Abstract

IntroductionAccording to the World Health Organization, there were approximately 0.5 million new cases of rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis in 2018, of which 78 percent were multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB), and China has one of the largest shares of the global burden (14%). In recent years, the Chinese government has made progress in TB control and prevention, but for MDR-TB, treatment options are still limited and expensive, and novel drugs are not always available. This research aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of adding bedaquiline to a background regimen (BR) of drugs for MDR-TB treatment in China, and to provide evidence for government to improve public health policies.MethodsA cohort-based Markov model was developed to evaluate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of bedaquiline plus BR (BBR) versus BR alone in MDR-TB treatment, over a 10-year time horizon. Data were sourced from a phase II clinical trial, real-world data in China, published literature, and expert opinion. Outcomes were evaluated in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and life-years gained (LYG). The discount rate was 3.5%. Probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses were conducted.ResultsThe discounted costs per person for BBR was CNY 135,706 [USD 19,172], compared with CNY 92,465 [USD 13,063] for BR. The discounted utility per person for BBR was also higher than that for BR (3.943 QALYs versus 3.193 QALYs). The ICER of BBR was CNY 58,096 [USD 8,208]/QALY, which was lower than the willingness-to-pay threshold of CNY 212,676 [USD 30,046] (three-times the gross domestic product per capita). Therefore, BBR was considered to be cost-effective. The sensitivity analysis confirmed the robustness of the results. BBR remained cost-effective in the sensitivity analysis, with a 77.2 percent probability of being cost-effective versus BR.ConclusionsIn China, bedaquiline is not included in the National Reimbursement Medicine List, which results in a heavy financial burden for MDR-TB patients. From this study, BBR was cost-effective by significantly reducing time to sputum culture conversion and increasing QALYs and LYGs, which offset the higher drug costs.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call