Cost-effectiveness of new antiviral regimens for treatment-naïve U.S. veterans with hepatitis C

Cost-effectiveness of direct-acting antivirals for chronic hepatitis C virus in the United States from a payer perspective

BACKGROUND: Direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) have been a breakthrough therapeutic innovation in the treatment of chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) with significantly improved efficacy, safety, and tolerability. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of treating patients with HCV with DAAs compared with pre-DAAs or no treatment over a lifetime horizon from the perspective of the US Veterans Affairs (VA) health care system. METHODS: A hybrid decision-tree and Markov model simulated the health outcomes of a cohort of 142,147 patients with HCV with an average age of 63 years. Demographic data, treatment rates and distribution, treatment efficacy by subpopulation, and health state costs were sourced from VA data. Treatment costs and utility values were sourced from publicly available databases and prior publications for older regimens. RESULTS: Over a lifetime horizon, the use of DAAs results in a significant reduction in advanced liver disease events compared with pre-DAA and no treatment. Total cost savings of $7 and $9 billion over a lifetime horizon (50 years) were predicted for patients who received DAA treatments compared with patients treated with pre-DAA treatments and those who were untreated, respectively. Cost savings were achieved quickly after treatment, with DAAs being inexpensive when compared with both the pre-DAA and untreated scenarios within 5 years. The DAA intervention dominated (ie, more effective and less costly) for both the pre-DAA and untreated strategies on both a per-patient and cohort basis. CONCLUSIONS: The use of DAA-based treatments in patients with HCV in the VA system significantly reduced long-term HCV-related morbidity and mortality, while providing cost savings within only 5 years of treatment. DISCLOSURES: This work was supported by Gilead Inc. Health Economic Outcomes Research group, grant number GS-US-18-HCV003. Drs Yehoshua and Kaushik are employees of Gilead in the Health Economic Outcome Research group. These individuals reviewed the manuscript but did not contribute to input or output of the Markov model. Maple Health Group (Dr El-Moustaid, Ms Raad, and Dr Smith) are consultants hired by Gilead for Markov modeling expertise. The model used in this study was previously published and peer reviewed. Data inputted into the model related to patient demographic, treatment outcomes, clinical outcomes, and costs were completely independent in derivation by Drs Kaplan, Serper, and Durkin and were not influenced by the funding sponsor. Dr Kaplan reports grants from Gilead Inc. during the conduct of the study and grants from Gilead Inc., other from Glycotest Inc., other from AstraZeneca, other from Exact Sciences, and other from Bayer outside the submitted work.

Cost-effectiveness of a "treat-all" strategy using Direct-Acting Antivirals (DAAs) for Japanese patients with chronic hepatitis C genotype 1 at different fibrosis stages

Aim

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of therapeutic strategies initiated at different stages of liver fibrosis using three direct-acting antivirals (DAAs), sofosbuvir-ledipasvir (SL), glecaprevir-pibrentasvir (GP), and elbasvir plus grazoprevir (E/G), for Japanese patients with chronic hepatitis C (CHC) genotype 1.

Methods

We created an analytical decision model reflecting the progression of liver fibrosis stages to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of alternative therapeutic strategies applied at different fibrosis stages. We compared six treatment strategies: treating all patients regardless of fibrosis stage (TA), treating individual patients with one of four treatments starting at four respective stages of liver fibrosis progression (F1S: withholding treatment at stage F0 and starting treatment from stage F1 or higher, and three successive options, F2S, F3S, and F4S), and administering no antiviral treatment (NoRx). We adopted a lifetime horizon and Japanese health insurance payers’ perspective.

Results

The base case analysis showed that the incremental quality-adjusted life years (QALY) gain of TA by SL, GP, and E/G compared with the strategies of starting treatments for patients with the advanced fibrosis stage, F2S, varied from 0.32 to 0.33, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were US$24,320, US$18,160 and US$17,410 per QALY, respectively. On the cost-effectiveness acceptability curve, TA was most likely to be cost-effective, with the three DAAs at the willingness to pay thresholds of US$50,000.

Conclusions

Our results suggested that administration of DAA treatment for all Japanese patients with genotype 1 CHC regardless of their liver fibrosis stage would be cost-effective under ordinary conditions.

Treatment selection for life-critical shared decision making under ranges of health-state utility scenarios

BACKGROUND

Selecting the best treatment for life-critical conditions via a shared decision making approach is a uniquely important challenge. Besides data from the healthcare physicians, other data that need to be considered are the personal values and perceptions of the patient. Usually, these data come in the form of health-state utility values. They are subjective and often times are elicited from the patient under emotional and stressful conditions. This paper examines an approach for selecting the best treatment under a life-critical shared decision making (SDM) framework.

METHODS

Health-state utility values are used in practice to quantify what is known as quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and quality-adjusted life expectancy (QALE). The QALEs from different treatments are used to select the best treatment. This paper describes methods for determining QALEs under a range of scenarios defined by the way some key assumptions on the health-state utility values are satisfied. Approaches for comparing different treatments are described along with some counter-intuitive results. These approaches are based on some optimization formulations. The proposed approaches are demonstrated in terms of a real example taken from the literature.

RESULTS

Having results that are robust under a spectrum of different scenarios can provide more confidence that the most suitable treatment has been selected in a given case. On the other hand, having non-robust results can be useful information too as they may provide evidence that a more thorough assessment of the benefits and harms of the treatments may be needed to select a treatment with higher confidence. Finally, this study demonstrates that under certain mathematical conditions among the data it is possible to decide which treatment is better among two treatments without having to use health-state utility values.

CONCLUSION

The significance of this study is that it provides valuable and actionable insights for the important question of how health-state utilities can be used in treatment selection.

Healthcare Rationing Cutoffs and Sorites Indeterminacy

Rationing is an unavoidable mechanism for reining in healthcare costs. It entails establishing cutoff points that distinguish between what is and is not offered or available to patients. When the resource to be distributed is defined by vague and indeterminate terms such as "beneficial," "effective," or even "futile," the ability to draw meaningful boundary lines that are both ethically and medically sound is problematic. In this article, I draw a parallel between the challenges posed by this problem and the ancient Greek philosophical conundrum known as the "sorites paradox." I argue, like the paradox, that the dilemma is unsolvable by conventional means of logical analysis. However, I propose another approach that may offer a practical solution that could be applicable to real-life situations in which cutoffs must be decided (such as rationing).

Differences in healthcare expenditure estimates according to statistical approach: A nationwide claims database study on patients with hepatocellular carcinoma

AIM

Disease-associated healthcare expenditures are generally calculated using matched comparisons or regression-based analyses, but little is known about their differences in estimates. This aim of this study was to compare the differences between disease-associated healthcare expenditures estimated using these 2 methods.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, a matched comparison was first conducted by matching cases with controls using sex, age, and comorbidities to estimate disease-associated expenditures. The cases were then used in a fixed-effects analysis that compared expenditures before and after disease occurrence. The subjects were adults (≥20 years) with primary hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who underwent treatment (including surgical resection, locoregional therapy, transcatheter arterial chemoembolization, and transarterial embolization) at a Japanese hospital between April 2010 and March 2018. We calculated the total healthcare expenditures per patient per month according to treatment and disease phase (initial, continuing, and terminal).

RESULTS

There were 14,923 cases in the initial/continuing phases and 15,968 cases in the terminal phase. In the initial/continuing phases, 3,552 patients underwent surgical resection only, with HCC-associated expenditures of $5,555 according to the matched comparison and $5,889 according to the fixed-effects analysis (proportional difference: 94.3%). The initial phase expenditures were approximately 9% higher in the fixed-effects analysis, whereas the continuing phase expenditures were approximately 7% higher in the matched comparison. The expenditures in the terminal phase were 93.1% higher in the fixed-effects analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

The 2 methods produced similar estimates of HCC-associated healthcare expenditures in the initial/continuing phases. However, terminal phase expenditures were substantially different between the methods.

Cost-effectiveness of second-generation direct-acting antiviral agents in chronic HCV infection: a systematic literature review

BACKGROUND

Our objectives were to review the economic modelling methods and cost-effectiveness of second-generation direct-acting antiviral agents for the treatment of chronic HCV infection.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed in February 2017 using Scopus and OVID to review relevant publications between 2011 to present. Two independent reviewers screened potential papers.

RESULTS

The database search resulted in a total of 1,536 articles; after deduplication, title/abstract and full text screening, 67 studies were included for qualitative analysis. The vast majority of studies were conducted in high-income countries (n=59) and used Markov-based modelling techniques (n=60). Most of the analyses utilized long-term time horizons; 58 studies calculated lifetime costs and outcomes. The examined treatments were heterogenic among the studies; seven analyses did not directly evaluate treatments (just with screening or genotype testing). The examined treatments (n=60) were either dominant (23%), or cost-effective at base case (57%) or in given subgroups (18%). Only one (2%) study reported that the assessed treatment was not cost-effective with the given setting and price.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite their high initial therapeutic costs, second-generation direct-acting antiviral agents were found to be cost-effective to treat chronic HCV infection. Studies were predominantly conducted in higher income countries, although we have limited information on cost-effectiveness in low- and middle-income countries, where assessment of cost-effectiveness is even more essential due to more limited health-care resources and potentially higher public health burden due to unsafe medical interventions.

Healthcare Expenditures for the Treatment of Patients Infected with Hepatitis C Virus in Japan

AIM

The recently developed direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) for hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections are costly. Cost-effectiveness analyses of DAAs require accurate healthcare expenditure estimates for the various HCV disease states, but few studies have produced such estimates using national-level data. This study utilized nationally representative data to estimate the healthcare expenditure for each HCV disease state.

METHODS

We identified all patients infected with HCV between April 2010 and March 2018 from a nationwide administrative claims database in Japan. Monthly patient-level healthcare expenditures were calculated for the following disease states: chronic hepatitis C (CHC), compensated cirrhosis (CC), decompensated cirrhosis (DC), and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The expenditures for the CHC and CC states were also compared before DAA treatment and after sustained virologic response (SVR) was achieved. A longitudinal two-part model was employed to estimate the healthcare expenditures for each state.

RESULTS

During the study period, 1,564,043 patients with 146,488,137 patient-months of data met the inclusion criteria. The year of valuation was 2017. The mean monthly healthcare expenditures per patient (95% confidence intervals) for the pre-DAA CHC, CC, DC, and HCC states were US$267 (US$267-268), US$428 (US$427-429), US$666 (US$663-669), and US$969 (US$966-972), respectively. The mean monthly healthcare expenditures per patient for the post-SVR (≥ 2 years) CHC and CC states were US$176 (US$176-177) and US$238 (US$236-240), respectively. Healthcare expenditure increased with increasing age in all disease states (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

These healthcare expenditure estimates from a nationally representative sample have potential applications in cost-effectiveness analyses of DAAs.

The testing of people with any risk factor for hepatitis C in community pharmacies is cost-effective

New antiviral drugs with high efficacy mean the hepatitis C virus (HCV) can now be eliminated. To achieve this, it is necessary to identify undiagnosed cases of HCV. However, the costs of testing should be considered when judging the overall cost-effectiveness of treatment. This study describes the cost-effectiveness of a community pharmacy testing service in a population of people at risk of HCV living on the Isle of Wight (United Kingdom). Dry blood spot testing was conducted in anyone with a known risk factor for HCV in 20 community pharmacies. The outcomes and costs were entered into a Markov model. Cost and health utilities from the model were used to calculate an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). In 24 months, 186 tests were conducted, 13 were positive for HCV RNA and six of these (46%) received treatment during the follow-up period. All achieved a sustained virological response at 3 months. The overall cost of the testing and treatment intervention was £242 183, and the ICER for the service was £3689 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. If screening had been restricted to just people with a history of injecting drug use (PWID) the ICER would have been £4865 per QALY gained. The service was effective at identifying people with HCV infection, and despite the additional cost of targeted testing, its cost-effectiveness was below the commonly accepted thresholds. In this setting, restricting targeted testing to PWID would not improve the cost-effectiveness.

How Does Treating Chronic Hepatitis C Affect Individuals in Need of Organ Transplants in the United Kingdom?

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the impact of cures for chronic hepatitis C (CHC) infection on organ donation in the United Kingdom. Curing CHC infection reduces the need for liver transplants and enables cured individuals to donate organs of all types.

METHODS

We adapted a double-queuing model of organ allocation to estimate the effects of CHC infection cures on liver, lung, heart, and kidney transplants in the United Kingdom. We assumed that cured individuals would donate organs at similar rates as the general population and no longer require liver transplants because of CHC infection. We estimated how curing CHC infection influences waitlist lengths for each organ and the annual net present value to society on the basis of quality-adjusted life-years gained through additional transplants under opt-in and opt-out organ donation policies.

RESULTS

Curing CHC generates the most value for patients on the liver waitlist, because it increases the number of transplantable livers and reduces the need for transplants. Under the current opt-in policy, liver waitlist length falls by 24%, generating £34.3 million of annual net present value. Growth in the number of uninfected lungs, hearts, and kidneys generates an additional £19.2 million annually, with £18.7 million from kidneys. Implementing the opt-out policy, liver waitlist length would decrease by 75%, implying that treating CHC eliminates one-third of the excess liver waitlist due to an opt-in policy.

CONCLUSIONS

Treating CHC has large positive spillovers to uninfected individuals by reducing the need for liver transplants and allowing cured individuals to donate organs. These spillovers have not been included in traditional value assessments of CHC treatment.

Liver resection versus transarterial chemoembolization for the treatment of intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The role of transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) as the standard treatment for intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is being challenged by increasing studies supporting liver resection (LR); but evidence of survival benefits of LR is lacking. We aimed to compare the overall survival (OS) of LR with that of TACE for the treatment of intermediate-stage HCC in cirrhotic patients.

METHODS

A Markov model, comparing LR with TACE over 15 years, was developed based on the data from 31 literatures. Additionally, external validation of the model was performed using a data set (n = 1735; LR: 701; TACE: 1034) from a tertiary center with propensity score matching method. We conducted one-way and two-way sensitivity analyses, in addition to a Monte Carlo analysis with 10 000 patients allocated into each arm.

RESULTS

The mean expected survival times and survival rates at 5 years were 77.8 months and 47.1% in LR group, and 48.6 months and 25.7% in TACE group, respectively. Sensitivity analyses found that initial LR was the most favorable treatment. The 95% CI for the difference in OS was 2.42-2.46 years between the two groups (P < 0.001). In the validation set, the 5-year survival rates after LR were significantly better than those after TACE before (40.2% vs. 25.9%, P < 0.001) and after matching (43.2% vs 30.9%, P < 0.001), which was comparable to the model results.

CONCLUSIONS

For cirrhotic patients with resectable intermediate-stage HCC, LR may provide survival benefit over TACE, but large-scale studies are required to further stratify patients at this stage for different optimal treatments.

A Guide to the Economics of Hepatitis C Virus Cure in 2017

This commentary reviews the core principals of cost-effectiveness and applies them to the rapidly evolving context of hepatitis C virus treatment in the United States. The article provides a foundation of evidence that hepatitis C virus treatment provides good economic value, even though it is expensive, and even when treating people who inject drugs who are at high risk for hepatitis C virus reinfection. The price of medications has decreased, but the high price continues to limit access to care. This wedge between cost effectiveness and affordability stands front and center as one of the leading obstacles to elimination.

Functional MRI and delay discounting in patients infected with hepatitis C

Hepatitis C virus-infected (HCV+) adults evidence increased rates of psychiatric and cognitive difficulties. This is the first study to use functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to examine brain activation in untreated HCV+ adults. To determine whether, relative to non-infected controls (CTLs), HCV+ adults exhibit differences in brain activation during a delay discounting task (DDT), a measure of one's tendency to choose smaller immediate rewards over larger delayed rewards-one aspect of impulsivity. Twenty adults with HCV and 26 CTLs completed an fMRI protocol during the DDT. Mixed effects regression analyses of hard versus easy trials of the DDT showed that, compared with CTLs, the HCV+ group exhibited less activation in the left lateral occipital gyrus, precuneus, and superior frontal gyrus. There were also significant interactive effects for hard-easy contrasts in the bilateral medial frontal gyrus, left insula, left precuneus, left inferior parietal lobule, and right temporal occipital gyrus; the CTL group evidenced a positive relationship between impulsivity and activation, while the HCV+ group exhibited a negative relationship. Within the HCV+ group, those with high viral load chose immediate rewards more often than those with low viral load, regardless of choice difficulty; those with low viral load chose immediate rewards more often on hard choices relative to easy choices. Results show that HCV+ patients exhibit greater impulsive behavior when presented with difficult choices, and impulsivity is negatively related to activation in regions important for cognitive control. Thus, interventions that decrease impulsive choice may be warranted with some HCV+ patients.

Feasibility of reaching world health organization targets for hepatitis C and the cost-effectiveness of alternative strategies

New drugs for treating hepatitis C have considerably increased the probability of being cured. Treatment uptake, however, is still low. The objectives of this study were to analyse the impact of initiatives that may increase the proportion of infected people on treatment and interventions aimed at reducing the incidence of new infection among people who inject drugs. A compartmental model for Norway was used to simulate hepatitis C and related complications. We analysed 2 different screening initiatives aimed to increase the proportion of infected people on treatment. Interventions aiming at reducing the hepatitis C incidence analysed were opioid substitution therapy (OST), a clean needle and syringe programme and a combination of both. The most cost-effective strategy for increasing hepatitis C treatment uptake was screening by general practitioners while simultaneously allowing for all infected people to be treated. We estimated that this intervention reduces the incidence of hepatitis C by 2030 by 63% compared with the current incidence. The 2 harm reduction strategies both reduced the incidence of hepatitis C by about 70%. Combining an increase in the current clean needles and syringe programme with OST was clearly the most cost-effective option. This strategy would reduce the incidence of hepatitis C by 80% compared with the current incidence by 2030. Thus, interventions to reduce the burden and spread of hepatitis C are cost-effective. Reaching the WHO target of a 90% reduction in hepatitis C incidence by 2030 may be difficult without combining different initiatives.

Population Health and Cost-Effectiveness Implications of a "Treat All" Recommendation for HCV: A Review of the Model-Based Evidence

The World Health Organization HCV Guideline Development Group is considering a "treat all" recommendation for persons infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV). We reviewed the model-based evidence of cost-effectiveness and population health impacts comparing expanded treatment policies to more limited treatment access policies, focusing primarily on evaluations of all-oral directly acting antivirals published after 2012. Searching PubMed, we identified 2,917 unique titles. Sequentially reviewing titles and abstracts identified 226 potentially relevant articles for full-text review. Sixty-nine articles met all inclusion criteria-42 cost-effectiveness analyses and 30 models of population-health impacts, with 3 articles presenting both types of analysis. Cost-effectiveness studies for many countries concluded that expanding treatment to people with mild liver fibrosis, who inject drugs (PWID), or who are incarcerated is generally cost-effective compared to more restrictive treatment access policies at country-specific prices. For certain patient subpopulations in some countries-for example, elderly individuals without fibrosis-treatment is only cost-effective at lower prices. A frequent limitation is the omission of benefits and consequences of HCV transmission (i.e., treatment as prevention; risks of reinfection), which may underestimate or overestimate the cost-effectiveness of a "treat all" policy. Epidemiologic modeling studies project that through a combination of prevention, aggressive screening and diagnosis, and prompt treatment for all fibrosis stages, it may be possible to virtually eliminate HCV in many countries. Studies show that if resources are not available to diagnose and treat all HCV-infected individuals, treatment prioritization may be needed, with alternative prioritization strategies resulting in tradeoffs between reducing mortality or reducing incidence. Notably, because most new HCV infections are among PWID in many settings, HCV elimination requires unrestricted treatment access combined with injection transmission disruption strategies. The model-based evidence suggests that a properly constructed strategy that substantially expands HCV treatment could achieve cost-effective improvements in population health in many countries.

Chronic Hepatitis C Screening, Evaluation, and Treatment Update in the Age of Direct-Acting Antivirals

Globally, hepatitis C virus (HCV), the cause of one of the most common infectious diseases, infects approximately 4 million to 5 million Americans with approximately half of infected individuals undiagnosed. Some workplaces screen employees for HCV exposure and other bloodborne pathogens (BBP) after needlestick injuries, but it is not well known whether employers screen employees for HCV without an occupational exposure. New guidelines from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommend that all individuals born between 1945 and 1965 should be screened for HCV regardless of risk; this provides an opportunity at the worksite for HCV outreach to employees, dependents, and retirees. To understand this recommendation, the management of HCV in the age of direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) should be reviewed. Now that new DAA treatment can cure HCV, occupational health nurses should identify potential HCV-positive individuals at the worksite via HCV education, screening, testing, and, if positive, linking to specialists for treatment.

Healthcare Costs Related to Treatment of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Among Veterans With Cirrhosis in the United States

BACKGROUND & AIMS

It is important to quantify medical costs associated with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the incidence of which is rapidly increasing in the United States, for development of rational healthcare policies related to liver cancer surveillance and treatment of chronic liver disease. We aimed to comprehensively quantify healthcare costs for HCC among patients with cirrhosis in an integrated health system and develop a model for predicting costs that is based on clinically relevant variables.

METHODS

Three years subsequent to liver cancer diagnosis, costs accrued by patients included in the Veteran's Outcome and Cost Associated with Liver disease cohort were compiled by using the Department of Veterans Affairs Corporate Data Warehouse. The cohort includes all patients with HCC diagnosed in 2008-2010 within the VA with 100% chart confirmation as well as chart abstraction of tumor and clinical characteristics. Cancer cases were matched 1:4 with non-cancer cirrhosis controls on the basis of severity of liver disease, age, and comorbidities to estimate background cirrhosis-related costs. Univariable and multivariable generalized linear models were developed and used to predict cancer-related overall cost.

RESULTS

Our analysis included 3188 cases of HCC and 12,722 controls. The mean 3-year total cost of care in HCC patients was $154,688 (standard error, $150,953-$158,422) compared with $69,010 (standard error, $67,344-$70,675) in matched cirrhotic controls, yielding an incremental cost of $85,679; 64.9% of this value reflected increased inpatient costs. In univariable analyses, receipt of transplantation, Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stage, liver disease etiology, hospital academic affiliation, use of multidisciplinary tumor board, and identification through surveillance were associated with cancer-related costs. Multivariable generalized linear models incorporating transplantation status, BCLC stage, and multidisciplinary tumor board presentation accurately predicted liver cancer-related costs (Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness of fit; P value ≅ 1.0).

CONCLUSIONS

In a model developed to comprehensively quantify healthcare costs for HCC among patients with cirrhosis in an integrated health system, we associated receipt of liver transplantation, BCLC stage, and multidisciplinary tumor board with higher costs. Models that predict total costs on the basis of receipt of liver transplantation were constructed and can be used to model cost-effectiveness of therapies focused on HCC prevention.

Hepatitis C virus genotypes in Saudi Arabia: a future prediction and laboratory profile

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotypes and subtypes are considered an important tool for epidemiological and clinical studies and valuable markers for disease progression and response to antiviral therapy. The aim of this study was to identify the prevalence of HCV genotypes and their relation to socio-demographic factors particularly age and sex, various biochemical profiles and viral load.

METHODS

The records (630) of Saudi patients positive for HCV (2007-2011) reported in the system of the Molecular Pathology Laboratory at a tertiary reference hospital in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia were analyzed. Socio-demographic characteristics, liver biochemical profile, viral load and co-infection with HBV and HIV were retrieved from the hospital database. The associations of continuous and categorical variables with genotypes were analyzed.

RESULT

The overall mean age of the surveyed patients was 59 years ±0.5 years (21% were <50 years (p = 0.02). The rate of infection is lower in males than in females (47.6% vs. 52.4%). HCV genotype 4 was the most prevalent (60.7%), followed by genotype 1 (24.8%). However, genotype 1 and 3 were found more in males (29.7% vs. 20.3% and 6% vs. 2.1%, respectively, p = 0.001), while genotype 2 and 4 were more among females (4.8% vs. 2% and 68.5% vs. 52.3%, respectively). In addition, genotype 1 was found dominant in younger males (33.8%). Biochemical parameters across gender showed significant variation in particular for the ALT (p = 0.007). The mean viral load was significantly higher in genotype 1 than genotype 4 (4,757,532 vs. 1,435,012, p = <001). There is a very low overall percentage of co-infection of HBV or HIV in this study (around 2% for each).

CONCLUSION

Although HCV genotype 4 shows an overall high prevalence in this study, a clear decline in the rate of this genotype was also demonstrated in particular among the younger age group who displayed increasing trends toward the global trend of genotype 1, rather than genotype 4. This finding would be of clinical interest in relation to future planning of the therapy for HCV infected patient.

Cost-Utility of Elbasvir/Grazoprevir in Patients with Chronic Hepatitis C Genotype 1 Infection

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the cost-utility of treatment with elbasvir/grazoprevir (EBR/GZR) regimens compared with ledipasvir/sofosbuvir (LDV/SOF), ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir + dasabuvir ± ribavirin (3D ± RBV), and sofosbuvir/velpatasvir (SOF/VEL) in patients with chronic hepatitis C genotype (GT) 1 infection.

METHODS

A Markov cohort state-transition model was constructed to evaluate the cost-utility of EBR/GZR ± RBV over a lifetime time horizon from the payer perspective. The target population was patients infected with chronic hepatitis C GT1 subtypes a or b (GT1a or GT1b), stratified by treatment history (treatment-naive [TN] or treatment-experienced), presence of cirrhosis, baseline hepatitis C virus RNA (< or ≥6 million IU/mL), and presence of NS5A resistance-associated variants. The primary outcome was incremental cost-utility ratio for EBR/GZR ± RBV versus available oral direct-acting antiviral agents. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to test the robustness of the model.

RESULTS

EBR/GZR ± RBV was economically dominant versus LDV/SOF in all patient populations. EBR/GZR ± RBV was also less costly than SOF/VEL and 3D ± RBV, but produced fewer quality-adjusted life-years in select populations. In the remaining populations, EBR/GZR ± RBV was economically dominant. One-way sensitivity analyses showed varying sustained virologic response rates across EBR/GZR ± RBV regimens, commonly impacted model conclusions when lower bound values were inserted, and at the upper bound resulted in dominance over SOF/VEL in GT1a cirrhotic and GT1b TN noncirrhotic patients. Results of the probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that EBR/GZR ± RBV was cost-effective in more than 99% of iterations in GT1a and GT1b noncirrhotic patients and more than 69% of iterations in GT1b cirrhotic patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with other oral direct-acting antiviral agents, EBR/GZR ± RBV was the economically dominant regimen for treating GT1a noncirrhotic and GT1b TN cirrhotic patients, and was cost saving in all other populations.

Eight- or 12-Week Treatment of Hepatitis C with Ledipasvir/Sofosbuvir: Real-World Experience in a Large Integrated Health System

BACKGROUND

Second-generation direct-acting antiviral agents are integral to treatment of hepatitis C (HCV) infection. Eight-week courses of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir (LDV/SOF) have been supported in some studies, but data are limited on efficacy in real-world use. Controversy exists regarding applicability of clinical trials to real-world effectiveness. We report virologic responses of patients with HCV genotype 1 infection receiving LDV/SOF for 8 or 12 weeks in a large integrated healthcare system.

METHODS

All patients receiving LDV/SOF, without ribavirin, were identified from pharmacy records, and outcomes are reported. Only treatment-naïve patients without evidence of cirrhosis and hepatitis C viral load less than 6 million IU/ml were candidates for 8-week therapy. Treatment was at clinician discretion, but delivered by a multidisciplinary team and reviewed for appropriateness and adherence to these criteria by one of the authors, all experienced in hepatitis C treatment. Sustained viral response at 12 weeks (SVR 12) was contrasted between those receiving 8 and those receiving 12 weeks of treatment.

RESULTS

Completed prescriptions for LDV/SOF, without ribavirin, as of 30 September 2015 were identified in 1021 patients. Five patients discontinued therapy due to medical reasons and 35 had incomplete follow-up viral load data, thus there were 981 evaluable patients: 377 treated for 8 weeks and 604 treated for 12 weeks. SVR 12 was virtually identical at 93.6 and 93.5%, respectively. Baseline characteristics differed between the two groups, as only treatment-naïve, non-cirrhotic, non-HIV-infected patients were eligible for an 8-week course of therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Eight-week courses of LDV/SOF are comparable to 12-week courses in real-world use among selected patients supported by a multidisciplinary team.

Eight- or 12-Week Treatment of Hepatitis C with Ledipasvir/Sofosbuvir: Real-World Experience in a Large Integrated Health System

BACKGROUND

Second-generation direct-acting antiviral agents are integral to treatment of hepatitis C (HCV) infection. Eight-week courses of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir (LDV/SOF) have been supported in some studies, but data are limited on efficacy in real-world use. Controversy exists regarding applicability of clinical trials to real-world effectiveness. We report virologic responses of patients with HCV genotype 1 infection receiving LDV/SOF for 8 or 12 weeks in a large integrated healthcare system.

METHODS

All patients receiving LDV/SOF, without ribavirin, were identified from pharmacy records, and outcomes are reported. Only treatment-naïve patients without evidence of cirrhosis and hepatitis C viral load less than 6 million IU/ml were candidates for 8-week therapy. Treatment was at clinician discretion, but delivered by a multidisciplinary team and reviewed for appropriateness and adherence to these criteria by one of the authors, all experienced in hepatitis C treatment. Sustained viral response at 12 weeks (SVR 12) was contrasted between those receiving 8 and those receiving 12 weeks of treatment.

RESULTS

Completed prescriptions for LDV/SOF, without ribavirin, as of 30 September 2015 were identified in 1021 patients. Five patients discontinued therapy due to medical reasons and 35 had incomplete follow-up viral load data, thus there were 981 evaluable patients: 377 treated for 8 weeks and 604 treated for 12 weeks. SVR 12 was virtually identical at 93.6 and 93.5%, respectively. Baseline characteristics differed between the two groups, as only treatment-naïve, non-cirrhotic, non-HIV-infected patients were eligible for an 8-week course of therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Eight-week courses of LDV/SOF are comparable to 12-week courses in real-world use among selected patients supported by a multidisciplinary team.

AS, Liz AL, Lisset GF, Sacha LDV, Elena FB. Clinical Evaluation of Terap C Vaccine in Combined Treatment with Interferon and Ribavirin in Patients with Hepatitis C

BACKGROUND

An estimated 170 million individuals worldwide are infected with the hepatitis C virus (HCV). Although treatment options using a combination of pegylated interferon and ribavirin (P-IFN/RBV) are available, sustained clearance of the virus is only achieved in approximately 40% of individuals infected with HCV genotype 1. Recent advances in the treatment of HCV using directly acting antiviral agents have been achieved; however, treatment can be very expensive and is associated with substantial side effects. The development of a new treatment modality is needed. One possible modality could be specific immunotherapy. Terap C is a therapeutic vaccine candidate composed of pIDKE2, a plasmid expressing HCV structural antigens, with a recombinant HCV core protein, Co.120.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the safety and efficacy of concomitant therapy with the candidate vaccine, Terap C, IFN α-2b and ribavirin in untreated individuals with HCV genotype 1 infection.

METHODS

This was a Phase II randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind clinical trial evaluating the safety and efficacy of Terap C concomitant with IFN α-2b/RBV in 92 treatment-naïve patients with HCV genotype 1 infection. The study was conducted at the Gastroenterology Institute in Havana, Cuba. Patients were randomly assigned to 1 of 5 groups. The control group (Group 1) received IFN α-2b/RBV and placebo for 48 weeks. Groups 2 and 3 were administered Terap C 6 and 9 times, respectively, in addition to standard IFN α-2b/RBV treatment. In groups 4 and 5, Terap C was introduced 12 weeks after the initiation of IFN α-2b/RBV and administered 6 and 9 times, respectively, concomitant with IFN α-2b/RBV.

RESULTS

All patients showed some adverse events. Out of 3615 adverse events, only 18.8% were considered to be probably associated with administration of Terap C. Most events (47.4%) were considered to be improbably associated with of administration Terap C. Only 33.8% were considered possibly temporarily associated with Terap C, and can be explained by the use of conventional IFN α-2b + RBV or by HCV itself. The most common adverse events (≥65%) observed were pain at the injection site, headache, asthenia, psychiatric disturbances, fever, and gastrointestinal symptoms. Regarding sustained virological response, a 20% superiority was observed in the patients who received concomitant Terap C treatments from the beginning of the study compared with those who started after Week 12.

CONCLUSIONS

Vaccination with Terap C in patients with chronic HCV infection was safe and well tolerated. Clinical trial protocol code: IG/VHI/HC/0701; Public Register Code: RPCEC00000074.

Real-World Drug Costs of Treating Hepatitis C Genotypes 1-4 with Direct-Acting Antivirals: Initiating Treatment at Fibrosis 0-2 and 3-4

BACKGROUND

Direct-acting antivirals (DAA) for the treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV) have drastically improved outcomes but are also very costly. For this reason, priority for treatment is often given to patients with a higher fibrosis score at baseline by payers and providers rather than treating all eligible patients. Simulation studies have suggested that waiting to treat patients until fibrosis 3-4 may be more costly and result in worse outcomes; however, real-world implications are unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To determine drug costs and outcomes for treating hepatitis C in patients with fibrosis scores of 0-2 and 3-4 at baseline in a real-world ambulatory care setting.

METHODS

A total of 322 patients at 36 clinical sites in Massachusetts with HCV genotype 1-4 and a prescription for at least 1 DAA medication between May 2011 and October 2015 were included. Retrospective and prospective chart reviews were completed by the primary investigator. Data were collected through April 2016. The primary outcome for the study was to determine the mean drug cost per sustained virologic response (SVR) achieved for patients with fibrosis scores of 0-2 and 3-4. Drug costs were calculated using average wholesale price and only included the cost of HCV medications, not for adjunctive medications, blood work, hospitalizations, anticipated complications, or any other projected medical costs.

RESULTS

The mean ± SD (median) drug cost per patient was $130,391 ± 46,787 (113,400) and completed treatment duration was 15.0 ± 8.9 (12) weeks. The mean drug cost per SVR was $155,662 for all patients with a mean drug cost per SVR of $122,452 and $178,401 for patients with fibrosis scores of 0-2 and 3-4, respectively. SVR rates were 83.5% (269/322) for all patients and 92.2% (107/116) and 78.6% (162/206) for patients with fibrosis scores of 0-2 and 3-4, respectively. Ledipasvir/ sofosbuvir; sofosbuvir + ribavirin; ledipasvir/sofosbuvir + ribavirin; sofos-buvir + interferon + ribavirin; boceprevir + interferon + ribavirin; sofosbu-vir + simeprevir; and telaprevir + interferon + ribavirin had a mean drug cost per SVR of $123,559; $153,347; $157,969; $184,800; $248,640; $251,550; and $373,333; respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Real-world knowledge about outcomes and drug costs may influence future decisions. Further studies are needed to evaluate emerging treatment options and to reflect changes in treatment guidelines.

DISCLOSURES

No outside funding supported this study. The authors report no conflicts of interest. Data in this study were presented as a poster at the ASHP Midyear Clinical Meeting; New Orleans, Louisiana; December 9, 2015; at the Massachusetts Society of Health-System Pharmacists Annual Meeting; Newton, Massachusetts; April 12, 2016; and at Eastern States Conference for Pharmacy Residents and Preceptors; Hershey, Pennsylvania; May 2, 2016. Study concept and design was primarily contributed by Bach, along with Zaiken. Bach took the lead in data collection, data interpretation, and preparation of the manuscript, along with Zaiken.

Hepatitis C virus pharmacogenomics in Latin American populations: implications in the era of direct-acting antivirals

In recent years, great progress has been made in the field of new therapeutic options for hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. The new direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs) represent a great hope for millions of chronically infected individuals because their use may lead to excellent cure rates with fewer side effects. In Latin America, the high prevalence of HCV genotype 1 infection and the significant association of Native American ancestry with risk predictive single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in IFNL4 and ITPA genes highlight the need to implement new treatment regimens in these populations. However, the universal accessibility to DAAs is still not a reality in the region as their high cost is one of the major, although not the only, limiting factors for their broad implementation. Therefore, under these circumstances, could the assessment of host genetic markers be a useful tool to prioritize DAA treatment until global access to these new drugs can be achieved? This review will summarize the scientific evidences and the potential implications of HCV pharmacogenomics in this rapidly evolving era of anti-HCV drug development.

Effectiveness and safety of ombitasvir, paritaprevir, ritonavir ± dasabuvir ± ribavirin: An early access programme for Spanish patients with genotype 1/4 chronic hepatitis C virus infection

Over the last 5 years, therapies for hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection have improved significantly, achieving sustained virologic response (SVR) rates of up to 100% in clinical trials in patients with HCV genotype 1. We investigated the effectiveness and safety of ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir±dasabuvir in an early access programme. This was a retrospective, multicentre, national study that included 291 treatment-naïve and treatment-experienced patients with genotype 1 or 4 HCV infection. Most patients (65.3%) were male, and the mean age was 57.5 years. The mean baseline viral load was 6.1 log, 69.8% had HCV 1b genotype, 72.9% had cirrhosis and 34.7% were treatment-naïve. SVR at 12 weeks posttreatment was 96.2%. Four patients had virological failure (1.4%), one leading to discontinuation. There were no statistical differences in virological response according to genotype or liver fibrosis. Thirty patients experienced serious adverse events (SAEs) (10.3%), leading to discontinuation in six cases. Hepatic decompensation was observed in five patients. Four patients died during treatment or follow-up, three of them directly related to liver failure. Multivariate analyses showed a decreased probability of achieving SVR associated with baseline albumin, bilirubin and Child-Pugh score B, and a greater probability of developing SAEs related to age and albumin. This combined therapy was highly effective in clinical practice with an acceptable safety profile and low rates of treatment discontinuation.

Assessing the Effect of Potential Reductions in Non-Hepatic Mortality on the Estimated Cost-Effectiveness of Hepatitis C Treatment in Early Stages of Liver Disease

BACKGROUND

Most cost-effectiveness analyses of hepatitis C (HCV) therapy focus on the benefits of reducing liver-related morbidity and mortality.

OBJECTIVES

Our objective was to assess how cost-effectiveness estimates of HCV therapy can vary depending on assumptions regarding the potential impact of HCV therapy on non-hepatic mortality.

METHODS

We adapted a state-transition model to include potential effects of HCV therapy on non-hepatic mortality. We assumed successful treatment could reduce non-hepatic mortality by as little as 0 % to as much as 100 %. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were computed comparing immediate treatment versus delayed treatment and comparing immediate treatment versus non-treatment.

RESULTS

Comparing immediate treatment versus delayed treatment, when we included a 44 % reduction in non-hepatic mortality following successful HCV treatment, the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained by HCV treatment fell by 76 % (from US$314,100 to US$76,900) for patients with no fibrosis and by 43 % (from US$62,500 to US$35,800) for patients with moderate fibrosis. Comparing immediate treatment versus non-treatment, assuming a 44 % reduction in non-hepatic mortality following successful HCV treatment, the incremental cost per QALY gained by HCV treatment fell by 64 % (from US$186,700 to US$67,300) for patients with no fibrosis and by 27 % (from US$35,000 to US$25,500) for patients with moderate fibrosis.

CONCLUSION

Including reductions in non-hepatic mortality from HCV treatment can have substantial effects on the estimated cost-effectiveness of treatment.

Optimal timing for hepatitis C therapy in US patients eligible for liver transplantation: a cost-effectiveness analysis

BACKGROUND

Recurrence of hepatitis C virus (HCV) following liver transplantation (LT) is universal for those with ongoing viraemia and is associated with higher rates of allograft failure and death. However, the optimal timing of HCV treatment for patients awaiting transplant remains unclear.

AIM

To evaluate the comparative cost-effectiveness of treating HCV pre-LT vs. post-LT (pre-emptive or after HCV recurrence).

METHODS

A Markov state-transition model was created to simulate the progression of a cohort of HCV-genotype 1 or 4 cirrhotic patients from the time of transplant listing until death. We then used this model to study the cost-effectiveness of ledipasvir-sofosbuvir (LDV/SOF) with ribavirin for 12 weeks, administered for three separate treatment strategies: (i) pre-LT; (ii) post-LT preemptively prior to HCV recurrence; or (iii) post-LT after HCV recurrence.

RESULTS

In the base-case analysis using a median model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score <25 at the time of transplant, we found that pre-LT treatment of HCV led to more QALYs for fewer dollars compared to other strategies. Analysis limited to living donor LT recipients revealed that pre-LT treatment was also the most cost-effective strategy. When the analysis was repeated for MELD ≥25, decompensated disease (Child-Pugh class B or C), and hepatocellular carcinoma cases, preemptive post-LT strategy was more cost-effective.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment of HCV prior to liver transplantation appears to be the most cost-effective strategy for patients with a MELD score <25. For patients with a MELD ≥25 or decompensated cirrhosis, preemptive post-liver transplantation treatment before HCV recurrence is the most cost-effective strategy.

Cost-Effectiveness of Treatments for Genotype 1 Hepatitis C Virus Infection in non-VA and VA Populations

Background: Chronic hepatitis C viral (HCV) infection affects millions of Americans. Health care systems face complex choices between highly efficacious, costly treatments. This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of treatments for chronic, genotype 1 HCV monoinfected, treatment-naïve individuals in the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and general US health care systems. Methods: The study used a decision-analytic Markov model, employing appropriate payer perspectives and time horizons, and discounting benefits and costs at 3% annually. Interventions included the following: 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. Results: SOF-LDV and 3D achieve high SVR rates, reducing advanced liver disease (>20% relative to no treatment), and increasing QALYs by >2 years per person. For the non-VA population, at current prices ($5040 per week for SOF-LDV; $4796 per week for 3D), SOF-LDV’s lifetime cost ($293,370) is $18,000 lower than 3D’s because of its shorter 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 $3308 per week. Drug prices strongly determine relative cost-effectiveness for SOF-LDV and 3D; with price reductions of 20% to 30% depending on health system, 3D could be cost-effective relative to SOF-LDV. We currently lack head-to-head regimen effectiveness trials. Conclusions: New HCV treatments are cost-effective in multiple health care systems if trial-estimated efficacy is achieved in practice, though, at current prices, total expenditures could present substantial challenges.

Prevention of progression to cirrhosis in hepatitis C with fibrosis: effectiveness and cost effectiveness of sequential therapy with new direct-acting anti-virals

BACKGROUND

The new direct-acting anti-virals (DAAs) for hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection offer higher cure rates, but at a much higher cost than the standard interferon-based treatments.

AIM

To identify the cost-effective treatment for patients with HCV infection with F3 liver fibrosis who are at high risk of progression to cirrhosis.

METHODS

A decision-analytic Markov model compared the health benefits and costs of all currently licensed treatments as single treatments and in sequential therapy of up to three lines. Costs were expressed in pound sterling from the perspective of the UK National Health Service. Health benefits were expressed in quality-adjusted life years.

RESULTS

Treatment before progression to cirrhosis always offers the most health benefits for the least costs. Sequential therapy with multiple treatment lines cures over 89% of patients across all HCV genotypes while ensuring a cost-effective use of resources. Cost-effective regimes for HCV genotype 1 patients include first-line oral therapy with sofosbuvir-ledipasvir while peginterferon continues to have a role in other genotypes.

CONCLUSIONS

The cost-effective treatment for HCV can be established using decision analytic modelling comparing single and sequential therapies. Sequential therapy with DAAs is effective and cost-effective in HCV patients with F3 fibrosis. This information is of significant benefit to health care providers with budget limitations and provides a sound scientific basis for drug treatment choices.

Economic and Public Health Impacts of Policies Restricting Access to Hepatitis C Treatment for Medicaid Patients

BACKGROUND

Interferon-free hepatitis C treatment regimens are effective but very costly. The cost-effectiveness, budget, and public health impacts of current Medicaid treatment policies restricting treatment to patients with advanced disease remain unknown.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of current Medicaid policies restricting hepatitis C treatment to patients with advanced disease compared with a strategy providing unrestricted access to hepatitis C treatment, assess the budget and public health impact of each strategy, and estimate the feasibility and long-term effects of increased access to treatment for patients with hepatitis C.

METHODS

Using a Markov model, we compared two strategies for 45- to 55-year-old Medicaid beneficiaries: 1) Current Practice-only advanced disease is treated before Medicare eligibility and 2) Full Access-both early-stage and advanced disease are treated before Medicare eligibility. Patients could develop progressive fibrosis, cirrhosis, or hepatocellular carcinoma, undergo transplantation, or die each year. Morbidity was reduced after successful treatment. We calculated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio and compared the costs and public health effects of each strategy from the perspective of Medicare alone as well as the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services perspective. We varied model inputs in one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

Full Access was less costly and more effective than Current Practice for all cohorts and perspectives, with differences in cost ranging from $5,369 to $11,960 and in effectiveness from 0.82 to 3.01 quality-adjusted life-years. In a probabilistic sensitivity analysis, Full Access was cost saving in 93% of model iterations. Compared with Current Practice, Full Access averted 5,994 hepatocellular carcinoma cases and 121 liver transplants per 100,000 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Current Medicaid policies restricting hepatitis C treatment to patients with advanced disease are more costly and less effective than unrestricted, full-access strategies. Collaboration between state and federal payers may be needed to realize the full public health impact of recent innovations in hepatitis C treatment.

Chronic Hepatitis C Virus Infection: A Review of Current Direct-Acting Antiviral Treatment Strategies

Chronic Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection carries a significant clinical burden in the United States, affecting more than 4.6 million Americans. Untreated chronic HCV infection can result in cirrhosis, portal hypertension, and hepatocellular carcinoma. Previous interferon based treatment carried low rates of success and significant adverse effects. The advent of new generation oral antiviral therapy has led to major improvements in efficacy and tolerability but has also resulted in an explosion of data with increased treatment choice complexity. Treatment guidelines are constantly evolving due to emerging regimens and real world treatment data. There also still remain subpopulations for whom current treatments are lacking or unclearly defined. Thus, the race for development of HCV treatment regimens still continues. This review of the current literature will discuss the current recommended treatment strategies and briefly overview next generation agents.