van Maurik Ingrid S, Altomare Daniele, Collij Lyduine E, Caprioglio Camilia, Moro Christian, Garibotto Valentina, Demonet Jean-François, Scheltens Philip, Farrer Gill, Gismondi Rosella, Stephens Andrew W, Gispert Jean Domingo, Molinuevo José Luis, Grau-Rivera Oriol, Edison Paul, Walker Zuzana, Jessen Frank, Dzrezga Alexander, Zeyen Philip, Payoux Pierre, Saint-Aubert Laure, Delrieu Julien, Nordberg Agneta, Barkhof Frederik, Frisoni Giovanni B, Berkhof Johannes
Alzheimer Center Amsterdam, Neurology Amsterdam UMC Location VUmc Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Amsterdam Neuroscience, Neurodegeneration Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Eur J Neurol. 2025 Jun;32(6):e70197. doi: 10.1111/ene.70197.
Amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) is instrumental in achieving an accurate diagnosis and may help to limit health-seeking behavior. Currently, amyloid-PET is not routinely used in clinical practice due to lack of evidence on cost-utility. We assessed the cost-utility of early versus no amyloid-PET in the diagnostic work-up of memory clinic patients after 6 months.
We assessed cost-utility of patients enrolled in AMYPAD-DPMS (EudraCT Number: 2017-002527-21) from six European memory clinics and randomized in ARM1; early amyloid-PET, ARM2; no amyloid-PET or ARM3; (amyloid-PET at request of the managing physician). ARM3 was not part of the cost-utility analysis. The EuroQol classification system (EQ-5D-5L), visual analogue scale (VAS), and ICEpop Capability measure for older people (ICECAP-O) were collected at baseline and 6 months. Costs were calculated from cost diaries at baseline, 3 and 6 months. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated using EQ-5D-5L and a societal perspective.
From April 2018, to October 2020, 844 participants were screened and 840 were randomized (290 ARM1; 270 ARM2 and 280 ARM3). N = 514 (250 ARM1; 264 ARM2) were included in the economic evaluation. Amyloid-PET resulted in higher costs at 6 months (ARM1 vs. ARM2 ∆€1384, bootstrapped 95% CI [7, 2761]). No significant difference in EQ-5D-5L, VAS or ICECAP-O was found. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was €461,333 per QALY.
Although patients receive an early etiological diagnosis, the cost-utility after 6 months is not favorable for amyloid-PET. The cost-utility will need to be reassessed when considering amyloid-PET to select patients for anti-amyloid biologics.
淀粉样蛋白正电子发射断层扫描(PET)有助于实现准确诊断,并可能有助于限制就医行为。目前,由于缺乏成本效益证据,淀粉样蛋白PET在临床实践中未被常规使用。我们评估了在记忆门诊患者诊断检查中,6个月后早期进行淀粉样蛋白PET与不进行该检查的成本效益。
我们评估了来自六个欧洲记忆门诊并被随机分配到ARM1(早期淀粉样蛋白PET)、ARM2(不进行淀粉样蛋白PET)或ARM3(应主治医生要求进行淀粉样蛋白PET)的AMYPAD-DPMS(欧盟临床试验注册号:2017-002527-21)研究中的患者的成本效益。ARM3不属于成本效益分析的一部分。在基线和6个月时收集欧洲五维度健康量表(EQ-5D-5L)、视觉模拟量表(VAS)和老年人ICEpop能力量表(ICECAP-O)。成本根据基线、3个月和6个月时的成本日记进行计算。使用EQ-5D-5L并从社会角度计算增量成本效益比(ICER)。
从2018年4月到2020年10月,共筛查了844名参与者,840名被随机分组(290名在ARM1;270名在ARM2;280名在ARM3)。514名(250名在ARM1;264名在ARM2)被纳入经济评估。淀粉样蛋白PET在6个月时导致成本更高(ARM1与ARM2相比,差值为1384欧元,自抽样95%可信区间[7, 2761])。在EQ-5D-5L、VAS或ICECAP-O方面未发现显著差异。增量成本效益比(ICER)为每质量调整生命年461,333欧元。
尽管患者能获得早期病因诊断,但6个月后的成本效益对淀粉样蛋白PET不利。在考虑使用淀粉样蛋白PET来选择抗淀粉样蛋白生物制剂的患者时,需要重新评估成本效益。