IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0319022.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Early economic evaluation of chelation therapy in kidney transplant recipients with high-normal lead

Author

Listed:
  • Jiasi Hao
  • Behrooz Z Alizadeh
  • Maarten J Postma
  • Daan J Touw
  • Stephan J L Bakker
  • Lisa A de Jong

Abstract

Background: Kidney transplant recipients (KTR) with high-normal lead have a higher risk of graft failure (GF). Clinically, chelation therapy using meso-2,3-dimercaptosuccinic acid (DMSA) removes lead. Despite the proposal that chelation therapy can prevent GF through lead removal, evidence is lacking. To guide research efforts, we conducted an early economic evaluation, aiming to explore the economic feasibility of screening for and implementing chelation therapy with oral DMSA for high-normal plasma lead concentrations in KTR (i.e., the intervention) compared to standard of care. Methods: A Markov model simulated the life course of 10,000 KTR in the Netherlands from a societal perspective. Transition probabilities were estimated using the data from TransplantLines Food and Nutrition Biobank and Cohort study. Costs and utilities were sourced from publications and public data. Model robustness was investigated through deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Various administration strategies were tested. Five-year costs were calculated from a healthcare payer’s perspective. Value of information was assessed. Results: The intervention was cost-saving and improved health, leading to a dominant incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. The result was most sensitive to transition probabilities (led by GF, followed by death with functioning graft and after graft failure). The probability of the intervention being cost-effective was 60%. Chelation strategies did not affect the result. The intervention applied to the Dutch KTR population could save €27 million in the initial five years. Further research is desirable if the cost of obtaining perfect information on GF survival is approximately below €4,000/KTR (all uncertainties under €5,000/KTR). Conclusion: The cost-effectiveness of the intervention is robust in KTR, except when considering the uncertainties around (graft) survival probabilities. Applying chelation therapy in the new setting we studied holds significant potential. However, trials that systematically assess the efficacy, administration strategies, and impacts on survival are crucial in updating the current evaluation and informing policies.

Suggested Citation

  • Jiasi Hao & Behrooz Z Alizadeh & Maarten J Postma & Daan J Touw & Stephan J L Bakker & Lisa A de Jong, 2025. "Early economic evaluation of chelation therapy in kidney transplant recipients with high-normal lead," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 20(2), pages 1-23, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0319022
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0319022
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0319022
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0319022&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0319022?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. Sigrid M Mohnen & Manon J M van Oosten & Jeanine Los & Martijn J H Leegte & Kitty J Jager & Marc H Hemmelder & Susan J J Logtenberg & Vianda S Stel & Leona Hakkaart-van Roijen & G Ardine de Wit, 2019. "Healthcare costs of patients on different renal replacement modalities – Analysis of Dutch health insurance claims data," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(8), pages 1-14, August.
    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. Redeker, Steef & Massey, Emma K. & van Merweland, Ruben G. & Weimar, Willem & Ismail, Sohal Y. & Busschbach, Jan J.V., 2022. "Induced demand in kidney replacement therapy," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(10), pages 1062-1068.
    2. Victoria Nkunu & Somkanya Tungsanga & Hassane M Diongole & Abdulshahid Sarki & Silvia Arruebo & Fergus J Caskey & Sandrine Damster & Jo-Ann Donner & Vivekanand Jha & Adeera Levin & Masaomi Nangaku & S, 2024. "Landscape of kidney replacement therapy provision in low- and lower-middle income countries: A multinational study from the ISN-GKHA," PLOS Global Public Health, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(12), pages 1-18, December.
    3. Steef Redeker & Sohal Ismail & Hester V. Eeren & Emma K. Massey & Willem Weimar & Mark Oppe & Jan Busschbach, 2022. "A dynamic Markov model to assess the cost-effectiveness of the Kidney Team at Home intervention in The Netherlands," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 23(4), pages 597-606, June.

    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:pone00:0319022. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.