Cost effectiveness of testing HIV infected individuals for TB in a low TB/HIV setting - 25/07/20
, Janey Sewell c, Colette Smith c, Ian Cropley d, Sanjay Bhagani d, Angelita Solamalai a, Stephen Morris e, #, Ibrahim Abubakar f, Margaret A Johnson a, Marc C I Lipman a, bHighlights |
• | Testing all UK HIV clinic attendees for latent and active TB is not cost-effective. |
• | Modelling shows only testing highest-risk groups for latent TB is cost effective. |
• | More comprehensive testing may become cost-effective if the cost of an IGRA falls. |
Summary |
Objectives |
Guidelines recommend routine testing for latent TB infection (LTBI) in people living with HIV. However there are few cost-effectiveness studies to justify this in contemporary high resource, low TB/HIV incidence settings. We sought to assess the uptake, yield and cost-effectiveness of testing for latent and active TB.
Methods |
Adults attending an ambulatory HIV clinic in London, UK were prospectively recruited by stratified selection and tested for TB infection using symptom questionnaires, chest radiograph (CXR), tuberculin skin test (TST), T-Spot.TB and induced sputum. From this, 30 testing strategies were compared in a cost-effectiveness model including probabilistic sensitivity analysis using Monte Carlo simulation.
Results |
219 subjects were assessed; 95% were using antiretroviral therapy (ART). Smear negative, culture positive TB was present in 0.9% asymptomatic subjects, LTBI in 9%. Only strategies testing those from subSaharan Africa with a TST or interferon gamma release assay (IGRA) with or without CXR, or testing those from countries with a TB incidence of >40/100,000 with TST alone were cost-effective using a £30,000/QALY threshold.
Conclusions |
Cost-effectiveness analysis in an adult HIV cohort with high ART usage suggests there is limited benefit beyond routine testing for latent TB in people from high and possibly medium TB incidence settings.
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.Keywords : Tuberculosis, HIV infection, Costs and Cost analysis, Adult, Screening
Plan
Vol 81 - N° 2
P. 289-296 - août 2020 Retour au numéro
Article précédent
- A clinical risk score to identify patients with COVID-19 at high risk of critical care admission or death: An observational cohort study
- James B Galloway, Sam Norton, Richard D Barker, Andrew Brookes, Ivana Carey, Benjamin D Clarke, Raeesa Jina, Carole Reid, Mark D Russell, Ruth Sneep, Leah Sugarman, Sarah Williams, Mark Yates, James Teo, Ajay M Shah, Fleur Cantle
- Respiratory Syncytial Virus hospitalization burden: a nation-wide population-based analysis, 2000-2017
- Aharona Glatman-Freedman, Zalman Kaufman, Yael Applbaum, Rita Dichtiar, Ada Steiman, Ethel-Sherry Gordon, Lital Keinan-Boker, Tamy Shohat, Ziona Haklai
Bienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
Déjà abonné à cette revue ?