This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (1) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Shamir, R. Articles by Leshno, M. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Shamir, R. Articles by Leshno, M. Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Screening for Celiac Disease in the Adult Population

Division of Pediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition, Meyer Children’s Hospital, Haifa, and the Bruce Rappaport School of Medicine, Technion-Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel

Olle Hernell, MD

Department of Clinical Sciences, Pediatrics, Umeå University, S-901 85 Umeå, Sweden

Moshe Leshno, MD, PhD

Faculty of Management and Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel, leshnom{at}post.tau.ac.il

Background. Celiac disease (CD) is common and, when undiagnosed, may result in increased mortality, suggesting that mass screening could be justified. The authors examined the cost-effectiveness (CE) of such an approach, assuming a higher mortality rate in undiagnosed CD and that adhering to a gluten-free diet (GFD) reduces the mortality rate.Methods. The authors developed a state transition Markov model, evaluating the CE of screening an entire population at the age of 18. Screening strategies included no screening v. screening by IgA antiendomysial antibodies (EMA), IgA human antitissue transglutaminase antibodies (TTG), and TTG verified by EMA. All strategies were examined with and without evaluation for IgA deficiency, and they all included an intestinal biopsy. Effects of variables were examined using sensitivity analysis. Effectiveness was assessed by life expectancy for each strategy and the incremental average CE ratio for each.Results. Base-case analysis revealed US$49,491 and US$572,616 per life year gained for screening compared to no screening using EMA or TTG, respectively. The CE of screening with EMA was most influenced by the prevalence of CD and the standardized mortality ratio (SMR) for untreated CD patients. Screening was cost-effective in populations with a relatively high prevalence of CD or when the SMR for untreated CD patients was higher than 1.5. The model was insensitive to changes in the cost of serological markers and diagnostic endoscopy.Conclusion. Assuming an SMR of 1.5 or higher for untreated CD patients, mass screening for CD is cost-effective in populations with a relatively high prevalence of CD over a wide range of ages at screening. From a CE perspective, EMA is the preferred serological marker for mass screening. Screening for CD would be justified only if the uncertainties regarding the validity of our assumptions are substantiated.

Key Words: celiac disease • serological markers • screening • cost-effectiveness analysis • health economics • prevention

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				I. R Korponay-Szabo, K. Szabados, J. Pusztai, K. Uhrin, E. Ludmany, E. Nemes, K. Kaukinen, A. Kapitany, L. Koskinen, S. Sipka, et al. Population screening for coeliac disease in primary care by district nurses using a rapid antibody test: diagnostic accuracy and feasibility study BMJ, December 15, 2007; 335(7632): 1244 - 1247. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]