Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Artificial Intelligence-Driven Risk Stratification in Patients With Diabetic Kidney Disease in the US Veterans Population

IF 4.1 Q1 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Kidney Medicine Pub Date : 2026-03-01 Epub Date: 2026-01-12 DOI:10.1016/j.xkme.2026.101261
Jyotirmoy Sarker , Abdullah I. Abdelaziz , Jacob Crook , Richard E. Nelson , Joanne LaFleur , Heather Nyman , Chao-Chin Lu , Kibum Kim
{"title":"Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Artificial Intelligence-Driven Risk Stratification in Patients With Diabetic Kidney Disease in the US Veterans Population","authors":"Jyotirmoy Sarker ,&nbsp;Abdullah I. Abdelaziz ,&nbsp;Jacob Crook ,&nbsp;Richard E. Nelson ,&nbsp;Joanne LaFleur ,&nbsp;Heather Nyman ,&nbsp;Chao-Chin Lu ,&nbsp;Kibum Kim","doi":"10.1016/j.xkme.2026.101261","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Rationale &amp; Objective</h3><div>Efficient risk stratification is essential to optimize care and allocate resources for treatment of diabetic kidney disease (DKD). This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of an artificial intelligence-driven in vitro kidney disease risk assay (AIKD).</div></div><div><h3>Study Design</h3><div>Cost-effectiveness analysis using a hybrid model, combining a decision tree followed by a Markov model.</div></div><div><h3>Setting &amp; Population</h3><div>Patients with early-stage DKD receiving care within the US Veterans Health Administration health care system.</div></div><div><h3>Intervention(s)</h3><div>Risk stratification using AIKD versus Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) standard of care (SoC).</div></div><div><h3>Outcomes</h3><div>Five-year health care costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).</div></div><div><h3>Model, Perspective, &amp; Timeframe</h3><div>The decision tree delineated clinical pathways based on the prevalence of progressive decline in kidney function and risk stratification performance of AIKD versus KDIGO. The subsequent Markov model simulated DKD stage transitions across the underlying risk–treatment pathways. Model inputs included test performance characteristics, risk prevalence, transition probabilities, costs, and utilities. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses assessed uncertainty. The analysis was conducted from the perspective of the Veterans Health Administration health care system over a 5-year time horizon.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>AIKD-guided care resulted in a total cost of $146,437 and 2.8277 QALYs, compared with $145,120 and 2.8164 QALYs for the SoC arm. The ICER for AIKD relative to SoC was $116,349 per QALY gained. One-way sensitivity analysis showed that the sensitivity and specificity of AIKD and SoC, as well as the prevalence of underlying risk of progressive decline in kidney function, were the most influential inputs affecting the ICER. From the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, AIKD has 69% likelihood of being accepted at the conventional willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000 per QALY gained.</div></div><div><h3>Limitations</h3><div>Model assumptions regarding risk stratification performance and long-term treatment effects may limit generalizability.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>AIKD is cost-effective compared to KDIGO for patients with early-stage DKD. Its adoption could improve health outcomes and support efficient health care resource utilization management.</div></div><div><h3>Plain-Language Summary</h3><div>We studied whether a new artificial intelligence tool, artificial intelligence-driven in vitro kidney disease risk assay (AIKD), is a worthwhile investment for early identification of diabetic kidney disease compared with the current Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) guideline-recommended risk stratification method. This tool assists clinicians in identifying patients at high risk of kidney function decline, allowing for earlier and more targeted interventions. Using data from the US Veterans Health Administration, we found that AIKD modestly increases care costs but helps slow disease progression and improves quality of life. Over 5 years, AIKD was found to be cost-effective, and its overall impact on the health care budget was modest. Our findings suggest that AIKD-assisted personalized care decision making has the potential to result in cost-effective health care resource utilization in patients with diabetic kidney disease.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":17885,"journal":{"name":"Kidney Medicine","volume":"8 3","pages":"Article 101261"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kidney Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590059526000221","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Rationale & Objective

Efficient risk stratification is essential to optimize care and allocate resources for treatment of diabetic kidney disease (DKD). This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of an artificial intelligence-driven in vitro kidney disease risk assay (AIKD).

Study Design

Cost-effectiveness analysis using a hybrid model, combining a decision tree followed by a Markov model.

Setting & Population

Patients with early-stage DKD receiving care within the US Veterans Health Administration health care system.

Intervention(s)

Risk stratification using AIKD versus Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) standard of care (SoC).

Outcomes

Five-year health care costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).

Model, Perspective, & Timeframe

The decision tree delineated clinical pathways based on the prevalence of progressive decline in kidney function and risk stratification performance of AIKD versus KDIGO. The subsequent Markov model simulated DKD stage transitions across the underlying risk–treatment pathways. Model inputs included test performance characteristics, risk prevalence, transition probabilities, costs, and utilities. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses assessed uncertainty. The analysis was conducted from the perspective of the Veterans Health Administration health care system over a 5-year time horizon.

Results

AIKD-guided care resulted in a total cost of $146,437 and 2.8277 QALYs, compared with $145,120 and 2.8164 QALYs for the SoC arm. The ICER for AIKD relative to SoC was $116,349 per QALY gained. One-way sensitivity analysis showed that the sensitivity and specificity of AIKD and SoC, as well as the prevalence of underlying risk of progressive decline in kidney function, were the most influential inputs affecting the ICER. From the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, AIKD has 69% likelihood of being accepted at the conventional willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000 per QALY gained.

Limitations

Model assumptions regarding risk stratification performance and long-term treatment effects may limit generalizability.

Conclusions

AIKD is cost-effective compared to KDIGO for patients with early-stage DKD. Its adoption could improve health outcomes and support efficient health care resource utilization management.

Plain-Language Summary

We studied whether a new artificial intelligence tool, artificial intelligence-driven in vitro kidney disease risk assay (AIKD), is a worthwhile investment for early identification of diabetic kidney disease compared with the current Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) guideline-recommended risk stratification method. This tool assists clinicians in identifying patients at high risk of kidney function decline, allowing for earlier and more targeted interventions. Using data from the US Veterans Health Administration, we found that AIKD modestly increases care costs but helps slow disease progression and improves quality of life. Over 5 years, AIKD was found to be cost-effective, and its overall impact on the health care budget was modest. Our findings suggest that AIKD-assisted personalized care decision making has the potential to result in cost-effective health care resource utilization in patients with diabetic kidney disease.
美国退伍军人糖尿病肾病患者人工智能驱动风险分层的成本-效果分析
理由和目的有效的风险分层对于优化糖尿病肾病(DKD)治疗的护理和资源分配至关重要。本研究评估了人工智能驱动的体外肾脏疾病风险测定(AIKD)的成本效益。研究设计使用混合模型进行成本效益分析,结合决策树和马尔可夫模型。背景和人群在美国退伍军人健康管理局医疗保健系统内接受治疗的早期DKD患者。干预:使用AIKD与肾脏疾病进行风险分层:改善全球结局(KDIGO)护理标准(SoC)。结果:5年医疗成本、质量调整生命年(QALYs)和增量成本-效果比(ICER)。模型、视角、时间框架决策树根据AIKD与KDIGO的肾功能进行性下降的患病率和风险分层表现描绘了临床途径。随后的马尔可夫模型模拟了跨潜在风险处理途径的DKD阶段转换。模型输入包括测试性能特征、风险流行、转换概率、成本和效用。单向和概率敏感性分析评估了不确定性。该分析是从退伍军人健康管理局医疗保健系统的角度进行的,时间跨度为5年。结果aikd引导护理的总成本为146,437美元和2.8277个QALYs,而SoC组的总成本为145,120美元和2.8164个QALYs。相对于SoC, AIKD的收益为每QALY获得116,349美元。单向敏感性分析显示,AIKD和SoC的敏感性和特异性,以及肾功能进行性下降的潜在风险的普遍性,是影响ICER的最具影响力的输入因素。从概率敏感性分析来看,AIKD有69%的可能性被传统的支付意愿阈值所接受,即每个QALY获得15万美元。关于风险分层性能和长期治疗效果的模型假设可能会限制通用性。结论对于早期DKD患者,saikd优于KDIGO。它的采用可以改善健康结果并支持有效的卫生保健资源利用管理。我们研究了一种新的人工智能工具,人工智能驱动的体外肾脏疾病风险测定(AIKD),与目前的肾脏疾病:改善全球结局(KDIGO)指南推荐的风险分层方法相比,是否值得投资用于早期识别糖尿病肾病。该工具可帮助临床医生识别肾功能下降高风险患者,允许更早和更有针对性的干预。使用美国退伍军人健康管理局的数据,我们发现AIKD适度增加了护理成本,但有助于减缓疾病进展并提高生活质量。在5年的时间里,发现AIKD具有成本效益,其对卫生保健预算的总体影响不大。我们的研究结果表明,aikd辅助的个性化护理决策有可能导致糖尿病肾病患者具有成本效益的医疗资源利用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Kidney Medicine
Kidney Medicine Medicine-Internal Medicine
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
5.10%
发文量
176
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书