| Affiliation: | 1. Renal-Electrolyte Division, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA;2. Renal-Electrolyte Division, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA Thomas E. Starzl Transplantation Institute, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA;3. Department of Health Policy and Management, Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA;4. Department of Medicine, Section of Decision Sciences, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA |
| Abstract: | Subclinical rejection (SCR) screening in kidney transplantation (KT) using protocol biopsies and noninvasive biomarkers has not been evaluated from an economic perspective. We assessed cost-effectiveness from the health sector perspective of SCR screening in the first year after KT using a Markov model that compared no screening with screening using protocol biopsy or biomarker at 3 months, 12 months, 3 and 12 months, or 3, 6, and 12 months. We used 12% subclinical cellular rejection and 3% subclinical antibody-mediated rejection (SC-ABMR) for the base-case cohort. Results favored 1-time screening at peak SCR incidence rather than repeated screening. Screening 2 or 3 times was favored only with age <35 years and with high SC-ABMR incidence. Compared to biomarkers, protocol biopsy yielded more quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) at lower cost. A 12-month biopsy cost $13 318/QALY for the base-case cohort. Screening for cellular rejection in the absence of SC-ABMR was less cost effective with 12-month biopsy costing $46 370/QALY. Screening was less cost effective in patients >60 years. Using biomarker twice or thrice was cost effective only if biomarker cost was <$700. In conclusion, in KT, screening for SCR more than once during the first year is not economically reasonable. Screening with protocol biopsy was favored over biomarkers. |
