Trade-offs between cost and accuracy in active case finding for tuberculosis: A dynamic modelling analysis.

<h4>Background</h4>Active case finding (ACF) may be valuable in tuberculosis (TB) control, but questions remain about its optimum implementation in different settings. For example, smear microscopy misses up to half of TB cases, yet is cheap and detects the most infectious TB cases. What...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Lucia Cilloni, Katharina Kranzer, Helen R Stagg, Nimalan Arinaminpathy
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2020-12-01
Series:PLoS Medicine
Online Access:https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1003456&type=printable
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849332250619936768
author Lucia Cilloni
Katharina Kranzer
Helen R Stagg
Nimalan Arinaminpathy
author_facet Lucia Cilloni
Katharina Kranzer
Helen R Stagg
Nimalan Arinaminpathy
author_sort Lucia Cilloni
collection DOAJ
description <h4>Background</h4>Active case finding (ACF) may be valuable in tuberculosis (TB) control, but questions remain about its optimum implementation in different settings. For example, smear microscopy misses up to half of TB cases, yet is cheap and detects the most infectious TB cases. What, then, is the incremental value of using more sensitive and specific, yet more costly, tests such as Xpert MTB/RIF in ACF in a high-burden setting?<h4>Methods and findings</h4>We constructed a dynamic transmission model of TB, calibrated to be consistent with an urban slum population in India. We applied this model to compare the potential cost and impact of 2 hypothetical approaches following initial symptom screening: (i) 'moderate accuracy' testing employing a microscopy-like test (i.e., lower cost but also lower accuracy) for bacteriological confirmation and (ii) 'high accuracy' testing employing an Xpert-like test (higher cost but also higher accuracy, while also detecting rifampicin resistance). Results suggest that ACF using a moderate-accuracy test could in fact cost more overall than using a high-accuracy test. Under an illustrative budget of US$20 million in a slum population of 2 million, high-accuracy testing would avert 1.14 (95% credible interval 0.75-1.99, with p = 0.28) cases relative to each case averted by moderate-accuracy testing. Test specificity is a key driver: High-accuracy testing would be significantly more impactful at the 5% significance level, as long as the high-accuracy test has specificity at least 3 percentage points greater than the moderate-accuracy test. Additional factors promoting the impact of high-accuracy testing are that (i) its ability to detect rifampicin resistance can lead to long-term cost savings in second-line treatment and (ii) its higher sensitivity contributes to the overall cases averted by ACF. Amongst the limitations of this study, our cost model has a narrow focus on the commodity costs of testing and treatment; our estimates should not be taken as indicative of the overall cost of ACF. There remains uncertainty about the true specificity of tests such as smear and Xpert-like tests in ACF, relating to the accuracy of the reference standard under such conditions.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Our results suggest that cheaper diagnostics do not necessarily translate to less costly ACF, as any savings from the test cost can be strongly outweighed by factors including false-positive TB treatment, reduced sensitivity, and foregone savings in second-line treatment. In resource-limited settings, it is therefore important to take all of these factors into account when designing cost-effective strategies for ACF.
format Article
id doaj-art-7e47c098154647428ce593b3d6acd62e
institution Kabale University
issn 1549-1277
1549-1676
language English
publishDate 2020-12-01
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
record_format Article
series PLoS Medicine
spelling doaj-art-7e47c098154647428ce593b3d6acd62e2025-08-20T03:46:15ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS Medicine1549-12771549-16762020-12-011712e100345610.1371/journal.pmed.1003456Trade-offs between cost and accuracy in active case finding for tuberculosis: A dynamic modelling analysis.Lucia CilloniKatharina KranzerHelen R StaggNimalan Arinaminpathy<h4>Background</h4>Active case finding (ACF) may be valuable in tuberculosis (TB) control, but questions remain about its optimum implementation in different settings. For example, smear microscopy misses up to half of TB cases, yet is cheap and detects the most infectious TB cases. What, then, is the incremental value of using more sensitive and specific, yet more costly, tests such as Xpert MTB/RIF in ACF in a high-burden setting?<h4>Methods and findings</h4>We constructed a dynamic transmission model of TB, calibrated to be consistent with an urban slum population in India. We applied this model to compare the potential cost and impact of 2 hypothetical approaches following initial symptom screening: (i) 'moderate accuracy' testing employing a microscopy-like test (i.e., lower cost but also lower accuracy) for bacteriological confirmation and (ii) 'high accuracy' testing employing an Xpert-like test (higher cost but also higher accuracy, while also detecting rifampicin resistance). Results suggest that ACF using a moderate-accuracy test could in fact cost more overall than using a high-accuracy test. Under an illustrative budget of US$20 million in a slum population of 2 million, high-accuracy testing would avert 1.14 (95% credible interval 0.75-1.99, with p = 0.28) cases relative to each case averted by moderate-accuracy testing. Test specificity is a key driver: High-accuracy testing would be significantly more impactful at the 5% significance level, as long as the high-accuracy test has specificity at least 3 percentage points greater than the moderate-accuracy test. Additional factors promoting the impact of high-accuracy testing are that (i) its ability to detect rifampicin resistance can lead to long-term cost savings in second-line treatment and (ii) its higher sensitivity contributes to the overall cases averted by ACF. Amongst the limitations of this study, our cost model has a narrow focus on the commodity costs of testing and treatment; our estimates should not be taken as indicative of the overall cost of ACF. There remains uncertainty about the true specificity of tests such as smear and Xpert-like tests in ACF, relating to the accuracy of the reference standard under such conditions.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Our results suggest that cheaper diagnostics do not necessarily translate to less costly ACF, as any savings from the test cost can be strongly outweighed by factors including false-positive TB treatment, reduced sensitivity, and foregone savings in second-line treatment. In resource-limited settings, it is therefore important to take all of these factors into account when designing cost-effective strategies for ACF.https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1003456&type=printable
spellingShingle Lucia Cilloni
Katharina Kranzer
Helen R Stagg
Nimalan Arinaminpathy
Trade-offs between cost and accuracy in active case finding for tuberculosis: A dynamic modelling analysis.
PLoS Medicine
title Trade-offs between cost and accuracy in active case finding for tuberculosis: A dynamic modelling analysis.
title_full Trade-offs between cost and accuracy in active case finding for tuberculosis: A dynamic modelling analysis.
title_fullStr Trade-offs between cost and accuracy in active case finding for tuberculosis: A dynamic modelling analysis.
title_full_unstemmed Trade-offs between cost and accuracy in active case finding for tuberculosis: A dynamic modelling analysis.
title_short Trade-offs between cost and accuracy in active case finding for tuberculosis: A dynamic modelling analysis.
title_sort trade offs between cost and accuracy in active case finding for tuberculosis a dynamic modelling analysis
url https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1003456&type=printable
work_keys_str_mv AT luciacilloni tradeoffsbetweencostandaccuracyinactivecasefindingfortuberculosisadynamicmodellinganalysis
AT katharinakranzer tradeoffsbetweencostandaccuracyinactivecasefindingfortuberculosisadynamicmodellinganalysis
AT helenrstagg tradeoffsbetweencostandaccuracyinactivecasefindingfortuberculosisadynamicmodellinganalysis
AT nimalanarinaminpathy tradeoffsbetweencostandaccuracyinactivecasefindingfortuberculosisadynamicmodellinganalysis