Cost-effectiveness of rapid vs in-house vs send-out ADAMTS13 testing for immune thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura
Allen C, Ito S, Butt A, Purcell A, Richmond R, Tormey C, Krumholz H, Cuker A, Goshua G. Cost-effectiveness of rapid vs in-house vs send-out ADAMTS13 testing for immune thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura. Blood Advances 2024, 8: 2279-2289. PMID: 38502197, PMCID: PMC11116991, DOI: 10.1182/bloodadvances.2024012608.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchImmune thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpuraPLASMIC scoreThrombotic thrombocytopenic purpuraThrombocytopenic purpuraADAMTS13 testingIncremental net monetary benefitPer-patient cost savingsTherapeutic plasma exchangeBase-case analysisMarkov cohort simulationProbabilistic sensitivity analysesAmount of QALYEmpirical therapyADAMTS13 assaysPlasma exchangeEmpirical treatmentCaplacizumabFRET-based assayPrimary outcomePatientsNet monetary benefitCohort simulationCost-effectiveness evaluationPurpuraTesting strategiesDecreasing alloimmunization‐specific mortality in sickle cell disease in the United States: Cost‐effectiveness of a shared transfusion resource
Ito S, Pandya A, Hauser R, Krishnamurti L, Stites E, Tormey C, Krumholz H, Hendrickson J, Goshua G. Decreasing alloimmunization‐specific mortality in sickle cell disease in the United States: Cost‐effectiveness of a shared transfusion resource. American Journal Of Hematology 2024, 99: 570-576. PMID: 38279581, DOI: 10.1002/ajh.27211.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchSickle cell diseaseDelayed hemolytic transfusion reactionQuality-adjusted life expectancyAlloimmunized patientsPatient populationRed blood cell alloimmunizationCell diseaseCost-effective interventionMedical expenditure of patientsHealth system perspectiveExpenditure of patientsIncremental cost-effectiveness ratioHemolytic transfusion reactionsUnited StatesMarkov cohort simulationCost-effectiveAverage patient populationCost-effectiveness ratioBirth cohortAnalytical time horizonAntibody historyCohort simulationTransfusionTransfusion reactionsLife expectancy