofcostutilityanalysesofscreeningmethodsinlatenttuberculosisinfectioninhighriskpopulations AT bealesophie systematicreviewofcostutilityanalysesofscreeningmethodsinlatenttuberculosisinfectioninhighriskpopulations AT holmeshayden systematicreviewofcostutilityanalysesofscreeningmethodsinlatenttuberculosisinfectioninhighriskpopulations AT arbermick systematicreviewofcostutilityanalysesofscreeningmethodsinlatenttuberculosisinfectioninhighriskpopulations AT nikolayevskyyvladyslav systematicreviewofcostutilityanalysesofscreeningmethodsinlatenttuberculosisinfectioninhighriskpopulations AT alagnariccardo systematicreviewofcostutilityanalysesofscreeningmethodsinlatenttuberculosisinfectioninhighriskpopulations AT manisserodavide systematicreviewofcostutilityanalysesofscreeningmethodsinlatenttuberculosisinfectioninhighriskpopulations AT dowdydavid systematicreviewofcostutilityanalysesofscreeningmethodsinlatenttuberculosisinfectioninhighriskpopulations AT migliorigiovannibattista systematicreviewofcostutilityanalysesofscreeningmethodsinlatenttuberculosisinfectioninhighriskpopulations AT sotgiugiovanni systematicreviewofcostutilityanalysesofscreeningmethodsinlatenttuberculosisinfectioninhighriskpopulations AT duarteraquel systematicreviewofcostutilityanalysesofscreeningmethodsinlatenttuberculosisinfectioninhighriskpopulations |