Cost comparison of nine-month treatment regimens with 20-month standardized care for the treatment of rifampicin-resistant/multi-drug resistant tuberculosis in Nigeria.
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2020
2020
Historique:
received:
21
06
2020
accepted:
07
10
2020
entrez:
1
12
2020
pubmed:
2
12
2020
medline:
15
1
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Globally, drug resistant tuberculosis (DR-TB) continues to be a public health threat. Nigeria, which accounts for a significant proportion of the global burden of rifampicin/multi-drug resistant-TB (RR/MDR-TB) had a funding gap of $168 million dollars for TB treatment in 2018. Since 2010, Nigeria has utilized five different models of care for RR/MDR-TB (Models A-E); Models A, B and C based on a standardized WHO-approved treatment regimen of 20-24 months, were phased out between 2015 and 2019 and replaced by Models D and E. Model D is a fully ambulatory model of 9-12 months during which a shorter treatment regimen including a second-line injectable agent is utilized. Model E is identical to Model D but has patients hospitalized for the first four months of care while Model F which is to be introduced in 2020, is a fully ambulatory, oral bedaquiline-containing shorter treatment regimen of 9-12 months. Treatment models for RR/MDR-TB of 20-24 months duration have had treatment success rates of 52-66% while shorter treatment regimens have reported success rates of 85% and above. In addition, replacing the second-line injectable agent in a shorter treatment regimen with bedaquiline has been found to further improve treatment success in patients with fluoroquinolone-susceptible RR/MDR-TB. Reliable cost data for RR/MDR-TB care are limited, specifically costs of models that utilize shorter treatment regimens and which are vital to guide Nigeria through the provision of RR/MDR-TB care at scale. We therefore conducted a cost analysis of shorter treatment regimens in use and to be used in Nigeria (Models D, E and F) and compared them to three models of longer duration utilized previously in Nigeria (Models A, B and C) to identify any changes in cost from transitioning from Models A-C to Models D-F and opportunities for cost savings. We obtained costs for TB diagnostic and monitoring tests, in-patient and out-patient care from a previous study, inflated these costs to 2019 NGN and then converted to 2020 USD. We obtained other costs from the average of six health facilities and drug costs from the global drug facility. We modeled treatment on strict adherence to two Nigerian National guidelines for programmatic and clinical management of drug-resistant tuberculosis. We estimated that the total costs of care from the health sector perspective for Models D, E and F were $4,334, $7,705 and $3,420 respectively. This is significantly lower than the costs of Models A, B and C which were $14,781, $12, 113, $7,572 respectively. Replacing Models A-C with Models D and E reduced the costs of RR/MDR-TB care in Nigeria by approximately $5,470 (48%) per patient treated and transitioning from Models D and E to Model F would result in further cost savings of $914 to $4,285 (21 to 56%) for every patient placed on Model F. If the improved outcomes of patients managed using bedaquiline-containing shorter treatment regimens in other countries can be attained in Nigeria, Model F would be the recommended model for the scale up of RR/MDR-TB care in Nigeria.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Globally, drug resistant tuberculosis (DR-TB) continues to be a public health threat. Nigeria, which accounts for a significant proportion of the global burden of rifampicin/multi-drug resistant-TB (RR/MDR-TB) had a funding gap of $168 million dollars for TB treatment in 2018. Since 2010, Nigeria has utilized five different models of care for RR/MDR-TB (Models A-E); Models A, B and C based on a standardized WHO-approved treatment regimen of 20-24 months, were phased out between 2015 and 2019 and replaced by Models D and E. Model D is a fully ambulatory model of 9-12 months during which a shorter treatment regimen including a second-line injectable agent is utilized. Model E is identical to Model D but has patients hospitalized for the first four months of care while Model F which is to be introduced in 2020, is a fully ambulatory, oral bedaquiline-containing shorter treatment regimen of 9-12 months. Treatment models for RR/MDR-TB of 20-24 months duration have had treatment success rates of 52-66% while shorter treatment regimens have reported success rates of 85% and above. In addition, replacing the second-line injectable agent in a shorter treatment regimen with bedaquiline has been found to further improve treatment success in patients with fluoroquinolone-susceptible RR/MDR-TB. Reliable cost data for RR/MDR-TB care are limited, specifically costs of models that utilize shorter treatment regimens and which are vital to guide Nigeria through the provision of RR/MDR-TB care at scale. We therefore conducted a cost analysis of shorter treatment regimens in use and to be used in Nigeria (Models D, E and F) and compared them to three models of longer duration utilized previously in Nigeria (Models A, B and C) to identify any changes in cost from transitioning from Models A-C to Models D-F and opportunities for cost savings.
METHODS
We obtained costs for TB diagnostic and monitoring tests, in-patient and out-patient care from a previous study, inflated these costs to 2019 NGN and then converted to 2020 USD. We obtained other costs from the average of six health facilities and drug costs from the global drug facility. We modeled treatment on strict adherence to two Nigerian National guidelines for programmatic and clinical management of drug-resistant tuberculosis.
RESULTS
We estimated that the total costs of care from the health sector perspective for Models D, E and F were $4,334, $7,705 and $3,420 respectively. This is significantly lower than the costs of Models A, B and C which were $14,781, $12, 113, $7,572 respectively.
CONCLUSION
Replacing Models A-C with Models D and E reduced the costs of RR/MDR-TB care in Nigeria by approximately $5,470 (48%) per patient treated and transitioning from Models D and E to Model F would result in further cost savings of $914 to $4,285 (21 to 56%) for every patient placed on Model F. If the improved outcomes of patients managed using bedaquiline-containing shorter treatment regimens in other countries can be attained in Nigeria, Model F would be the recommended model for the scale up of RR/MDR-TB care in Nigeria.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33259492
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0241065
pii: PONE-D-20-19082
pmc: PMC7707487
doi:
Substances chimiques
Antitubercular Agents
0
Diarylquinolines
0
Rifamycins
0
bedaquiline
78846I289Y
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0241065Commentaires et corrections
Type : ErratumIn
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2013 Aug;89(2):271-80
pubmed: 23926140
Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2019 Sep 1;23(9):1005-1011
pubmed: 31615608
Lancet Infect Dis. 2009 Mar;9(3):153-61
pubmed: 19246019
BMC Infect Dis. 2016 Sep 05;16:470
pubmed: 27595779
PLoS One. 2013;8(1):e54587
pubmed: 23349933
Infect Dis Ther. 2013 Dec;2(2):123-44
pubmed: 25134476
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2010 Sep 1;182(5):684-92
pubmed: 20442432
Bull World Health Organ. 2020 May 1;98(5):306-314
pubmed: 32514196
PLoS One. 2013 Dec 05;8(12):e82943
pubmed: 24349402
Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2014 Oct;18(10):1180-7
pubmed: 25216831
Clin Infect Dis. 2019 Apr 24;68(9):1522-1529
pubmed: 30165431
Lancet Respir Med. 2018 Sep;6(9):699-706
pubmed: 30001994
BMC Infect Dis. 2019 Jan 10;19(1):41
pubmed: 30630429
Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2016 Apr;20(4):435-41
pubmed: 26970150
J Clin Pharmacol. 2011 Aug;51(8):1152-62
pubmed: 21228407
Lancet. 2018 Sep 8;392(10150):821-834
pubmed: 30215381
Eur Respir J. 2012 Jul;40(1):133-42
pubmed: 22362862
BMC Infect Dis. 2014 Jun 17;14:333
pubmed: 24938738
Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2015 May;19(5):517-24
pubmed: 25868018
J Antimicrob Chemother. 2011 Aug;66(8):1815-20
pubmed: 21642291
Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2018 Jan 1;22(1):17-25
pubmed: 29149917
PLoS One. 2019 Jun 6;14(6):e0217820
pubmed: 31170207
Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2014 Oct;18(10):1188-94
pubmed: 25216832
Pharmacoeconomics. 2015 Sep;33(9):939-55
pubmed: 25939501
PLoS One. 2015 Mar 17;10(3):e0120161
pubmed: 25781958
Respir Med. 2014 Nov;108(11):1677-87
pubmed: 25443398
PLoS One. 2018 Apr 18;13(4):e0196003
pubmed: 29668748