Dataset Information

The cost-effectiveness, health benefits, and financial costs of new antiviral treatments for hepatitis C virus.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:New hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatments deliver higher cure rates with fewer contraindications, increasing demand for treatment and healthcare costs. The cost-effectiveness of new treatments is unknown. METHODS:We conducted a microsimulation of guideline testing followed by alternative treatment regimens for HCV among the US population aged 20 and older to estimate cases identified, treated, sustained viral response, deaths, medical costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of different treatment options expressed as discounted lifetime costs and benefits from the healthcare perspective. RESULTS:Compared to treatment with pegylated interferon and ribavirin (PR), and a protease inhibitor for HCV genotype (G) 1 and PR alone for G2/3, treatment with PR and Sofosbuvir (PRS) for G1/4 and treatment with Sofosbuvir and ribavirin (SR) for G2/3 increased QALYs by 555 226, reduced deaths by 80 682, and increased costs by $26.2 billion at an ICER of $47 304 per QALY gained. As compared to PRS/SR, treating with an all oral regimen of Sofosbuvir and Simeprevir (SS) for G1/4 and SR for G2/3, increased QALYs by 1 110 451 and reduced deaths by an additional 164 540 at an incremental cost of $80.1 billion and an ICER of $72 169. In sensitivity analysis, where treatment with SS effectiveness was set to the list price of Viekira Pak and then Harvoni, treatment cost $24 921 and $25 405 per QALY gained as compared to PRS/SR. CONCLUSIONS:New treatments are cost-effectiveness per person treated, but pent-up demand for treatment may create challenges for financing.

SUBMITTER: Rein DB

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5759765 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The cost-effectiveness, health benefits, and financial costs of new antiviral treatments for hepatitis C virus.

Rein David B DB Wittenborn John S JS Smith Bryce D BD Liffmann Danielle K DK Ward John W JW

Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America 20150316 2

<h4>Background</h4>New hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatments deliver higher cure rates with fewer contraindications, increasing demand for treatment and healthcare costs. The cost-effectiveness of new treatments is unknown.<h4>Methods</h4>We conducted a microsimulation of guideline testing followed by alternative treatment regimens for HCV among the US population aged 20 and older to estimate cases identified, treated, sustained viral response, deaths, medical costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QA ...[more]

PMID: 25778747

Similar Datasets

Project description:UnlabelledRecently approved, interferon-free medication regimens for treating hepatitis C are highly effective, but extremely costly. We aimed to identify cost-effective strategies for managing treatment-naïve U.S. veterans with new hepatitis C medication regimens. We developed a Markov model with 1-year cycle length for a cohort of 60-year-old veterans with untreated genotype 1 hepatitis C seeking treatment in a typical year. We compared using sofosbuvir/ledipasvir or ombitasvir/ritonavir/paritaprevir/dasabuvir to treat: (1) any patient seeking treatment; (2) only patients with advanced fibrosis or cirrhosis; or (3) patients with advanced disease first and healthier patients 1 year later. The previous standard of care, sofosbuvir/simeprevir or sofosbuvir/pegylated interferon/ribavirin, was included for comparison. Patients could develop progressive fibrosis, cirrhosis, or hepatocellular carcinoma, undergo transplantation, or die. Complications were less likely after sustained virological response. We calculated the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) and varied model inputs in one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. We used the Veterans Health Administration perspective with a lifetime time horizon and 3% annual discounting. Treating any patient with ombitasvir-based therapy was the preferred strategy ($35,560; 14.0 QALYs). All other strategies were dominated (greater costs/QALY gained than more effective strategies). Varying treatment efficacy, price, and/or duration changed the preferred strategy. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, treating any patient with ombitasvir-based therapy was cost-effective in 70% of iterations at a $50,000/QALY threshold and 65% of iterations at a $100,000/QALY threshold.ConclusionManaging any treatment-naïve genotype 1 hepatitis C patient with ombitasvir-based therapy is the most economically efficient strategy, although price and efficacy can impact cost-effectiveness. It is economically unfavorable to restrict treatment to patients with advanced disease or use a staged treatment strategy. (Hepatology 2016;63:428-436).

Project description:Neonatal intensive care improves survival, but is associated with high costs and disability amongst survivors. Recent health reform in Mexico launched a new subsidized insurance program, necessitating informed choices on the different interventions that might be covered by the program, including neonatal intensive care. The purpose of this study was to estimate the clinical outcomes, costs, and cost-effectiveness of neonatal intensive care in Mexico.A cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted using a decision analytic model of health and economic outcomes following preterm birth. Model parameters governing health outcomes were estimated from Mexican vital registration and hospital discharge databases, supplemented with meta-analyses and systematic reviews from the published literature. Costs were estimated on the basis of data provided by the Ministry of Health in Mexico and World Health Organization price lists, supplemented with published studies from other countries as needed. The model estimated changes in clinical outcomes, life expectancy, disability-free life expectancy, lifetime costs, disability-adjusted life years (DALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for neonatal intensive care compared to no intensive care. Uncertainty around the results was characterized using one-way sensitivity analyses and a multivariate probabilistic sensitivity analysis. In the base-case analysis, neonatal intensive care for infants born at 24-26, 27-29, and 30-33 weeks gestational age prolonged life expectancy by 28, 43, and 34 years and averted 9, 15, and 12 DALYs, at incremental costs per infant of US$11,400, US$9,500, and US$3,000, respectively, compared to an alternative of no intensive care. The ICERs of neonatal intensive care at 24-26, 27-29, and 30-33 weeks were US$1,200, US$650, and US$240, per DALY averted, respectively. The findings were robust to variation in parameter values over wide ranges in sensitivity analyses.Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for neonatal intensive care imply very high value for money on the basis of conventional benchmarks for cost-effectiveness analysis. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary.

Project description:Background. Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infections are perinatally transmitted from chronically infected mothers. Supplemental antiviral therapy during late pregnancy with lamivudine (LAM), telbivudine (LdT), or tenofovir (TDF) can substantially reduce perinatal HBV transmission compared to postnatal immunoprophylaxis (IP) alone. However, the cost-effectiveness of these measures is not clear. Aim. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness from a societal perspective of supplemental antiviral agents for preventing perinatal HBV transmission in mothers with high viral load (>6 log10 copies/mL). Methods. A systematic review and network meta-analysis were performed for the risk of perinatal HBV transmission with antiviral therapies. A decision analysis was conducted to evaluate the clinical and economic outcomes in China of four competing strategies: postnatal IP alone (strategy IP), or in combination with perinatal LAM (strategy LAM + IP), LdT (strategy LdT + IP), or TDF (strategy TDF + IP). Antiviral treatments were administered from week 28 of gestation to 4 weeks after birth. Outcomes included treatment-related costs, number of infections, and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). One- and two-way sensitivity analyses were performed to identify influential clinical and cost-related variables. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses were used to estimate the probabilities of being cost-effective for each strategy. Results. LdT + IP and TDF + IP averted the most infections and HBV-related deaths, and gained the most QALYs. IP and TDF + IP were dominated as they resulted in less or equal QALYs with higher associated costs. LdT + IP had an incremental $2,891 per QALY gained (95% CI [$932-$20,372]) compared to LAM + IP (GDP per capita for China in 2013 was $6,800). One-way sensitivity analyses showed that the cost-effectiveness of LdT + IP was only sensitive to the relative risk of HBV transmission comparing LdT + IP with LAM + IP. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses demonstrated that LdT + IP was cost-effective in most cases across willingness-to-pay range of $6,800 ? $20,400 per QALY gained. Conclusions. For pregnant HBV-infected women with high levels of viremia, supplemental use of LdT during late pregnancy combined with postnatal IP for infants is cost-effective in China.

Project description:BackgroundChronic hepatitis C viral (HCV) infection affects millions of Americans. Healthcare systems face complex choices between multiple highly efficacious, costly treatments. This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of HCV treatments for chronic, genotype 1 HCV monoinfected, treatment-naïve individuals in the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and general U.S. healthcare systems.MethodsWe conducted a decision-analytic Markov model-based cost-effectiveness analysis, employing appropriate payer perspectives and time horizons, and discounting benefits and costs at 3% annually. Interventions included: Sofosbuvir/ledipasvir (SOF-LDV); ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir/dasabuvir (3D); sofosbuvir/simeprevir (SOF-SMV); sofosbuvir/pegylated interferon/ribavirin (SOF-RBV-PEG); boceprevir/pegylated interferon/ribavirin (BOC-RBV-PEG); and pegylated interferon/ribavirin (PEG-RBV). Outcomes were sustained virologic response (SVR), advanced liver disease, costs, quality adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness.ResultsSOF-LDV and 3D achieve higher SVR rates compared to older regimens and reduce advanced liver disease (>20% relative to no treatment), increasing QALYs by over 2 years per person. For the non-VA population, at current prices ($5,040 per week for SOF-LDV and $4,796 per week for 3D), SOF-LDV's lifetime cost ($293,370) is $18,000 lower than 3D's because of its shorter treatment duration in subgroups. SOF-LDV costs $17,100 per QALY gained relative to no treatment. 3D costs $208,000 per QALY gained relative to SOF-LDV. Both dominate other treatments and are even more cost-effective for the VA, though VA aggregate treatment costs still exceed $4 billion at SOF-LDV prices of $3,308 per week. Drug prices strongly determine relative cost-effectiveness for SOF-LDV and 3D; With sufficient price reductions (approximately 20-30% depending on the health system), 3D could be cost-effective relative to SOF-LDV. Limitations include the lack of long-term head-to-head regimen effectiveness trials.ConclusionsNew HCV treatments are cost-effective in multiple healthcare systems if trial-estimated efficacy is achieved in practice, though, at current prices, total expenditures could present substantial challenges.

Dataset Information

The cost-effectiveness, health benefits, and financial costs of new antiviral treatments for hepatitis C virus.

Publications

The cost-effectiveness, health benefits, and financial costs of new antiviral treatments for hepatitis C virus.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets