Buisman Leander R, Luime Jolanda J, Oppe Mark, Hazes Johanna M W, Rutten-van Mölken Maureen P M H
Institute of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, PO Box 1738, 3000, DR, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Institute for Medical Technology Assessment, Erasmus University Rotterdam, PO Box 1738, 3000, DR, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Arthritis Res Ther. 2016 Jun 10;18(1):135. doi: 10.1186/s13075-016-1020-3.
There is a lack of information about the sensitivity, specificity and costs new diagnostic tests should have to improve early diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Our objective was to explore the early cost-effectiveness of various new diagnostic test strategies in the workup of patients with inflammatory arthritis (IA) at risk of having RA.
A decision tree followed by a patient-level state transition model, using data from published literature, cohorts and trials, was used to evaluate diagnostic test strategies. Alternative tests were assessed as add-on to or replacement of the ACR/EULAR 2010 RA classification criteria for all patients and for intermediate-risk patients. Tests included B-cell gene expression (sensitivity 0.60, specificity 0.90, costs €150), MRI (sensitivity 0.90, specificity 0.60, costs €756), IL-6 serum level (sensitivity 0.70, specificity 0.53, costs €50) and genetic assay (sensitivity 0.40, specificity 0.85, costs €750). Patients with IA at risk of RA were followed for 5 years using a societal perspective. Guideline treatment was assumed using tight controlled treatment based on DAS28; if patients had a DAS28 >3.2 at 12 months or later patients could be eligible for starting biological drugs. The outcome was expressed in incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (€2014 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained) and headroom.
The B-cell test was the least expensive strategy when used as an add-on and as replacement in intermediate-risk patients, making it the dominant strategy, as it has better health outcomes and lower costs. As add-on for all patients, the B-cell test was also the most cost-effective test strategy. When using a willingness-to-pay threshold of €20,000 per QALY gained, the IL-6 and MRI strategies were not cost-effective, except as replacement. A genetic assay was not cost-effective in any strategy. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis revealed that the B-cell test was consistently superior in all strategies. When performing univariate sensitivity analysis for intermediate-risk patients, specificity and DAS28 in the B-cell add-on strategy, and DAS28 and sensitivity in the MRI add-on strategy had the largest impact on the cost-effectiveness.
This early cost-effectiveness analysis indicated that new tests to diagnose RA are most likely to be cost-effective when the tests are used as an add-on in intermediate-risk patients, and have high specificity, and the test costs should not be higher than €200-€300.
对于新的诊断测试应具备何种敏感性、特异性和成本才能改善类风湿关节炎(RA)的早期诊断,目前缺乏相关信息。我们的目标是探讨各种新的诊断测试策略在对有患RA风险的炎性关节炎(IA)患者进行检查时的早期成本效益。
采用决策树以及基于已发表文献、队列研究和试验数据的患者水平状态转换模型,来评估诊断测试策略。将替代测试评估为所有患者以及中度风险患者的美国风湿病学会/欧洲抗风湿病联盟(ACR/EULAR)2010年RA分类标准的补充或替代方法。测试包括B细胞基因表达(敏感性0.60,特异性0.90,成本150欧元)、磁共振成像(MRI,敏感性0.90,特异性0.60,成本756欧元)、白细胞介素-6血清水平(敏感性0.70,特异性0.53,成本50欧元)和基因检测(敏感性0.40,特异性0.85,成本750欧元)。从社会角度对有患RA风险的IA患者进行了5年的随访。假设采用基于疾病活动评分28(DAS28)的严格控制治疗的指南治疗方法;如果患者在12个月或更晚时DAS28>3.2,则有资格开始使用生物药物。结果以增量成本效益比(每获得一个质量调整生命年(QALY)2014欧元)和净空间来表示。
B细胞检测在中度风险患者中作为补充和替代方法使用时是最便宜的策略,使其成为主导策略,因为它具有更好的健康结果和更低的成本。作为所有患者的补充方法,B细胞检测也是最具成本效益的测试策略。当采用每获得一个QALY支付意愿阈值为20000欧元时,白细胞介素-6和MRI策略不具有成本效益,除非作为替代方法。基因检测在任何策略中都不具有成本效益。概率敏感性分析表明,B细胞检测在所有策略中始终表现更优。对中度风险患者进行单变量敏感性分析时,B细胞补充策略中的特异性和DAS28,以及MRI补充策略中的DAS28和敏感性对成本效益的影响最大。
这项早期成本效益分析表明,用于诊断RA的新测试在作为中度风险患者的补充方法使用时,最有可能具有成本效益,且具有高特异性,测试成本不应高于200 - 300欧元。