Lee Spencer A W, Sposato Luciano A, Hachinski Vladimir, Cipriano Lauren E
Ivey Business School, Western University, 1255 Western Road, London, ON, N6G 0N1, Canada.
School of Medicine, University College Cork, College Road, Cork, T12 YN60, Ireland.
Alzheimers Res Ther. 2017 Mar 16;9(1):18. doi: 10.1186/s13195-017-0243-0.
Accurate and timely diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) is important for prompt initiation of treatment in patients with AD and to avoid inappropriate treatment of patients with false-positive diagnoses.
Using a Markov model, we estimated the lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of cerebrospinal fluid biomarker analysis in a cohort of patients referred to a neurologist or memory clinic with suspected AD who remained without a definitive diagnosis of AD or another condition after neuroimaging. Parametric values were estimated from previous health economic models and the medical literature. Extensive deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate the robustness of the results.
At a 12.7% pretest probability of AD, biomarker analysis after normal neuroimaging findings has an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $11,032 per QALY gained. Results were sensitive to the pretest prevalence of AD, and the ICER increased to over $50,000 per QALY when the prevalence of AD fell below 9%. Results were also sensitive to patient age (biomarkers are less cost-effective in older cohorts), treatment uptake and adherence, biomarker test characteristics, and the degree to which patients with suspected AD who do not have AD benefit from AD treatment when they are falsely diagnosed.
The cost-effectiveness of biomarker analysis depends critically on the prevalence of AD in the tested population. In general practice, where the prevalence of AD after clinical assessment and normal neuroimaging findings may be low, biomarker analysis is unlikely to be cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000 per QALY gained. However, when at least 1 in 11 patients has AD after normal neuroimaging findings, biomarker analysis is likely cost-effective. Specifically, for patients referred to memory clinics with memory impairment who do not present neuroimaging evidence of medial temporal lobe atrophy, pretest prevalence of AD may exceed 15%. Biomarker analysis is a potentially cost-saving diagnostic method and should be considered for adoption in high-prevalence centers.
准确及时地诊断阿尔茨海默病(AD)对于AD患者及时开始治疗以及避免对假阳性诊断患者进行不恰当治疗至关重要。
我们使用马尔可夫模型,估计了一组因疑似AD而转诊至神经科医生或记忆门诊的患者队列中脑脊液生物标志物分析的终生成本和质量调整生命年(QALY),这些患者在神经影像学检查后仍未明确诊断为AD或其他疾病。参数值是根据先前的健康经济模型和医学文献估计的。进行了广泛的确定性和概率敏感性分析,以评估结果的稳健性。
在AD的预测试概率为12.7%时,神经影像学检查结果正常后的生物标志物分析每获得一个QALY的增量成本效益比(ICER)为11,032美元。结果对AD的预测试患病率敏感,当AD患病率降至9%以下时,ICER增加到每QALY超过50,000美元。结果还对患者年龄(生物标志物在老年队列中成本效益较低)、治疗接受率和依从性、生物标志物检测特征以及疑似AD但未患AD的患者在被误诊时从AD治疗中获益的程度敏感。
生物标志物分析的成本效益关键取决于测试人群中AD的患病率。在一般临床实践中,临床评估和神经影像学检查结果正常后AD的患病率可能较低,在每获得一个QALY支付意愿阈值为50,000美元的情况下,生物标志物分析不太可能具有成本效益。然而,当神经影像学检查结果正常后至少每11名患者中有1名患有AD时,生物标志物分析可能具有成本效益。具体而言,对于因记忆障碍转诊至记忆门诊且未出现内侧颞叶萎缩神经影像学证据的患者,AD的预测试患病率可能超过15%。生物标志物分析是一种潜在的节省成本的诊断方法,在高患病率中心应考虑采用。