Table 1.
Probability (Pr.) of being cost-effective and expected loss at different willingness-to-pay thresholds (WTP) of the cost-effectiveness analysis of 6 cerebrospinal (CSF) biomarker test-and-treat strategies in patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI).
| WTP = $50,000/QALY | WTP = $100,000/QALY | WTP = $150,000/QALY | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Strategy | Pr. cost- effective |
Expected loss ($) |
Pr. cost- effective |
Expected loss ($) |
Pr. cost- effective |
Expected loss ($) |
| 1. Test-and-treat low risk* |
14% | 2,690 | 26% | 3,061 | 29% | 3,997 |
| 2. Test-and-treat low or intermediate risk |
9% | 2,767 | 24% | 3,354 | 28% | 4,506 |
| 3. No testing and no MCI treatment |
38% | 2,766 | 30% | 4,323 | 28% | 6,445 |
| 4. Test-and-treat high risk |
0% | 5,863 | 0% | 15,021 | 0% | 24,744 |
| 5. Test-and-treat high or intermediate risk |
0% | 5,939 | 0% | 15,313 | 0% | 25,253 |
| 6. No testing and treat all MCI patients |
39% | 4,505 | 20% | 11,963 | 15% | 19,986 |
*
Optimal strategy at the three willingness-to-pay thresholds of this table given by the lowest expected loss assuming a risk-neutral decision maker. QALY, quality-adjusted life year.