ArticlePLOS global public health2024
Comparing the cost-effectiveness of the MPT64-antigen detection test to Xpert MTB/RIF and ZN-microscopy for the diagnosis of Extrapulmonary Tuberculosis: An economic evaluation modelling study.
Article in PLOS global public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Health-related quality of life among extrapulmonary tuberculosis patients and inequalities by disease manifestations: a longitudinal study analysing the impact of TB treatment.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Extrapulmonary Tuberculosis (EPTB) poses challenges from patient and health system perspectives. The cost-effectiveness analysis of the Xpert MTB/RIF (Xpert) test to diagnose pulmonary tuberculosis is documented. However, there are no economic evaluations for EPTB. Considering the reported better diagnostic sensitivity of the MPT64 test, this study explored its cost-effectiveness as an alternative diagnostic test. We conducted this economic evaluation to assess the cost-effectiveness of the MPT64 test compared to Xpert and ZN microscopy for EPTB adult patients. We utilised a Markov modelling approach to capture short- and long-term costs and benefits from a health system perspective. For the model inputs, we combined data from our cohort studies in Tanzania and peer-reviewed EPTB literature. We calculated the Incremental Cost Effectiveness Ratio (ICER) by comparing the cost (in USD) of each diagnostic test and Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) as health gain. We found the MPT64 test cost-effective for EPTB diagnosis and absolutely dominated ZN microscopy and Xpert using the baseline model inputs. A scenario analysis showed that the Xpert test might be the most cost-effective at its higher test sensitivity, which corresponds to using it to diagnose lymph node aspirates. The prevalence of HIV among EPTB cases, their probability of treatment, costs of ART, and the probability of the MPT64 test in detecting EPTB patients were the main parameters associated with the highest impact on ICER in one-way deterministic analysis. The most cost-effective option for EPTB at the baseline parameters was the MPT64 diagnostic test. Including the MPT64 test in EPTB diagnostic pathways for previously untreated patients can lead to better resource use. The Xpert test was the most cost-effective diagnostic intervention at a higher diagnostic test sensitivity in scenario analyses based on different sites of infection, such as for the lymph node aspirates.
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.