{Reference Type}: Journal Article
{Title}: Evaluating the cost-effectiveness of Cy-Tb for LTBI in India: a comprehensive economic modelling analysis.
{Author}: Muniyandi M;Nagarajan K;Mathiyazhagan K;Tyagi K;Rajsekar K;Padmapriyadarsini C;
{Journal}: Int Health
{Volume}: 0
{Issue}: 0
{Year}: 2024 Aug 2
{Factor}: 3.131
{DOI}: 10.1093/inthealth/ihae048
{Abstract}: BACKGROUND: Latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) remains a significant challenge, as there is no gold standard diagnostic test. Current methods used for identifying LTBI are the interferon-γ release assay (IGRA), which is based on a blood test, and the tuberculin skin test (TST), which has low sensitivity. Both these tests are inadequate, primarily because they have limitations with the low bacterial burden characteristic of LTBI. This highlights the need for the development and adoption of more specific and accurate diagnostic tests to effectively identify LTBI. Herein we estimate the cost-effectiveness of the Cy-Tb test as compared with the TST for LTBI diagnosis.
METHODS: An economic modelling study was conducted from a health system perspective using decision tree analysis, which is most widely used for cost-effectiveness analysis using transition probabilities. Our goal was to estimate the incremental cost and number of TB cases prevented from LTBI using the Cy-Tb diagnostic test along with TB preventive therapy (TPT). Secondary data such as demographic characteristics, treatment outcome, diagnostic test results and cost data for the TST and Cy-Tb tests were collected from the published literature. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was calculated for the Cy-Tb test as compared with the TST. The uncertainty in the model was evaluated using one-way sensitivity analysis and probability sensitivity analysis.
RESULTS: The study findings indicate that for diagnosing an additional LTBI case with the Cy-Tb test and to prevent a TB case by providing TPT prophylaxis, an additional cost of 18 658 Indian rupees (US${\$}$223.5) is required. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated that using the Cy-Tb test for diagnosing LTBI was cost-effective as compared with TST testing. If the cost of the Cy-Tb test is reduced, it becomes a cost-saving strategy.
CONCLUSIONS: The Cy-Tb test for diagnosing LTBI is cost-effective at the current price, and price negotiations could further change it into a cost-saving strategy. This finding emphasizes the need for healthcare providers and policymakers to consider implementing the Cy-Tb test to maximize economic benefits. Bulk procurements can also be considered to further reduce costs and increase savings.