Holland David P, Sanders Gillian D, Hamilton Carol D, Stout Jason E
Department of Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina 27710, USA.
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2009 Jun 1;179(11):1055-60. doi: 10.1164/rccm.200901-0153OC. Epub 2009 Mar 19.
Isoniazid given daily for 9 months is the standard treatment for latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI), but its effectiveness is limited by poor completion rates. Shorter course regimens and regimens using directly observed therapy result in improved adherence but have higher upfront costs.
To evaluate the costs and cost-effectiveness of regimens for the treatment of LTBI.
We used a computerized Markov model to estimate total societal costs and benefits associated with four regimens for the treatment of LTBI: self-administered isoniazid daily for 9 months, directly observed isoniazid twice-weekly for 9 months, directly observed isoniazid plus rifapentine once weekly for 3 months, and self-administered rifampin daily for 4 months. In the base-case analysis, subjects were assumed to have newly positive tuberculin skin tests after recent exposure to infectious tuberculosis.
We determined the costs of treatment, quality-adjusted life-years gained, and cases of active tuberculosis prevented. In the base-case analysis, rifampin dominated (less costly with increased benefits) all other regimens except isoniazid plus rifapentine, which was more effective at a cost $48,997 per quality-adjusted life year gained. Isoniazid plus rifapentine dominated all regimens at a relative risk of disease 5.2 times the baseline estimate, or with completion rates less than 34% for isoniazid or 37% for rifampin. Rifampin could be 17% less efficacious than self-administered isoniazid and still be cost-saving compared with this regimen.
In our model, rifampin is cost-saving compared with the standard therapy of self-administered isoniazid. Isoniazid plus rifapentine is cost-saving for extremely high-risk patients and is cost-effective for lower-risk patients.
每日服用异烟肼9个月是潜伏性结核感染(LTBI)的标准治疗方法,但其有效性受到低完成率的限制。疗程较短的治疗方案以及采用直接观察治疗的方案可提高依从性,但前期成本较高。
评估治疗LTBI方案的成本及成本效益。
我们使用计算机化马尔可夫模型来估计与四种LTBI治疗方案相关的社会总成本和效益:每日自行服用异烟肼9个月、每周两次直接观察服用异烟肼9个月、每周一次直接观察服用异烟肼加利福喷丁3个月、每日自行服用利福平4个月。在基础病例分析中,假设受试者在近期接触传染性肺结核后结核菌素皮肤试验新呈阳性。
我们确定了治疗成本、获得的质量调整生命年以及预防的活动性结核病例数。在基础病例分析中,除异烟肼加利福喷丁外,利福平优于(成本更低且效益更高)所有其他方案,而异烟肼加利福喷丁每获得一个质量调整生命年的成本为48,997美元,效果更佳。在疾病相对风险为基线估计值的5.2倍时,或异烟肼完成率低于34%或利福平完成率低于37%时,异烟肼加利福喷丁优于所有方案。与自行服用异烟肼方案相比,利福平的疗效可能低17%,但仍可节省成本。
在我们的模型中,与自行服用异烟肼的标准疗法相比,利福平可节省成本。异烟肼加利福喷丁对于极高风险患者可节省成本,对于较低风险患者具有成本效益。