Search

The article presents a study, which estimates the cost and benefit of testing donated blood for West Nile virus in the U.S. Rather than studying actual patients, the researchers used a computer to simulate what would happen to patients 60 years of age or older who received blood transfusions that were or were not tested for West Nile virus. The researchers found that the cost per quality-adjusted life-year saved decreased if West Nile virus infection became more common or if minipool testing was performed only 6 months of the year but remained more than $250,000.

Background: In 2016, universal individual donation nucleic acid testing (ID-NAT) of donated blood for Zika virus began in U.S. states and territories., Objective: To assess the cost-effectiveness of universal ID-NAT in the first year of screening compared with alternatives for the 50 states and separately for Puerto Rico., Design: Microsimulation that captured Zika-related harms to transfusion recipients, sexual partners, and their infants., Data Sources: National testing results compiled by AABB and costs, utilities, and outcome probabilities estimated from the literature., Target Population: Transfusion recipients., Time Horizon: Lifetime., Perspective: Societal., Intervention: Universal ID-NAT, universal mini-pool NAT (MP-NAT), and ID-NAT exclusively for components transfused to women of childbearing age. Seasonally targeted strategies in Puerto Rico and geographically targeted strategies in the 50 states were also considered., Outcome Measures: Costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and outcomes., Results of Base-Case Analysis: In Puerto Rico, MP-NAT exclusively during high mosquito season was cost-effective at $81 123 per QALY (95% CI, -$49 138 to $978 242 per QALY). No screening policy was cost-effective in the 50 states. Universal ID-NAT cost $341 million per QALY (CI, $125 million to $2.90 billion per QALY) compared with no screening in the 50 states., Results of Sensitivity Analysis: In Puerto Rico, MP-NAT only during the season of high mosquito activity was most cost-effective in 64% of probabilistic sensitivity analysis iterations. In the 50 states, no intervention was cost-effective in 99.99% of iterations. Cost-effectiveness was highly dependent on the rate of assumed infectious donations., Limitation: Data were limited on the component-specific transmissibility of Zika and long-term sequelae of infection., Conclusion: Screening was cost-effective only in the high mosquito season in Puerto Rico, and no evaluated screening policy was cost-effective in the 50 states. During periods with lower rates of Zika-infectious donations, the cost-effectiveness of screening will be even less favorable., Primary Funding Source: None.