Back

Optimizing TB policies using the global TB portfolio model: an economic analysis

Satyanarayana, S.; Mandal, S.; McQuaid, F.; Nair, S.; Sahu, S.; Menzies, N. A.; Sweeney, S.; Sanders, R.; Garcia Baena, I.; White, R. G.; Adam, T.; Smit, M.; Pretorius, C.

2025-06-05 health economics
10.1101/2025.06.03.25328801 medRxiv
Show abstract

RationaleTuberculosis (TB) remains a global health crisis, disproportionately affecting low- and middle-income countries. Strategic resource allocation is essential to achieving the WHO End TB targets. Existing TB costing tools have limitations in conducting global analyses, prompting the development of a novel model tailored to address these gaps. MethodsWe developed a new, open-source TB costing model that simulates detailed TB care cascades comprising steps of screening, diagnosis, treatment, and prevention for those eligible - according to WHO guidelines for 20 distinct population groups. These include 10 groups each from patient-initiated and provider-initiated pathways, capturing variations in pulmonary status, age, HIV/ART status, and drug sensitivity. The model captures the cost of a large-scale vaccine. We demonstrate the models functionality through a case study that informed the Global Funds Investment Case for its 8th replenishment (2027-2029). ResultsIn the case study, the model was first used to estimate the cost of implementing the TB Global Plan 2023 - 2030. This scenario incorporated intervention targets, normative standards of care, and the availability of new TB tools. An optimization routine applied to 29 high-burden countries estimated maximal TB impact under constrained funding scenarios. The results were also used to assess the potential impact and contribution of innovation within the Global Funds 8th replenishment. DiscussionThis new TB costing model offers improved representation of TB care complexity across diverse populations, with enhanced transparency, flexibility, and policy relevance. Its application in global TB strategy analysis highlights its value in informing investment cases and prioritizing interventions for maximal impact under resource constraints.

Matching journals

The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
BMJ Global Health
98 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
41.2%
2
PLOS Global Public Health
293 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
10.5%
50% of probability mass above
3
Clinical Infectious Diseases
231 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
5.0%
4
Frontiers in Public Health
140 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.5%
5
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 35%
4.1%
6
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 11%
3.2%
7
Environmental Research Letters
15 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.8%
8
PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases
378 papers in training set
Top 3%
2.0%
9
PLOS Medicine
98 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.0%
10
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 30%
1.9%
11
BMC Health Services Research
42 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
12
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 61%
1.5%
13
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 54%
1.4%
14
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.3%
15
Medical Decision Making
10 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.3%
16
The Lancet Global Health
24 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.3%
17
BMC Public Health
147 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.0%
18
eClinicalMedicine
55 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
19
The Lancet Infectious Diseases
71 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.8%
20
Malaria Journal
48 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
21
The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene
60 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
22
Vaccine
189 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
23
Journal of the International AIDS Society
20 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.7%
24
Epidemiology and Infection
84 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.7%
25
International Journal of Epidemiology
74 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.7%
26
Pediatrics
10 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.7%