{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.029518384256861728, 'fraction_numerical': 0.006732263076126359, 'mean_word_length': 5.44, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Cost-effectiveness of PET in the diagnosis of Alzheimer disease.

PURPOSE
To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of positron emission tomography (PET) in the diagnosis of Alzheimer disease (AD) in community-dwelling patients with mild or moderate dementia who present to specialized AD centers.


MATERIALS AND METHODS
A decision-analytic model was used to compare costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) associated with strategies involving single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), dynamic susceptibility-weighted contrast material-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) imaging, and PET as functional imaging adjuncts to the standard clinical work-up. Sensitivity analyses were performed to examine changes in test characteristics, health-related quality-of-life survey instruments, therapeutic effectiveness, and treatment rules.


RESULTS
The use of PET to confirm the results of the standard clinical work-up cost more but yielded fewer benefits than a strategy in which dynamic susceptibility-weighted contrast-enhanced MR imaging was substituted for the typically performed structural computed tomography. This relationship remained stable in scenarios in which standard diagnostic work-up accuracy, drug treatment effectiveness, and version of the Health Utilities Index were altered. Dynamic susceptibility-weighted contrast-enhanced MR imaging cost US dollars 598800 per QALY gained (range, US dollars 74400 to US dollars 1.9 million per QALY), compared with the cost of the standard diagnostic work-up. Treating all patients with dementia was the dominant imaging strategy, except when side effects in patients with non-AD-related dementia were modeled. In all scenarios, SPECT yielded fewer benefits than other strategies at a higher cost.


CONCLUSION
PET may have high diagnostic accuracy, but adding it to the standard diagnostic regimen at AD clinics would yield limited, if any, benefits at very high costs.