Cost effectiveness of intermittent screening followed by treatment versus intermittent preventive treatment during pregnancy in West Africa: analysis and modelling of results from a non-inferiority trial
Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift › Tidsskriftartikel › Forskning › fagfællebedømt
Standard
Cost effectiveness of intermittent screening followed by treatment versus intermittent preventive treatment during pregnancy in West Africa : analysis and modelling of results from a non-inferiority trial. / Fernandes, Silke; Sicuri, Elisa; Halimatou, Diawara; Akazili, James; Boiang, Kalifa; Chandramohan, Daniel; Coulibaly, Sheikh; Diawara, Sory Ibrahim; Kayentao, Kassoum; Kuile, Feiko ter; Magnussen, Pascal; Tagbor, Harry; Williams, John; Woukeu, Arouna; Cairns, Matthew; Greenwood, Brian; Hanson, Kara.
I: Malaria Journal, Bind 15, 493, 23.09.2016.Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift › Tidsskriftartikel › Forskning › fagfællebedømt
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Author
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Cost effectiveness of intermittent screening followed by treatment versus intermittent preventive treatment during pregnancy in West Africa
T2 - analysis and modelling of results from a non-inferiority trial
AU - Fernandes, Silke
AU - Sicuri, Elisa
AU - Halimatou, Diawara
AU - Akazili, James
AU - Boiang, Kalifa
AU - Chandramohan, Daniel
AU - Coulibaly, Sheikh
AU - Diawara, Sory Ibrahim
AU - Kayentao, Kassoum
AU - Kuile, Feiko ter
AU - Magnussen, Pascal
AU - Tagbor, Harry
AU - Williams, John
AU - Woukeu, Arouna
AU - Cairns, Matthew
AU - Greenwood, Brian
AU - Hanson, Kara
PY - 2016/9/23
Y1 - 2016/9/23
N2 - Background: Emergence of high-grade sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP) resistance in parts of Africa has led to growing concerns about the efficacy of intermittent preventive treatment of malaria during pregnancy (IPTp) with SP. The incremental cost-effectiveness of intermittent screening and treatment (ISTp) with artemether-lumefantrine (AL) as an alternative strategy to IPTp-SP was estimated followed by a simulation of the effects on cost-effectiveness of decreasing efficacy of IPTp-SP due to SP resistance. The analysis was based on results from a multi-centre, non-inferiority trial conducted in West Africa. Methods: A decision tree model was analysed from a health provider perspective. Model parameters for all trial countries with appropriate ranges and distributions were used in a probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Simulations were performed in hypothetical cohorts of 1000 pregnant women who received either ISTp-AL or IPTp-SP. In addition a cost-consequences analysis was conducted. Trial estimates were used to calculate disability-adjusted-life-years (DALYs) for low birth weight and severe/moderate anaemia (both shown to be non-inferior for ISTp-AL) and clinical malaria (inferior for ISTp-AL). Cost estimates were obtained from observational studies, health facility costings and public procurement databases. Results were calculated as incremental cost per DALY averted. Finally, the cost-effectiveness changes with decreasing SP efficacy were explored by simulation. Results: Relative to IPTp-SP, delivering ISTp-AL to 1000 pregnant women cost US$ 4966.25 more (95 % CI US$ 3703.53; 6376.83) and led to a small excess of 28.36 DALYs (95 % CI -75.78; 134.18), with LBW contributing 81.3 % of this difference. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was -175.12 (95 % CI -1166.29; 1267.71) US$/DALY averted. Simulations show that cost-effectiveness of ISTp-AL increases as the efficacy of IPTp-SP decreases, though the specific threshold at which ISTp-AL becomes cost-effective depends on assumptions about the contribution of bed nets to malaria control, bed net coverage and the willingness-to-pay threshold used. Conclusions: At SP efficacy levels currently observed in the trial settings it would not be cost-effective to switch from IPTp-SP to ISTp-AL, mainly due to the substantially higher costs of ISTp-AL and limited difference in outcomes. The modelling results indicate thresholds below which IPT-SP efficacy must fall for ISTp-AL to become a cost-effective option for the prevention of malaria in pregnancy.
AB - Background: Emergence of high-grade sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP) resistance in parts of Africa has led to growing concerns about the efficacy of intermittent preventive treatment of malaria during pregnancy (IPTp) with SP. The incremental cost-effectiveness of intermittent screening and treatment (ISTp) with artemether-lumefantrine (AL) as an alternative strategy to IPTp-SP was estimated followed by a simulation of the effects on cost-effectiveness of decreasing efficacy of IPTp-SP due to SP resistance. The analysis was based on results from a multi-centre, non-inferiority trial conducted in West Africa. Methods: A decision tree model was analysed from a health provider perspective. Model parameters for all trial countries with appropriate ranges and distributions were used in a probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Simulations were performed in hypothetical cohorts of 1000 pregnant women who received either ISTp-AL or IPTp-SP. In addition a cost-consequences analysis was conducted. Trial estimates were used to calculate disability-adjusted-life-years (DALYs) for low birth weight and severe/moderate anaemia (both shown to be non-inferior for ISTp-AL) and clinical malaria (inferior for ISTp-AL). Cost estimates were obtained from observational studies, health facility costings and public procurement databases. Results were calculated as incremental cost per DALY averted. Finally, the cost-effectiveness changes with decreasing SP efficacy were explored by simulation. Results: Relative to IPTp-SP, delivering ISTp-AL to 1000 pregnant women cost US$ 4966.25 more (95 % CI US$ 3703.53; 6376.83) and led to a small excess of 28.36 DALYs (95 % CI -75.78; 134.18), with LBW contributing 81.3 % of this difference. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was -175.12 (95 % CI -1166.29; 1267.71) US$/DALY averted. Simulations show that cost-effectiveness of ISTp-AL increases as the efficacy of IPTp-SP decreases, though the specific threshold at which ISTp-AL becomes cost-effective depends on assumptions about the contribution of bed nets to malaria control, bed net coverage and the willingness-to-pay threshold used. Conclusions: At SP efficacy levels currently observed in the trial settings it would not be cost-effective to switch from IPTp-SP to ISTp-AL, mainly due to the substantially higher costs of ISTp-AL and limited difference in outcomes. The modelling results indicate thresholds below which IPT-SP efficacy must fall for ISTp-AL to become a cost-effective option for the prevention of malaria in pregnancy.
U2 - 10.1186/s12936-016-1539-4
DO - 10.1186/s12936-016-1539-4
M3 - Journal article
C2 - 27663678
AN - SCOPUS:84992187924
VL - 15
JO - Malaria Journal
JF - Malaria Journal
SN - 1475-2875
M1 - 493
ER -
ID: 169079579