↓ Skip to main content

A five-year model to assess the early cost-effectiveness of new diagnostic tests in the early diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis

Overview of attention for article published in Arthritis Research & Therapy, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
57 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A five-year model to assess the early cost-effectiveness of new diagnostic tests in the early diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis
Published in
Arthritis Research & Therapy, June 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13075-016-1020-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Leander R. Buisman, Jolanda J. Luime, Mark Oppe, Johanna M. W. Hazes, Maureen P. M. H. Rutten-van Mölken

Abstract

There is a lack of information about the sensitivity, specificity and costs new diagnostic tests should have to improve early diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Our objective was to explore the early cost-effectiveness of various new diagnostic test strategies in the workup of patients with inflammatory arthritis (IA) at risk of having RA. A decision tree followed by a patient-level state transition model, using data from published literature, cohorts and trials, was used to evaluate diagnostic test strategies. Alternative tests were assessed as add-on to or replacement of the ACR/EULAR 2010 RA classification criteria for all patients and for intermediate-risk patients. Tests included B-cell gene expression (sensitivity 0.60, specificity 0.90, costs €150), MRI (sensitivity 0.90, specificity 0.60, costs €756), IL-6 serum level (sensitivity 0.70, specificity 0.53, costs €50) and genetic assay (sensitivity 0.40, specificity 0.85, costs €750). Patients with IA at risk of RA were followed for 5 years using a societal perspective. Guideline treatment was assumed using tight controlled treatment based on DAS28; if patients had a DAS28 >3.2 at 12 months or later patients could be eligible for starting biological drugs. The outcome was expressed in incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (€2014 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained) and headroom. The B-cell test was the least expensive strategy when used as an add-on and as replacement in intermediate-risk patients, making it the dominant strategy, as it has better health outcomes and lower costs. As add-on for all patients, the B-cell test was also the most cost-effective test strategy. When using a willingness-to-pay threshold of €20,000 per QALY gained, the IL-6 and MRI strategies were not cost-effective, except as replacement. A genetic assay was not cost-effective in any strategy. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis revealed that the B-cell test was consistently superior in all strategies. When performing univariate sensitivity analysis for intermediate-risk patients, specificity and DAS28 in the B-cell add-on strategy, and DAS28 and sensitivity in the MRI add-on strategy had the largest impact on the cost-effectiveness. This early cost-effectiveness analysis indicated that new tests to diagnose RA are most likely to be cost-effective when the tests are used as an add-on in intermediate-risk patients, and have high specificity, and the test costs should not be higher than €200-€300.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 56 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 16%
Student > Master 5 9%
Student > Bachelor 5 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 7%
Other 11 19%
Unknown 13 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 37%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 4 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Other 10 18%
Unknown 14 25%