Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://www.arca.fiocruz.br/handle/icict/6714
Type
ArticleCopyright
Open access
Collections
- IFF - Artigos de Periódicos [1284]
Metadata
Show full item record
COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF QUANTIFERON®-TB GOLD-IN-TUBE VERSUS TUBERCULIN SKIN TESTING FOR CONTACT SCREENING AND TREATMENT OF LATENT TUBERCULOSIS INFECTION IN BRAZIL
Author
Affilliation
Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro. Programa de Pós-Graduação em Medicina Inter. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil
Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro. Instituto de Medicina Social. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil
Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Fernandes Figueira. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil
Universidade Gama Filho. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil
Universidade Gama Filho. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil
Universidade Gama Filho. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil
Hospital Santa Casa de Misericórdia do Rio de Janeiro. Laboratório Paschoal Granato. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil
McGill University. Montreal Chest Institute. Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Universidade Gama Filho. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil / McGill University. Montreal Chest Institute. Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro. Instituto de Medicina Social. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil
Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Fernandes Figueira. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil
Universidade Gama Filho. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil
Universidade Gama Filho. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil
Universidade Gama Filho. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil
Hospital Santa Casa de Misericórdia do Rio de Janeiro. Laboratório Paschoal Granato. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil
McGill University. Montreal Chest Institute. Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Universidade Gama Filho. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil / McGill University. Montreal Chest Institute. Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Abstract
BACKGROUND:
Latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) is a reservoir for new TB cases. Isoniazid preventive therapy (IPT) reduces the risk of active TB by as much as 90%, but LTBI screening has limitations. Unlike tuberculin skin testing (TST), interferon-gamma release assays are not affected by BCG vaccination, and have been reported to be cost-effective in low-burden countries. The goal of this study was to perform a cost-effectiveness analysis from the health system perspective, comparing three strategies for LTBI diagnosis in TB contacts: tuberculin skin testing (TST), QuantiFERON®-TB Gold-in-Tube (QFT-GIT) and TST confirmed by QFT-GIT if positive (TST/QFT-GIT) in Brazil, a middle-income, high-burden country with universal BCG coverage.
METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS:
Costs for LTBI diagnosis and treatment of a hypothetical cohort of 1,000 adult immunocompetent close contacts were considered. The effectiveness measure employed was the number of averted TB cases in two years. Health system costs were US$ 105,096 for TST, US$ 121,054 for QFT-GIT and US$ 101,948 for TST/QFT-GIT; these strategies averted 6.56, 6.63 and 4.59 TB cases, respectively. The most cost-effective strategy was TST (US$ 16,021/averted case). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was US$ 227,977/averted TB case for QFT-GIT. TST/QFT-GIT was dominated.
CONCLUSIONS:
Unlike previous studies, TST was the most cost-effective strategy for averting new TB cases in the short term. QFT-GIT would be more cost-effective if its costs could be reduced to US$ 26.95, considering a TST specificity of 59% and US$ 18 considering a more realistic TST specificity of 80%. Nevertheless, with TST, 207.4 additional people per 1,000 will be prescribed IPT compared with QFT.
Share