Background: The disease burden of active tuberculosis (TB) is considerable, but systematic reviews of economic evaluations of active TB treatments are scarce.Methods: PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library databases were used to search for articles on cost-effectiveness analysis or cost-utility analysis that economically evaluated active TB treatments, which were then systematically reviewed by two independent reviewers. We extracted vital components of the included studies, such as country, population, intervention/comparator, primary outcome, values of outcomes, thresholds, model type, time horizon, and health states included in the model.Results: Seventeen studies were included in this systematic review. Thirteen dealt with interventions of medications, and the remaining four compared care strategies. The Markov model was the most commonly used tool to compare medications, whereas studies on care plans mainly used decision trees. The most commonly used primary outcome was disability-adjusted life years, followed by quality-adjusted life years. For treatment-naïve TB, the 4-month regimen was more cost-effective than the 6-month regimen mainly in low- and middle-income countries. For multidrug-resistant TB, a bedaquiline-based regimen was cost-effective. For multidrug-resistant TB, decentralized care that employed the use of home or mobile devices was more cost-effective than hospital-based centralized care in low- and middle-income countries.Conclusion: New treatment strategies to improve therapeutic outcomes by enhancing treatment adherence, such as regimens with shorter durations (2 or 4 months) and decentralized care, or new anti-TB agents (e.g., bedaquiline) have been suggested as cost-effective interventions for active TB. This review provides information on the economic evaluation of active TB from good-quality studies, thus aiding the future economic evaluation of active TB.

No abstract

No abstract

Brain metastases (BM) are common in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, the pure economic burden of BM is unknown. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of BM on healthcare costs and resource utilization in patients with NSCLC by comparing patients with and without BM. This was a retrospective cohort analysis of South Korean health insurance review and assessment claims data. Patients with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC were identified (March 1, 2013 to February 28, 2018). We compared their two-year and per-patient-per-month (PPPM) healthcare costs and resource utilization with 1:3 propensity score-matched patients without the condition. A generalized linear model was used to estimate the impact of BM and other covariates on healthcare costs. After propensity score matching with the 33 402 newly diagnosed cases of stage IIIB or IV NSCLC, 3435 and 10 305 patients were classified as having or not having BM, respectively. Mean healthcare costs were significantly greater in patients with BM for both the two years (US$ 44 692 vs. US$ 32 230, p < .0001) and PPPM (US$ 3510 vs. US$ 2573, p < .0001). The length of hospital stay was longer in patients with BM (79.15 vs. 69.41 days for two years, p < .0001; 7.69 vs. 6.86 days PPPM, p < .0001), and patients with BM had more outpatient visits (50.61 vs. 46.43 times for two years, p < .0001; 3.64 vs. 3.40 times PPPM costs, p < .0001). The costs of drugs, radiology/radiotherapy, and admission comprised the majority of PPPM costs and were higher in patients with BM. The generalized linear model analysis suggested that patients with BM had significantly increased healthcare costs (by 1.29-fold, 95% confidence interval 1.26–1.32). BM is a significant economic burden for patients with NSCLC. Therefore, it is important to prevent BM in patients with NSCLC to reduce their economic burden.