Tuberculosis screening of travelers to higher-incidence countries: A cost-effectiveness analysis

Abstract Background Travelers to countries with high tuberculosis incidence can acquire infection during travel. We sought to compare four screening interventions for travelers from low-incidence countries, who visit countries with varying tuberculosis incidence. Methods Decision analysis model: We considered hypothetical cohorts of 1,000 travelers, 21 years old, visiting Mexico, the Dominican Republic, or Haiti for three months. Travelers departed from and returned to the United States or Canada; they were born in the United States, Canada, or the destination countries. The time horizon was 20 years, with 3% annual discounting of future costs and outcomes. The analysis was conducted from the health care system perspective. Screening involved tuberculin skin testing (post-travel in three strategies, with baseline pre-travel tests in two), or chest radiography post-travel (one strategy). Returning travelers with tuberculin conversion (one strategy) or other evidence of latent tuberculosis (three strategies) were offered treatment. The main outcome was cost (in 2005 US dollars) per tuberculosis case prevented. Results For all travelers, a single post-trip tuberculin test was most cost-effective. The associated cost estimate per case prevented ranged from $21,406 for Haitian-born travelers to Haiti, to$161,196 for US-born travelers to Mexico. In all sensitivity analyses, the single post-trip tuberculin test remained most cost-effective. For US-born travelers to Haiti, this strategy was associated with cost savings for trips over 22 months. Screening was more cost-effective with increasing trip duration and infection risk, and less so with poorer treatment adherence. Conclusion A single post-trip tuberculin skin test was the most cost-effective strategy considered, for travelers from the United States or Canada. The analysis did not evaluate the use of interferon-gamma release assays, which would be most relevant for travelers who received BCG vaccination after infancy, as in many European countries. Screening decisions should reflect duration of travel, tuberculosis incidence, and commitment to treat latent infection.</p

Cost-effectiveness of novel vaccines for tuberculosis control: a decision analysis study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The development of a successful new tuberculosis (TB) vaccine would circumvent many limitations of current diagnostic and treatment practices. However, vaccine development is complex and costly. We aimed to assess the potential cost effectiveness of novel vaccines for TB control in a sub-Saharan African country - Zambia - relative to the existing strategy of directly observed treatment, short course (DOTS) and current level of bacille Calmette-Guérin (BCG) vaccination coverage.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We conducted a decision analysis model-based simulation from the societal perspective, with a 3% discount rate and all costs expressed in 2007 US dollars. Health outcomes and costs were projected over a 30-year period, for persons born in Zambia (population 11,478,000 in 2005) in year 1. Initial development costs for single vaccination and prime-boost strategies were prorated to the Zambian share (0.398%) of global BCG vaccine coverage for newborns. Main outcome measures were TB-related morbidity, mortality, and costs over a range of potential scenarios for vaccine efficacy.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Relative to the status quo strategy, a BCG replacement vaccine administered at birth, with 70% efficacy in preventing rapid progression to TB disease after initial infection, is estimated to avert 932 TB cases and 422 TB-related deaths (prevention of 199 cases/100,000 vaccinated, and 90 deaths/100,000 vaccinated). This would result in estimated net savings of $3.6 million over 30 years for 468,073 Zambians born in year 1 of the simulation. The addition of a booster at age 10 results in estimated savings of$5.6 million compared to the status quo, averting 1,863 TB cases and 1,011 TB-related deaths (prevention of 398 cases/100,000 vaccinated, and of 216 deaths/100,000 vaccinated). With vaccination at birth alone, net savings would be realized within 1 year, whereas the prime-boost strategy would require an additional 5 years to realize savings, reflecting a greater initial development cost.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Investment in an improved TB vaccine is predicted to result in considerable cost savings, as well as a reduction in TB morbidity and TB-related mortality, when added to existing control strategies. For a vaccine with waning efficacy, a prime-boost strategy is more cost-effective in the long term.</p