ArticlePLoS medicine2025
Cost-effectiveness of screening with transcriptional signatures for incipient TB among U.S. migrants.
Article in PLoS medicine, 2025. 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.
- Posttuberculosis Consequences on Tuberculosis Prevention Effectiveness and Cost-effectiveness among New Immigrants, Canada.Emerging infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Risks and consequences of TB and its prevention in cost-utility analyses among immigrants: a systematic review.IJTLD open · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHost-response-based transcriptional signatures (HrTS) have been developed to identify "incipient tuberculosis (TB)". No study has reported the cost-effectiveness of HrTS for post-arrival migrant screening programs in low-incidence countries. The aim of this study was to assess the potential health impact and cost-effectiveness of HrTS for post-arrival TB infection screening among new migrants in the United States. METHODS AND
findingsWe used a discrete-event simulation model to compare four strategies: (1) no screening for TB infection or incipient TB; (2) 'IGRA-only', screen all with interferon-gamma release assay (IGRA), provide TB preventive treatment for IGRA-positives; (3) 'IGRA-HrTS', screen all with IGRA followed by HrTS for IGRA-positives, provide incipient TB treatment for individuals testing positive with both tests; and (4) 'HrTS-only', screen all with HrTS, provide incipient TB treatment for HrTS-positives. We assessed outcomes over the lifetime of migrants entering the United Stataes (U.S.) in 2019, assuming HrTS met WHO Target Product Profile (TPP) optimal criteria. We conducted sensitivity analyses to evaluate the robustness of results. Our findings show that at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained, the IGRA-only strategy was the optimal strategy under both healthcare sector and societal perspectives, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $104,138 and $143,103 per QALY gained, respectively. At a willingness-to-pay of $100,000 per QALY gained the IGRA-HrTS strategy appeared optimal. When the cohort was stratified by TB incidence in the country-of-origin, the IGRA-only strategy was optimal for country-of-origin incidence [Formula: see text]100 per 100,000, and the no-screening strategy was optimal for country-of-origin incidence <10 per 100,000. The IGRA-HrTS strategy was potentially cost-effective with country-of-origin incidence of 10-100 per 100,000, though this result had substantial uncertainty. Results were sensitive to time trends in TB progression risk after U.S. entry.
conclusionsAn HrTS test meeting WHO TPP optimal criteria would be potentially cost-effective for post-arrival screening among a subset of U.S. migrants, but this result was sensitive to multiple factors.
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.