Back

Cost-effectiveness of testing for Mycoplasma genitalium among men who have sex with men in Australia

Ong, J.; Lim, A.; Bradshaw, C.; Taylor-Robinson, D.; Unemo, M.; Horner, P.; Vickerman, P.; Zhang, L.

2022-08-25 infectious diseases
10.1101/2022.08.24.22279191 medRxiv
Show abstract

ObjectivesMycoplasma genitalium (MG) disproportionately affects men who have sex with men (MSM). We determined the cost-effectiveness of testing strategies for MG using a healthcare provider perspective. MethodsWe used inputs from a dynamic transmission model of MG among MSM living in Australia in a decision tree model to evaluate the impact of four testing scenarios on MG incidence: 1) no one tested; 2) symptomatic MSM; 3) symptomatic and high-risk asymptomatic MSM; 4) all MSM. We calculated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) using a willingness to pay threshold of $30,000 AUD per QALY gained. We explored the impact of adding an AMR tax (i.e. additional cost per antibiotic consumed) to identify the threshold whereby any testing for MG is no longer cost-effective. ResultsTesting only symptomatic MSM is the most cost-effective (ICER $3,677 per QALY gained) approach. Offering testing to all men is dominated (i.e. not recommended because of higher costs and lower QALYs gained compared to other strategies). When the AMR tax was above $150, any testing for MG was no longer cost-effective. ConclusionTesting only symptomatic MSM is the most cost-effective option even when the potential costs associated with AMR are accounted for (up to $150 additional cost per antibiotic consumed). For pathogens like MG where there are anticipated future costs related to AMR, we recommend models to test the impact of incorporating these costs as they can change the conclusions of cost-effectiveness studies. KEY MESSAGESO_LIWhat is already known on this topic - Mycoplasma genitalium (MG) is a sexually transmitted pathogen with rising antimicrobial resistance. C_LIO_LIWhat this study adds - This economic evaluation found that testing only symptomatic men who have sex with men (MSM) is the most cost-effective option. When the costs per antibiotic consumed is greater than $150, any testing for MG is no longer cost-effective. C_LIO_LIHow this study might affect research, practice or policy - Among testing strategies for MSM, testing for MG should be restricted to symptomatic men only. C_LI

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Sexually Transmitted Infections
21 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
19.9%
2
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 23%
7.4%
3
PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases
378 papers in training set
Top 2%
5.0%
4
PLOS Medicine
98 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
5.0%
5
Tropical Medicine and Infectious Disease
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.4%
6
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 4%
4.4%
7
Clinical Infectious Diseases
231 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.3%
50% of probability mass above
8
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.1%
9
BMC Infectious Diseases
118 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.1%
10
PLOS Global Public Health
293 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.1%
11
Open Forum Infectious Diseases
134 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
3.0%
12
Transactions of The Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene
16 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.8%
13
Emerging Infectious Diseases
103 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
2.1%
14
Tropical Medicine & International Health
15 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.7%
15
BMC Public Health
147 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
16
Wellcome Open Research
57 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.4%
17
The Journal of Infectious Diseases
182 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.3%
18
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 21%
1.0%
19
Epidemiology
26 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.9%
20
BMJ Global Health
98 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.8%
21
The Lancet Global Health
24 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
22
Clinical Microbiology and Infection
60 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
23
AIDS
31 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.8%
24
The Lancet Infectious Diseases
71 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.7%
25
International Journal of Epidemiology
74 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.7%
26
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 65%
0.7%
27
The Lancet Microbe
43 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.5%
28
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 80%
0.5%
29
Journal of Infection
71 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.5%
30
International Journal of Infectious Diseases
126 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.5%