Change search
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cost-effectiveness analysis of screening for celiac disease in the adult population.
Umeå University, Faculty of Medicine, Clinical Sciences, Paediatrics.
2006 (English)In: Med Decis Making, ISSN 0272-989X, Vol. 26, no 3, 282-93 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

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.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2006. Vol. 26, no 3, 282-93 p.
Keyword [en]
Adolescent, Adult, Autoantibodies/analysis, Celiac Disease/*diagnosis, Child, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Humans, Markov Chains, Mass Screening/*economics
URN: urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-7011PubMedID: 16751327OAI: diva2:146682
Available from: 2008-01-12 Created: 2008-01-12 Last updated: 2011-01-11Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links


Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Hernell, Olle
By organisation

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

Altmetric score

Total: 13 hits
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link