4.7 Article

Long-term economic evaluation of the recombinant Mycobacterium tuberculosis fusion protein (EC) test for the diagnosis of Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection

期刊

FRONTIERS IN PHARMACOLOGY
卷 14, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2023.1161526

关键词

recombinant Mycobacterium tuberculosis fusion protein (EC); purified protein derivative of tuberculin (TB-PPD); Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection; decision tree-markov model; cost-utility

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Compared with the TB-PPD test, the EC test is more cost-effective for the diagnosis of M. tuberculosis infection in the long term, according to our study.
Background: Tuberculosis continues to be a significant global burden. Purified protein derivative of tuberculin (TB-PPD) is one type of tuberculin skin test (TST) and is used commonly for the auxiliary diagnosis of tuberculosis. The recombinant Mycobacterium tuberculosis fusion protein (EC) test is a new test developed in China.Objective: Evaluate the long-term economic implications of using the EC test compared with the TB-PPD test to provide a reference for clinical decision-making.Methods: The target population was people at a high risk persons of being infected with Mycobacterium tuberculosis. The outcome indicator was quality-adjusted life years (QALY). A cost-utility analysis was used to evaluate the long-term economic implications of using the EC test compared with the TB-PPD test. We employed a decision tree-Markov model from the perspective of the whole society within 77 years.Results: Compared with the TB-PPD test, the EC test had a lower cost but higher QALY. The incremental cost-utility ratio was -119,800.7381 CNY/QALY. That is, for each additional QALY, the EC test could save 119,800.7381 CNY: the EC test was more economical than the TB-PPD test.Conclusion: Compared with the TB-PPD test, the EC test would be more economical in the long term for the diagnosis of M. tuberculosis infection according our study.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据