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