128 个国家艾滋病毒/艾滋病、疟疾、梅毒和结核病干预措施的成本效益:荟萃回归分析。

Cost-effectiveness of interventions for HIV/AIDS, malaria, syphilis, and tuberculosis in 128 countries: a meta-regression analysis.

机构信息

Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.

Duke Global Health Institute, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.

出版信息

Lancet Glob Health. 2024 Jul;12(7):e1159-e1173. doi: 10.1016/S2214-109X(24)00181-5.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Cost-effectiveness analyses have been conducted for many interventions for HIV/AIDS, malaria, syphilis, and tuberculosis, but they have not been conducted for all interventions that are currently recommended in all countries. To support national decision makers in the effective allocation of resources, we conducted a meta-regression analysis of published incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for interventions for these causes, and predicted ICERs for 14 recommended interventions for Global Fund-eligible countries.

METHODS

In the meta-regression analysis, we used data from the Tufts University Center for the Evaluation of Value and Risk in Health (Boston, MA, USA) Cost-Effectiveness Registries (the CEA Registry beginning in 1976 and the Global Health CEA registry beginning in 1995) up to Jan 1, 2018. To create analysis files, we standardised and mapped the data, extracted additional data from published articles, and added variables from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD). Then we selected ratios for interventions with a minimum of two published articles and three published ICERs that mapped to one of five GBD causes (HIV/AIDS, malaria, syphilis, drug-susceptible tuberculosis, or multi-drug resistant tuberculosis), and to a GBD country; reported a currency year during or after 1990; and for which the comparator intervention was defined as no intervention, standard of care, or placebo. Our meta-regression analysis used all available data on 25 eligible interventions, and quantified the association between ICERs and factors at country level and intervention level. We used a five-stage statistical model that was developed to synthesise evidence on cost-effectiveness analyses, and we adapted it for smaller sample sizes by grouping interventions by cause and type (ie, prevention, diagnostics, and treatment). Using the meta-regression parameters we predicted country-specific median ICERs, IQRs, and 95% uncertainty intervals in 2019 US$ per disability-adjusted life-year (DALY) for 14 currently recommended interventions. We report ICERs in league tables with gross domestic product (GDP) per capita and country-specific thresholds.

FINDINGS

The sample for the analysis was 1273 ratios from 144 articles, of which we included 612 ICERs from 106 articles in our meta-regression analysis. We predicted ICERs for antiretroviral therapy for prevention for two age groups and pregnant women, pre-exposure prophylaxis against HIV for two risk groups, four malaria prevention interventions, antenatal syphilis screening, two tuberculosis prevention interventions, the Xpert tuberculosis test, and chemotherapy for drug-sensitive tuberculosis. At the country level, ranking of interventions and number of interventions with a predicted median ICER below the country-specific threshold varied greatly. For instance, median ICERs for six of 14 interventions were below the country-specific threshold in Sudan, whereas 12 of 14 were below the country-specific threshold in Peru. Antenatal syphilis screening had the lowest median ICER among all 14 interventions in 81 (63%) of 128 countries, ranging from $3 (IQR 2-4) per DALY averted in Equatorial Guinea to $3473 (2244-5222) in Ukraine. Pre-exposure prophylaxis for HIV/AIDS for men who have sex with men had the highest median ICER among all interventions in 116 (91%) countries, ranging from $2326 (1077-4567) per DALY averted in Lesotho to $53 559 (23 841-108 534) in Maldives.

INTERPRETATION

Country-specific league tables highlight the interventions that offer better value per DALY averted, and can support decision making at a country level that is more tailored to available resources than GDP per capita and country-specific thresholds. Meta-regression is a promising method to synthesise cost-effectiveness analysis results and transfer them across settings.

FUNDING

Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

摘要

背景

针对艾滋病毒/艾滋病、疟疾、梅毒和结核病等许多干预措施,已经进行了成本效益分析,但并非针对所有国家目前推荐的所有干预措施。为了支持国家决策者有效分配资源,我们对这些病因的已发表增量成本效益比(ICER)进行了荟萃回归分析,并预测了全球基金合格国家推荐的 14 项干预措施的 ICER。

方法

在荟萃回归分析中,我们使用了来自塔夫茨大学评估卫生保健价值与风险中心(美国马萨诸塞州波士顿)成本效益登记处(1976 年开始的 CEA 登记处和 1995 年开始的全球卫生 CEA 登记处)的数据,截至 2018 年 1 月 1 日。为了创建分析文件,我们对数据进行了标准化和映射,从已发表的文章中提取了额外的数据,并添加了来自全球疾病、伤害和风险因素研究(GBD)的变量。然后,我们选择了至少有两篇已发表文章和三篇已发表 ICER 的干预措施的比值,这些比值与五个 GBD 病因之一(艾滋病毒/艾滋病、疟疾、梅毒、耐多药结核病或广泛耐药结核病)和一个 GBD 国家相关,并报告了在 1990 年期间或之后的货币年份,且其比较干预措施定义为无干预、标准护理或安慰剂。我们的荟萃回归分析使用了 25 项合格干预措施的所有可用数据,并量化了 ICER 与国家一级和干预一级因素之间的关联。我们使用了一个为综合成本效益分析证据而开发的五阶段统计模型,并通过按病因和类型(即预防、诊断和治疗)对干预措施进行分组来适应较小的样本量。利用荟萃回归参数,我们预测了在 2019 年,14 项目前推荐的干预措施中,在每个国家特定的残疾调整生命年(DALY)中,2019 年美国每 DALY 的中值 ICER、四分位距和 95%的不确定性区间。我们在国内生产总值(GDP)和国家特定阈值的表格中报告 ICER。

结果

分析的样本为来自 144 篇文章的 1273 个比值,其中我们从 106 篇文章中纳入了 612 个 ICER 进行荟萃回归分析。我们预测了针对两个年龄组和孕妇的预防用抗逆转录病毒治疗、两种风险群体的 HIV 暴露前预防、四种疟疾预防干预、产前梅毒筛查、两种结核病预防干预、Xpert 结核病检测和耐多药结核病的化疗的 ICER。在国家一级,干预措施的排名和低于国家特定阈值的干预措施数量差异很大。例如,在苏丹,14 项干预措施中有 6 项的中值 ICER低于国家特定阈值,而在秘鲁,14 项中有 12 项低于国家特定阈值。在所有 14 项干预措施中,产前梅毒筛查在 128 个国家中的 81 个(63%)国家中的中值 ICER 最低,从赤道几内亚每避免一个 DALY 的 3 美元(四分位距 2-4 美元)到乌克兰的每避免一个 DALY 的 5347 美元(2244-5222 美元)。在所有 14 项干预措施中,男性与男性发生性行为者的 HIV 暴露前预防的中值 ICER 最高,在 116 个国家(91%)中,从莱索托每避免一个 DALY 的 2326 美元(1077-4567 美元)到马尔代夫每避免一个 DALY 的 53559 美元(23841-108534 美元)。

解释

国家特定的联赛表突出了每避免一个 DALY 所产生的更高价值的干预措施,并可以支持国家一级的决策制定,这些决策制定更符合可用资源,而不是国内生产总值和国家特定阈值。荟萃回归是综合成本效益分析结果并将其转移到不同环境中的一种很有前途的方法。

资金来源

比尔及梅琳达·盖茨基金会。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f904/11194165/75cacbcb4b8f/gr1.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索