IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pgph00/0005872.html

Cost-effectiveness of BPaL-based and 9-month modified all-oral short treatment regimens for rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis in Belarus

Author

Listed:
  • Natalia Yatskevich

Abstract

Belarus remains a high-burden country for multidrug-/rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis (MDR/RR-TB), including pre-extensively drug-resistant TB (pre-XDR-TB). BPaL-based and modified 9-month short treatment regimens (mSTR), implemented under operational research conditions, have demonstrated improved clinical outcomes, but evidence on their cost-effectiveness in real-world settings remains limited. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of BPaL-based regimens containing bedaquiline, pretomanid, and linezolid with either moxifloxacin or clofazimine (BPaL(M/C)); mSTR composed of bedaquiline, levofloxacin, linezolid, clofazimine, cycloserine, or delamanid; and standard of care (SOC; ≥ 18-month regimens) for MDR/RR-TB and pre-XDR-TB in Belarus over a 20-year horizon using a cohort-based Markov model. Clinical effectiveness, safety, and cost inputs were derived from operational research and WHO data. Health outcomes were measured in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), costs were expressed in 2022 USD, and both were discounted at 3% annually. Incremental costs, QALYs, and incremental net monetary benefits (INMB) were estimated. Univariate, probabilistic, and conservative scenario analyses were conducted. A scale-up analysis assessed national budgetary implications. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that both shorter regimens were cost-effective compared with SOC at the Belarus-specific willingness-to-pay threshold, with mean [IQR] INMB of USD 27,586 [16,248; 37,645] for BPaL(M/C) and USD 23,488 [10,887; 35,092] for mSTR versus SOC. In the base case, BPaL(M/C) was the most cost-effective strategy, with lower mean costs (USD 8,155) and higher effectiveness (10.82 QALYs) than SOC (USD 20,757; 8.91 QALYs). mSTR was also cost-effective compared with SOC but less effective than BPaL(M/C). Results were robust across sensitivity and scenario analyses. Under conservative assumptions of identical clinical outcomes, shorter regimens remained cost-saving. The scale-up analysis showed that expanding use of shorter regimens in Belarus could generate annual TB programme budget savings exceeding USD 9.8 million. BPaL(M/C) and mSTR are cost-effective alternatives to SOC in Belarus, offering substantial economic benefits at both patient and programmatic levels.

Suggested Citation

  • Natalia Yatskevich, 2026. "Cost-effectiveness of BPaL-based and 9-month modified all-oral short treatment regimens for rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis in Belarus," PLOS Global Public Health, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(7), pages 1-14, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pgph00:0005872
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0005872
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgph.0005872
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pgph.0005872&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pgph.0005872?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Briggs, Andrew & Sculpher, Mark & Claxton, Karl, 2006. "Decision Modelling for Health Economic Evaluation," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198526629.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Chiranjeev Sanyal & Don Husereau, 2020. "Systematic Review of Economic Evaluations of Services Provided by Community Pharmacists," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 375-392, June.
    2. Arantzazu Arrospide & Oliver Ibarrondo & Iván Castilla & Igor Larrañaga & Javier Mar, 2022. "Development and Validation of a Discrete Event Simulation Model to Evaluate the Cardiovascular Impact of Population Policies for Obesity," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 42(2), pages 241-254, February.
    3. Mark Oppe & Daniela Ortín-Sulbarán & Carlos Vila Silván & Anabel Estévez-Carrillo & Juan M. Ramos-Goñi, 2021. "Cost-effectiveness of adding Sativex® spray to spasticity care in Belgium: using bootstrapping instead of Monte Carlo simulation for probabilistic sensitivity analyses," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 22(5), pages 711-721, July.
    4. Kaitlyn Hastings & Clara Marquina & Jedidiah Morton & Dina Abushanab & Danielle Berkovic & Stella Talic & Ella Zomer & Danny Liew & Zanfina Ademi, 2022. "Projected New-Onset Cardiovascular Disease by Socioeconomic Group in Australia," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 40(4), pages 449-460, April.
    5. Michael S. Willis & Andreas Nilsson & Cheryl A. Neslusan, 2025. "A Review of Heterogeneity in Comparative Economic Analysis, with Specific Considerations for the Decentralized US Setting and Patient-Centered Care," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 43(6), pages 601-616, June.
    6. Julie A. Campbell & Glen J. Henson & Valery Fuh Ngwa & Hasnat Ahmad & Bruce V. Taylor & Ingrid Mei & Andrew J. Palmer, 2025. "Estimation of Transition Probabilities from a Large Cohort (> 6000) of Australians Living with Multiple Sclerosis (MS) for Changing Disability Severity Classifications, MS Phenotype, and Disease-Modifying Therapy Classifications," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 43(2), pages 223-239, February.
    7. Andrea Marcellusi & Raffaella Viti & Loreta A. Kondili & Stefano Rosato & Stefano Vella & Francesco Saverio Mennini, 2019. "Economic Consequences of Investing in Anti-HCV Antiviral Treatment from the Italian NHS Perspective: A Real-World-Based Analysis of PITER Data," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 37(2), pages 255-266, February.
    8. Risha Gidwani & Louise B. Russell, 2020. "Correction to: Estimating Transition Probabilities from Published Evidence: A Tutorial for Decision Modelers," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 38(11), pages 1277-1277, November.
    9. Round, Jeff, 2012. "Is a QALY still a QALY at the end of life?," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 521-527.
    10. Xinyue Dong & Xiaoning He & Jing Wu, 2022. "Cost Effectiveness of the First‐in‐Class ARNI (Sacubitril/Valsartan) for the Treatment of Essential Hypertension in a Chinese Setting," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 40(12), pages 1187-1205, December.
    11. Joseph F. Levy & Marjorie A. Rosenberg, 2019. "A Latent Class Approach to Modeling Trajectories of Health Care Cost in Pediatric Cystic Fibrosis," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 39(5), pages 593-604, July.
    12. Jisoo A Kwon & Georgina M Chambers & Fabio Luciani & Lei Zhang & Shamin Kinathil & Dennis Kim & Hla-Hla Thein & Willings Botha & Sandra Thompson & Andrew Lloyd & Lorraine Yap & Richard T Gray & Tony B, 2021. "Hepatitis C treatment strategies in prisons: A cost-effectiveness analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(2), pages 1-13, February.
    13. Qi Cao & Erik Buskens & Hans L. Hillege & Tiny Jaarsma & Maarten Postma & Douwe Postmus, 2019. "Stratified treatment recommendation or one-size-fits-all? A health economic insight based on graphical exploration," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 20(3), pages 475-482, April.
    14. Jorge Luis García & James J. Heckman, 2021. "Early childhood education and life‐cycle health," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(S1), pages 119-141, November.
    15. Stephen Morris & Kurinchi S Gurusamy & Jessica Sheringham & Brian R Davidson, 2015. "Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Endoscopic Ultrasound versus Magnetic Resonance Cholangiopancreatography in Patients with Suspected Common Bile Duct Stones," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(3), pages 1-12, March.
    16. Tushar Srivastava & Nicholas R. Latimer & Paul Tappenden, 2021. "Estimation of Transition Probabilities for State-Transition Models: A Review of NICE Appraisals," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 39(8), pages 869-878, August.
    17. Eleanor Heather & Katherine Payne & Mark Harrison & Deborah Symmons, 2014. "Including Adverse Drug Events in Economic Evaluations of Anti-Tumour Necrosis Factor-α Drugs for Adult Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Systematic Review of Economic Decision Analytic Models," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 32(2), pages 109-134, February.
    18. Manuel Gomes & Robert Aldridge & Peter Wylie & James Bell & Owen Epstein, 2013. "Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of 3-D Computerized Tomography Colonography Versus Optical Colonoscopy for Imaging Symptomatic Gastroenterology Patients," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 11(2), pages 107-117, April.
    19. Isaac Corro Ramos & Maureen P. M. H. Rutten-van Mölken & Maiwenn J. Al, 2013. "The Role of Value-of-Information Analysis in a Health Care Research Priority Setting," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 33(4), pages 472-489, May.
    20. Chantal Guilhaume & Delphine Saragoussi & John Cochran & Clément François & Mondher Toumi, 2010. "Modeling stroke management: a qualitative review of cost-effectiveness analyses," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 11(4), pages 419-426, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pgph00:0005872. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: globalpubhealth (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.