ArticleBMC nephrology2021
Cost-effectiveness and value of information analysis of NephroCheck and NGAL tests compared to standard care for the diagnosis of acute kidney injury.
Article in BMC nephrology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Biomarkers for assessing acute kidney injury for people who are being considered for admission to critical care: a systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2022Pooled it
- Critical care considerations in rhabdomyolysis-associated acute kidney injury and kidney replacement therapy.World journal of nephrology · 2026Review
- DCBM-Tri: a dual-channel bilinear mapping triplet model for early recognition of acute kidney injury in imbalanced cohorts.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- How accurate should a precision medical test be to meet cost-effectiveness.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2026Article
- Adoption of a novel biomarker-guided quality improvement treatment bundle for patients with subclinical acute kidney injury after cardiac surgery: An implementation study.European journal of anaesthesiology · 2026Article
- Lipocalin 2: a double-edged sword in cellular ferroptosis.Cell biology and toxicology · 2026Review
- Acute Kidney Injury Biomarkers in Perioperative Care: A Scoping Review of Clinical Implementation.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Cost-effectiveness analysis model for sotagliflozin compared with insulin monotherapy for patients with type 1 diabetes and chronic kidney disease.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2025Article
- Cost-Utility Analysis of Renal Replacement Therapy Modalities in the Management of Severe Acute Kidney Injury in US Critically Ill Patients.ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR · 2025Article
- Urinary NGAL OutperformsTransplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation · 2025Article
- Employing urinary biomarkers to infer the absence of acute kidney disease in outpatients with a single serum creatinine measurement.Renal failure · 2024Article
- The role of biomarkers in early identification of acute kidney injury among non-critically ill patients.Journal of nephrology · 2024Observational
- The Role of Biomarkers in Diagnosis of Sepsis and Acute Kidney Injury.Biomedicines · 2024Review
- Exploring the Cost-Utility of a Biomarker Predicting Persistent Severe Acute Kidney Injury: The Case of C-C Motif Chemokine Ligand 14 (CCL14).ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR · 2024Article
- Diagnosis, pathophysiology and preventive strategies for cardiac surgery-associated acute kidney injury: a narrative review.European journal of medical research · 2023Review
- Steering Away from Current Amoxicillin Dose Reductions in Hospitalized Patients with Impaired Kidney Function to Avoid Subtherapeutic Drug Exposure.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Advances in laboratory detection of acute kidney injury.Practical laboratory medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEarly and accurate acute kidney injury (AKI) detection may improve patient outcomes and reduce health service costs. This study evaluates the diagnostic accuracy and cost-effectiveness of NephroCheck and NGAL (urine and plasma) biomarker tests used alongside standard care, compared with standard care to detect AKI in hospitalised UK adults.
methodsA 90-day decision tree and lifetime Markov cohort model predicted costs, quality adjusted life years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) from a UK NHS perspective. Test accuracy was informed by a meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy studies. Clinical trial and observational data informed the link between AKI and health outcomes, health state probabilities, costs and utilities. Value of information (VOI) analysis informed future research priorities.
resultsUnder base case assumptions, the biomarker tests were not cost-effective with ICERs of £105,965 (NephroCheck), £539,041 (NGAL urine BioPorto), £633,846 (NGAL plasma BioPorto) and £725,061 (NGAL urine ARCHITECT) per QALY gained compared to standard care. Results were uncertain, due to limited trial data, with probabilities of cost-effectiveness at £20,000 per QALY ranging from 0 to 99% and 0 to 56% for NephroCheck and NGAL tests respectively. The expected value of perfect information (EVPI) was £66 M, which demonstrated that additional research to resolve decision uncertainty is worthwhile.
conclusionsCurrent evidence is inadequate to support the cost-effectiveness of general use of biomarker tests. Future research evaluating the clinical and cost-effectiveness of test guided implementation of protective care bundles is necessary. Improving the evidence base around the impact of tests on AKI staging, and of AKI staging on clinical outcomes would have the greatest impact on reducing decision uncertainty.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.