Cost-effectiveness of short, oral treatment regimens for rifampicin resistant tuberculosis

PLOS Glob Public Health. 2022 Dec 7;2(12):e0001337. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0001337. eCollection 2022.

Abstract

Current options for treating tuberculosis (TB) that is resistant to rifampicin (RR-TB) are few, and regimens are often long and poorly tolerated. Following recent evidence from the TB-PRACTECAL trial countries are considering programmatic uptake of 6-month, all-oral treatment regimens. We used a Markov model to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness of three regimens containing bedaquiline, pretomanid and linezolid (BPaL) with and without moxifloxacin (BPaLM) or clofazimine (BPaLC) compared with the current mix of long and short standard of care (SOC) regimens to treat RR-TB from the provider perspective in India, Georgia, Philippines, and South Africa. We estimated total costs (2019 USD) and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) over a 20-year time horizon. Costs and DALYs were discounted at 3% in the base case. Parameter uncertainty was tested with univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analysis. We found that all three regimens would improve health outcomes and reduce costs compared with the current programmatic mix of long and short SOC regimens in all four countries. BPaL was the most cost-saving regimen in all countries, saving $112-$1,173 per person. BPaLM was the preferred regimen at a willingness to pay per DALY of 0.5 GDP per capita in all settings. Our findings indicate BPaL-based regimens are likely to be cost-saving and more effective than the current standard of care in a range of settings. Countries should consider programmatic uptake of BPaL-based regimens.

Grants and funding

This study was financially supported by Médecins Sans Frontières in the form of an award to KF. This work was also supported by Médecins Sans Frontières via salary for CB, EK, IM, and BTN. The specific roles of these authors are articulated in the ‘author contributions’ section. No additional external funding was received for this study. The funders had no additional role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.