Search

Background: A pan-tuberculosis regimen that could be initiated without knowledge of drug susceptibility has been proposed as an objective of tuberculosis regimen development. We modelled the health and economic benefits of such a regimen and analysed which of its features contribute most to impact and savings., Methods: We constructed a mathematical model of tuberculosis treatment parameterised with data from the published literature specific to three countries with a high tuberculosis burden (India, the Philippines, and South Africa). Our model simulated cohorts of newly diagnosed tuberculosis patients, including drug susceptibility testing if performed, regimen assignment, discontinuation, adherence, costs, and resulting outcomes of durable cure (microbiological cure without relapse), need for retreatment, or death. We compared a pan-tuberculosis regimen meeting the WHO 2023 target regimen profile against the standard of care of separate rifampicin-susceptible and rifampicin-resistant regimens. We estimated incremental cures; averted deaths, secondary cases, and costs; and prices below which a pan-tuberculosis regimen would be cost saving. We also assessed scenarios intended to describe which mechanisms of benefit from a pan-tuberculosis regimen (including improved characteristics compared with the current rifampicin-susceptible and rifampicin-resistant regimens and improved regimen assignment and retention in care for patients with rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis) would be most impactful. Results are presented as a range of means across countries with the most extreme 95% uncertainty intervals (UIs) from the three UI ranges., Findings: Compared with the standard of care, a pan-tuberculosis regimen could increase the proportion of patients durably cured after an initial treatment attempt from 69-71% (95% UI 57-80) to 75-76% (68-83), preventing 30-32% of the deaths (20-43) and 17-20% of the transmission (9-29) that occur after initial tuberculosis diagnosis. Considering savings to the health system and patients during and after the initial treatment attempt, the regimen could reduce non-drug costs by 32-42% (22-49) and would be cost saving at prices below US$170-340 (130-510). A rifamycin-containing regimen that otherwise met pan-tuberculosis targets yielded only slightly less impact, indicating that most of the benefits from a pan-tuberculosis regimen resulted from its improvements upon the rifampicin-susceptible standard of care. Eliminating non-adherence and treatment discontinuation, for example via a long-acting injectable regimen, increased health impact and savings., Interpretation: In countries with a high tuberculosis burden, a shorter, highly efficacious, safe, and tolerable regimen to treat all tuberculosis could yield substantial health improvements and savings., Funding: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests TSR reports funding for work outside of this study from WHO. CFM was funded for work outside of this study by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (TB MAC OPP1135288) and Unitaid (20193-3-ASCENT). All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: With numerous trials investigating novel drug combinations to treat tuberculosis, we aimed to evaluate the extent to which future improvements in tuberculosis treatment regimens could offset potential increases in drug costs., Methods: In this modelling analysis, we used an ingredients-based approach to estimate prices at which novel regimens for rifampin-susceptible and rifampin-resistant tuberculosis treatment would be cost-neutral or cost-effective compared with standards of care in India, the Philippines, and South Africa. We modelled regimens meeting targets set in the WHO's 2023 Target Regimen Profiles (TRPs). Our decision-analytical model tracked cohorts of adults initiating rifampin-susceptible or rifampin-resistant tuberculosis treatment, simulating their health outcomes and costs accumulated during and following treatment under standard-of-care and novel regimen scenarios. Price thresholds included short-term cost-neutrality (considering only savings accrued during treatment), medium-term cost-neutrality (additionally considering savings from averted retreatments and secondary cases), and cost-effectiveness (incorporating willingness-to-pay for improved health outcomes)., Findings: Total medium-term costs per person treated using standard-of-care regimens were estimated at US$450 (95% uncertainty interval 310-630) in India, $560 (350-860) in the Philippines, and $730 (530-1090) in South Africa for rifampin-susceptible tuberculosis (current drug costs $46) and $2100 (1590-2810) in India, $2610 (2090-3280) in the Philippines, and $3790 (3090-4630) in South Africa for rifampin-resistant tuberculosis (current drug costs $432). A rifampin-susceptible tuberculosis regimen meeting the optimal targets defined in the TRPs could be cost-neutral in the short term at drug costs of $140 (90-210) per full course in India, $230 (130-380) in the Philippines, and $280 (180-460) in South Africa. For rifampin-resistant tuberculosis, short-term cost-neutral thresholds were higher with $930 (720-1230) in India, $1180 (980-1430) in the Philippines, and $1480 (1230-1780) in South Africa. Medium-term cost-neutral prices were approximately $50-100 higher than short-term cost-neutral prices for rifampin-susceptible tuberculosis and $250-550 higher for rifampin-resistant tuberculosis. Health system cost-neutral prices that excluded patient-borne costs were 45-70% lower (rifampin-susceptible regimens) and 15-50% lower (rifampin-resistant regimens) than the cost-neutral prices that included patient costs. Cost-effective prices were substantially higher. Shorter duration was the most important driver of medium-term savings with novel regimens, followed by ease of adherence., Interpretation: Improved tuberculosis regimens, particularly shorter regimens or those that facilitate better adherence, could reduce overall costs, potentially offsetting higher prices., Funding: WHO., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests TSR, CL, DWD, and EAK report funding from WHO. TSR and EAK report funding from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license.)