Dataset Information

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Antiviral Therapy for Untreated Minimally Active Chronic Hepatitis B to Prevent Liver Disease Progression.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Antiviral therapy (AVT) for chronic hepatitis B (CHB) can prevent liver disease progression. Because of its stringent reimbursement criteria, significant numbers of patients with untreated minimally active (UMA)-CHB exist, although they are still subject to disease progression. We thus performed a cost-effectiveness analysis to assess the rationale for AVT for UMA-CHB.

Methods

We compared cost and effectiveness (quality-adjusted life years, QALYs) in virtual UMA-CHB cohorts of 10,000 50-year-olds receiving AVT (scenario 1) vs no treatment (scenario 2) for 10 years. A Markov model, including 7 health states of CHB-related disease progression, was used. Values for transition probabilities and costs were mostly obtained from recent South Korean data.

Results

The simulation of AVT vs no treatment predicted $2,201 incremental costs and 0.175 incremental QALYs per patient for 10 years, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $12,607/QALY, suggesting cost-effectiveness of AVT. In sum, if 10,000 patients received AVT, 720 incident hepatocellular carcinoma and 465 CHB-related more deaths could be averted in 10 years relative to no treatment. When the simulated analysis period was extended to 20 years, AVT was also highly cost-effective with an ICER of $2,036/QALY. Although hepatocellular carcinoma-related mortality was a major factor influencing ICER, its fluctuation can be accepted within willingness to pay of $33,000 in South Korea. According to probabilistic sensitivity analysis with the threshold of willingness to pay, the probability of AVT cost-effectiveness was 83.3%.

Discussion

Long-term AVT for patients with UMA-CHB may contribute positively toward individual clinical benefit and national health care budget.

SUBMITTER: Lee H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7889372 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

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: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:ObjectiveScreening for hepatitis C in Russia is a complex process that involves several visits and stepwise testing, limiting adherence and substantially reducing the yield in the identification of active infections. We aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of different screening algorithms from a health system perspective.MethodsA decision analytic model was applied to a hypothetical adult population eligible to participate in a general screening program for hepatitis C in Russia. The standard pathway (I: Screen for anti-HCV antibodies followed by a nucleic acid test for HCV RNA on antibody positives) was compared to three alternatives (II: Screen for antibodies, a reflexed test for HCV antigen on antibody positives, and RNA on antigen negatives; III: Screen for antibodies, a reflexed test for HCV antigen on antibody positives; IV: Screen for antigen). Each strategy considered a cascade of events (referral, adherence, testing, diagnosis) that must occur for screening to be effective. The primary measure of effectiveness was the number of diagnosed active infections. Calculations followed a health system perspective with costs derived from 2017 reimbursement rates and a willingness-to-pay of 2,000RUB ($82) per diagnosed active infection. Model was tested with deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.ResultsNon-adherence to screening stages reduced the capture rate of active infections in Strategy I from 79.0% to 40.6%. Strategies II, III, and IV were less affected and identified 69%, 67%, and 104% more infections. Average costs per diagnosed infection were decreased by 41% from 89,599RUB ($3,681) for I to 53,072RUB ($2,180), 53,004RUB ($2,177), and 59,633RUB ($2,450) for II, III, and IV, respectively. With a probability of 97%, Strategy III was most cost-effective with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio vs. I of -1,373RUB (CI: -5,011RUB to -2,033RUB; $-56; CI: -$206 to -$84). Below a willingness-to-pay of 91,000RUB ($3,738), Strategy IV was not cost-effective. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of results.ConclusionsTesting strategies for hepatitis C with HCV antigen on HCV antibody positive cases offer a streamlining opportunity for population screening programs. Those shall increase the chances for detecting active infections and are cost-effective over current practice in Russia.