瞬时弹性成像在泰国糖尿病患者肝纤维化筛查中的成本-效果。

IF 5.4 3区 医学 Q1 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Chayanis Kositamongkol, Pichaya Tantiyavarong, Alissa Ratanatawan, Pimsiri Sripongpun, Prawej Mahawithitwong, Prawat Kositamongkol, Surasak Saokaew, Pochamana Phisalprapa
{"title":"瞬时弹性成像在泰国糖尿病患者肝纤维化筛查中的成本-效果。","authors":"Chayanis Kositamongkol, Pichaya Tantiyavarong, Alissa Ratanatawan, Pimsiri Sripongpun, Prawej Mahawithitwong, Prawat Kositamongkol, Surasak Saokaew, Pochamana Phisalprapa","doi":"10.3748/wjg.v31.i32.110333","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The association between diabetes mellitus (DM) and metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) is well documented, with DM increasing the risk of developing MASLD and liver fibrosis.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To evaluate the cost-effectiveness and budget impact of transient elastography (TE) for detecting significant fibrosis in Thai patients with DM.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a lifetime cost-utility analysis from a societal perspective, combining a decision tree with a Markov model. Four alternatives were compared: Fibrosis-4 (FIB-4) index triage followed by TE, steatosis-associated fibrosis estimator (SAFE) score triage followed by TE, standalone TE, and no screening. Clinical probabilities, utilities, and costs came from previous studies and Siriraj Hospital data. Costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were discounted 3% annually, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were judged against the 160000-Thai baht (THB; 4619 United States dollars [USD])/QALY threshold. A 5-year budget impact was evaluated from the payer perspective.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among the screening methods evaluated, TE alone yielded the highest total lifetime costs of 200403 THB (5785 USD) and the highest QALYs of 12.81. Compared to no screening, all strategies demonstrated cost-effectiveness with ICERs of 75961, 80385, and 98965 THB (2193, 2321, and 2857 USD)/QALY gained for FIB-4 + TE, SAFE + TE, and TE alone, respectively. Extended dominance favored SAFE + TE, yet probabilistic analysis showed FIB-4 + TE had the highest cost-effectiveness probability and the smallest budget impact. Estimated annual budget impacts amounted to 470.7-755.8 million THB (13.6-21.8 million USD).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Implementing screening for significant fibrosis in patients with DM is cost-effective. In resource-limited settings, prioritizing the FIB-4 index as a triage tool before TE is recommended.</p>","PeriodicalId":23778,"journal":{"name":"World Journal of Gastroenterology","volume":"31 32","pages":"110333"},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12400221/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cost-effectiveness of transient elastography for liver fibrosis screening in Thai patients with diabetes mellitus.\",\"authors\":\"Chayanis Kositamongkol, Pichaya Tantiyavarong, Alissa Ratanatawan, Pimsiri Sripongpun, Prawej Mahawithitwong, Prawat Kositamongkol, Surasak Saokaew, Pochamana Phisalprapa\",\"doi\":\"10.3748/wjg.v31.i32.110333\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The association between diabetes mellitus (DM) and metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) is well documented, with DM increasing the risk of developing MASLD and liver fibrosis.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To evaluate the cost-effectiveness and budget impact of transient elastography (TE) for detecting significant fibrosis in Thai patients with DM.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a lifetime cost-utility analysis from a societal perspective, combining a decision tree with a Markov model. Four alternatives were compared: Fibrosis-4 (FIB-4) index triage followed by TE, steatosis-associated fibrosis estimator (SAFE) score triage followed by TE, standalone TE, and no screening. Clinical probabilities, utilities, and costs came from previous studies and Siriraj Hospital data. Costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were discounted 3% annually, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were judged against the 160000-Thai baht (THB; 4619 United States dollars [USD])/QALY threshold. A 5-year budget impact was evaluated from the payer perspective.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among the screening methods evaluated, TE alone yielded the highest total lifetime costs of 200403 THB (5785 USD) and the highest QALYs of 12.81. Compared to no screening, all strategies demonstrated cost-effectiveness with ICERs of 75961, 80385, and 98965 THB (2193, 2321, and 2857 USD)/QALY gained for FIB-4 + TE, SAFE + TE, and TE alone, respectively. Extended dominance favored SAFE + TE, yet probabilistic analysis showed FIB-4 + TE had the highest cost-effectiveness probability and the smallest budget impact. Estimated annual budget impacts amounted to 470.7-755.8 million THB (13.6-21.8 million USD).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Implementing screening for significant fibrosis in patients with DM is cost-effective. In resource-limited settings, prioritizing the FIB-4 index as a triage tool before TE is recommended.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23778,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"World Journal of Gastroenterology\",\"volume\":\"31 32\",\"pages\":\"110333\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12400221/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"World Journal of Gastroenterology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v31.i32.110333\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Journal of Gastroenterology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v31.i32.110333","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:糖尿病(DM)与代谢功能障碍相关的脂肪变性肝病(MASLD)之间的关联已被充分证实,糖尿病增加了发生MASLD和肝纤维化的风险。目的:评估瞬时弹性成像(TE)检测泰国dm患者显著纤维化的成本-效果和预算影响。方法:我们从社会角度进行了终身成本-效用分析,结合决策树和马尔可夫模型。比较了四种选择:纤维化-4 (FIB-4)指数分选后TE,脂肪变性相关纤维化评估(SAFE)评分分选后TE,独立TE和不筛查。临床概率、效用和成本来自先前的研究和Siriraj医院的数据。成本和质量调整寿命年(QALYs)每年折现3%,增量成本效益比(ICERs)根据16万泰铢(泰铢;4619美元)/QALY阈值进行判断。从付款人的角度评估了5年的预算影响。结果:在评估的筛查方法中,单独使用TE的总生命周期成本最高,为200403泰铢(5785美元),QALYs最高,为12.81。与未筛查相比,所有策略均显示出成本效益,FIB-4 + TE、SAFE + TE和单独TE的ICERs分别为75961、80385和98965 THB(2193、2321和2857美元)/QALY。扩展优势倾向于SAFE + TE,但概率分析显示FIB-4 + TE具有最高的成本效益概率和最小的预算影响。预计年度预算影响为4.707亿至7.558亿泰铢(1360万至2180万美元)。结论:对糖尿病患者实施显著纤维化筛查具有成本效益。在资源有限的情况下,建议优先使用FIB-4索引作为TE之前的分类工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Cost-effectiveness of transient elastography for liver fibrosis screening in Thai patients with diabetes mellitus.

Cost-effectiveness of transient elastography for liver fibrosis screening in Thai patients with diabetes mellitus.

Cost-effectiveness of transient elastography for liver fibrosis screening in Thai patients with diabetes mellitus.

Cost-effectiveness of transient elastography for liver fibrosis screening in Thai patients with diabetes mellitus.

Background: The association between diabetes mellitus (DM) and metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) is well documented, with DM increasing the risk of developing MASLD and liver fibrosis.

Aim: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness and budget impact of transient elastography (TE) for detecting significant fibrosis in Thai patients with DM.

Methods: We conducted a lifetime cost-utility analysis from a societal perspective, combining a decision tree with a Markov model. Four alternatives were compared: Fibrosis-4 (FIB-4) index triage followed by TE, steatosis-associated fibrosis estimator (SAFE) score triage followed by TE, standalone TE, and no screening. Clinical probabilities, utilities, and costs came from previous studies and Siriraj Hospital data. Costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were discounted 3% annually, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were judged against the 160000-Thai baht (THB; 4619 United States dollars [USD])/QALY threshold. A 5-year budget impact was evaluated from the payer perspective.

Results: Among the screening methods evaluated, TE alone yielded the highest total lifetime costs of 200403 THB (5785 USD) and the highest QALYs of 12.81. Compared to no screening, all strategies demonstrated cost-effectiveness with ICERs of 75961, 80385, and 98965 THB (2193, 2321, and 2857 USD)/QALY gained for FIB-4 + TE, SAFE + TE, and TE alone, respectively. Extended dominance favored SAFE + TE, yet probabilistic analysis showed FIB-4 + TE had the highest cost-effectiveness probability and the smallest budget impact. Estimated annual budget impacts amounted to 470.7-755.8 million THB (13.6-21.8 million USD).

Conclusion: Implementing screening for significant fibrosis in patients with DM is cost-effective. In resource-limited settings, prioritizing the FIB-4 index as a triage tool before TE is recommended.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
World Journal of Gastroenterology
World Journal of Gastroenterology 医学-胃肠肝病学
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
4.70%
发文量
464
审稿时长
2.4 months
期刊介绍: The primary aims of the WJG are to improve diagnostic, therapeutic and preventive modalities and the skills of clinicians and to guide clinical practice in gastroenterology and hepatology.
×
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