Cost-effectiveness of treatment for hepatitis C in an urban cohort co-infected with HIV

Management of Hepatitis C in Children and Adolescents

The management of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections has changed dramatically in recent years with the use of direct antiviral agents (AADs). New AADs have excellent safety profile and demonstrated to be highly effective. Interferon free regimens are now recommended for children and adolescents but significant barriers for treatment exist. Overcoming those barriers will facilitate HCV elimination. This review covers varied topics to familiarize providers with the current status of pediatric HCV management in light of newly available DAAs medications.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Early Treatment of Chronic HCV with Sofosbuvir/Velpatasvir in Italy

BACKGROUND

Chronic Hepatitis C virus (cHCV) is a major health issue worldwide. New effective direct-acting anti-viral (DAA) drugs such as the combination sofosbuvir/velpatasvir, represent an important turning point, given the high sustained virologic response (SVR) rates associated with their use.

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the cost and effects of two different treatment strategies based on sofosbuvir/velpatasvir. Strategy 1: treating all patients, including those in the early stages of fibrosis; Strategy 2: reserving treatments for patients at more advanced stages of disease (≥ F3). The analysis compares the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of Strategy 1 versus Strategy 2 in a cohort of HCV-infected patients and a cohort of hepatitis C virus (HCV)-human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) patients.

METHODS

A Markov model simulating the natural history of the disease was built considering a 60-year time horizon and two cohorts of 1000 patients aged ≥ 35 years. Disease morbidity was classified according to the METAVIR classification. The robustness of the model was tested using deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA).

RESULTS

In both cohorts, Strategy 1 results in higher resource consumption and a greater number of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) compared with Strategy 2. The ICERs for the cohort of HCV patients and the cohort of co-infected HCV/HIV patients ranged between €15,555-74,804/QALY and €10,708-55,138/QALY, respectively, depending on the assumed cost of the treatment. In the PSA, the ICER distribution remained below the threshold of €30,000/QALY in 96 and 97% of the scenarios in the cohorts of HCV and HCV/HIV patients, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Extending the treatment of HCV to patients at an early stage of HCV infection is estimated to be cost effective from the perspective of the Italian Healthcare System.

Is hepatitis C virus elimination possible among people living with HIV and what will it take to achieve it?

INTRODUCTION

The World Health Organization targets for hepatitis C virus (HCV) elimination include a 90% reduction in new infections by 2030. Our objective is to review the modelling evidence and cost data surrounding feasibility of HCV elimination among people living with HIV (PLWH), and identify likely components for elimination. We also discuss the real-world experience of HCV direct acting antiviral (DAA) scale-up and elimination efforts in the Netherlands.

METHODS

We review modelling evidence of what intervention scale-up is required to achieve WHO HCV elimination targets among HIV-infected (HIV+) people who inject drugs (PWID) and men who have sex with men (MSM), review cost-effectiveness of HCV therapy among PLWH and discuss economic implications of elimination. We additionally use the real-world experience of DAA scale-up in the Netherlands to illustrate the promise and potential challenges of HCV elimination strategies in MSM. Finally, we summarize key components of the HCV elimination response among PWLH.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Modelling indicates HCV elimination among HIV+ MSM and PWID is potentially achievable but requires combination treatment and either harm reduction or behavioural risk reductions. Preliminary modelling indicates elimination among HIV+ PWID will require elimination efforts among PWID more broadly. Treatment for PLWH and high-risk populations (PWID and MSM) is cost-effective in high-income countries, but costs of DAAs remain a barrier to scale-up worldwide despite the potential low production price ($50 per 12 week course). In the Netherlands, universal DAA availability led to rapid uptake among HIV+ MSM in 2015/16, and a 50% reduction in acute HCV incidence among HIV+ MSM from 2014 to 2016 was observed. In addition to HCV treatment, elimination among PLWH globally also likely requires regular HCV testing, development of low-cost accurate HCV diagnostics, reduced costs of DAA therapy, broad treatment access without restrictions, close monitoring for HCV reinfection and retreatment, and harm reduction and/or behavioural interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

Achieving WHO HCV Elimination targets is potentially achievable among HIV-infected populations. Among HIV+ PWID, it likely requires HCV treatment scale-up combined with harm reduction for both HIV+ and HIV- populations. Among HIV+ MSM, elimination likely requires both HCV treatment and behaviour risk reduction among the HIV+ MSM population, the latter of which to date has not been observed. Lower HCV diagnostic and treatment costs will be key to ensuring scale-up of HCV testing and treatment without restriction, enabling elimination.

Use of opioid substitution therapies in the treatment of opioid use disorder: results of a UK cost-effectiveness modelling study

AIMS

This study investigated the cost-effectiveness of buprenorphine maintenance treatment (BMT) and methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) vs no opioid substitution therapy (OST) for the treatment of opioid use disorder, from the UK National Health Service (NHS)/personal social services (PSS) and societal perspectives over 1 year.

METHODS

Cost-effectiveness of OST vs no OST was evaluated by first replicating and then expanding an existing UK health technology assessment model. The expanded model included the impact of OST on infection rates of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection.

RESULTS

Versus no OST, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for BMT and MMT were £13,923 and £14,206 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY), respectively, from a NHS/PSS perspective. When total costs (NHS/PSS and societal) are considered, there are substantial savings associated with adopting OST; these savings are in excess of £14,032 for BMT vs no OST and £17,174 for MMT vs no OST over 1 year. This is primarily driven by a reduction in victim costs. OST treatment also impacted other aspects of criminality and healthcare resource use.

LIMITATIONS

The model's 1-year timeframe means long-term costs and benefits, and the influence of changes over time are not captured.

CONCLUSIONS

OST can be considered cost-effective vs no OST from the UK NHS/PSS perspective, with a cost per QALY well below the UK's willingness-to-pay threshold. There were only small differences between BMT and MMT. The availability of two or more cost-effective options is beneficial to retaining patients in OST programs. From a societal perspective, OST is estimated to save over £14,032 and £17,174 per year for BMT and MMT vs no OST, respectively, due to savings in victim costs. Further work is required to fully quantify the clinical and health economic impacts of different OST formulations and their societal impact over the long-term.

Cost-Effectiveness of Genotype 1 Chronic Hepatitis C Virus Treatments in Patients Coinfected with Human Immunodeficiency Virus in the United States

INTRODUCTION

New treatments for chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) are highly effective in patients coinfected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). This study estimated the cost-effectiveness of treatments for genotype 1 (GT1) HCV in HIV-coinfected patients.

METHODS

A Markov model based on HCV natural history was used. The base-case analysis included both treatment-naïve and -experienced patients. Alternatives were ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir, dasabuvir with or without ribavirin (3D ± R) for 12 or 24 weeks, sofosbuvir plus peginterferon and R (SOF + PR) for 12 weeks, SOF + R for 24 weeks, and no treatment (NT). A subgroup analysis restricted to treatment-naïve, non-cirrhotic patients compared 3D ± R for 12 weeks to SOF plus ledipasvir (LDV) for 12 weeks and NT. Transition probabilities, utilities, and costs were obtained from the published literature. Outcomes were measured over a lifetime horizon and included rates of compensated cirrhosis, decompensated cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma and liver-related death, total costs, life-years, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).

RESULTS

In the base-case, SOF + R was dominated by both SOF + PR and 3D ± R. Compared to SOF + PR, 3D ± R had an ICER of $45,581. The lifetime rates of liver morbidity and mortality were lower among those treated with 3D ± R compared to SOF + PR, SOF + R, or NT. In the subgroup analysis, 3D ± R was cost-effective compared to NT at a threshold of $50,000 per QALY (ICER $27,496). SOF/LDV had an ICER of $104,489 per QALY gained compared to 3D ± R.

CONCLUSION

In the GT1 HCV population coinfected with HIV, 3D ± R was cost-effective compared to NT, SOF + R, and SOF + PR. In the treatment-naïve sub-population, 3D ± R was cost-effective compared to NT and SOF/LDV.

The cost-effectiveness of treating triple coinfection with HIV, tuberculosis and hepatitis C virus

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of treating patients infected with HIV and simultaneously coinfected with tuberculosis (TB) and hepatitis C virus (HCV).

METHODS

A mathematical model for HIV coinfection with TB and HCV is introduced. The model was designed to incorporate parameters of control for the coverage of care, which makes it useful for performing cost-effectiveness analysis of public policies. A cost-effectiveness analysis of early medical care of patients with TB and HCV coinfection, with coverage of 0 (basal), 25, 50, 75 and 100%, was performed for the whole cohort of patients and a special analysis was performed in a selected population with triple infection.

RESULTS

The cost per resolved infection and the cost per year of life gained were found to be very cost-effective for the population with triple infection, for all different coverages.

CONCLUSIONS

It is known that treating patients with HIV who are coinfected with TB or HCV implies high cost and low efficacy, but it is possible that the population with triple infections could achieve important benefits in terms of years of life gained.

Current guidelines and prioritizing treatment of hepatitis C virus in HIV-infected patients

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Coinfection with hepatitis C virus (HCV) and HIV is a significant public health problem worldwide. The broad spectrum antivirals interferon-alpha (IFN) and ribavirin (RBV) have lower sustained virologic response rates in HIV-HCV coinfection compared with HCV monoinfection, with significant associated toxicities and prolonged treatment courses. The recent availability of direct acting antivirals (DAA) has transformed the treatment of HCV, with the opportunity of cure available for most patients with much more tolerable regimens. These regimens are now being studied in HIV-HCV coinfection.

RECENT FINDINGS

DAA-based regimens for HIV-HCV coinfection have shown excellent efficacy, with cure rates similar to HCV monoinfection. Either in combination with IFN and RBV, or in 'IFN-free' regimens, cure rates of over 90% are the goal for all HIV-HCV-infected individuals. Data are excellent in genotype 1 infection, but further data on genotype 2-6 are required. These regimens have been shown to be cost-effective in HCV monoinfection, and are likely to be cost-effective in HIV-HCV coinfection. Nonetheless they remain expensive. Recent guidelines have identified coinfected patients as a group for prioritization for treatment, regardless of fibrosis stage. Earlier treatment of those likely to transmit HCV is also recommended.

SUMMARY

With the use of DAA, HCV infection in HIV should be curable for most patients, and HIV-infected patients should be prioritized for treatment. The optimal treatment regimens for some genotypes have yet to be determined. The significant cost of DAA-containing regimens is likely to significantly impair their widespread use for the short to medium term, even in well resourced settings, and those with more advanced liver disease are likely to access them first.

[Cost-effectiveness of hepatitis C treatment in slow virologic responders coinfected with HIV]

Recent evidence has demonstrated that slow responders may benefit from antiviral treatment in HCV/HIV coinfection. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of HCV treatment in individuals with genotype 1 coinfected with HIV, with peg-interferon in combination with ribavirin, compared to the inclusion (versus non-inclusion) of slow responders. A Markov model was developed that simulated the progression of liver disease in a hypothetical cohort of one thousand men over 40 years of age, considering the Brazilian Unified National Health System (SUS) perspective and a 30-year timeline. The extension of treatment to slow responders provided a 60% increase in the number of individuals who eliminated HCV and an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 44,171 BRL/QALY, below the acceptability threshold proposed by World Health Organization. Sensitivity analysis did not alter the results. The inclusion of HCV/ HIV-coinfected slow virologic responders in the treatment protocol is shown to be a cost-effective strategy for the SUS.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of sofosbuvir plus peginterferon/ribavirin in the treatment of chronic hepatitis C virus genotype 1 infection

BACKGROUND

Sofosbuvir, an oral NS5B nucleotide polymerase inhibitor, is indicated for the treatment of patients infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV).

AIM

To evaluate the long-term health economic outcomes of sofosbuvir + pegylated interferon alfa/ribavirin (pegIFN/RBV) compared with current treatments in patients infected with HCV genotype 1 in the US.

METHODS

A decision-analytic Markov model was developed to estimate health outcomes, number needed to treat and short-term and long-term economic outcomes, including incremental cost-effectiveness ratios and cost per sustained virological response (SVR), for several sofosbuvir-comparator regimen pairings for a cohort of 10 000 patients. It considered three patient cohorts: treatment-naïve, treatment-experienced and treatment-naïve human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) co-infected. Subgroup analyses were conducted for treatment-naïve patients with and without cirrhosis.

RESULTS

Reductions in the incidence of new cases of liver-disease complications with sofosbuvir + pegIFN/RBV compared with pegIFN/RBV, boceprevir + pegIFN/RBV, telaprevir + pegIFN/RBV and simeprevir + pegIFN/RBV were 64-82%, 50-68%, 43-58% and 33-56%, respectively. Sofosbuvir + pegIFN/RBV was typically associated with the lowest 1-year cost per SVR. When considering the lifetime incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained, sofosbuvir + pegIFN/RBV was the most cost-effective treatment option assessed. Sofosbuvir + pegIFN/RBV generally dominated (less costly and more effective than) boceprevir + pegIFN/RBV, telaprevir + pegIFN/RBV and simeprevir + pegIFN/RBV.

CONCLUSION

Sofosbuvir + pegIFN/RBV yields more favourable future health and economic outcomes than current treatment regimens for patients across all levels of treatment experience and cirrhosis stage, as well as for individuals with or without HIV co-infection.

Modeling the impact of early antiretroviral therapy for adults coinfected with HIV and hepatitis B or C in South Africa

OBJECTIVE

There has been discussion about whether individuals coinfected with HIV and hepatitis C virus (HCV) or hepatitis B virus (HBV) (∼30% of all people living with HIV) should be prioritized for early HIV antiretroviral therapy (ART). We assess the relative benefits of providing ART at CD4 count below 500  cells/μl or immediate ART to HCV/HIV or HBV/HIV-coinfected adults compared with HIV-monoinfected adults. We evaluate individual outcomes (HIV/liver disease progression) and preventive benefits in a generalized HIV epidemic setting.

METHODS

We modeled disease progression for HIV-monoinfected, HBV/HIV-coinfected, and HCV/HIV-coinfected adults for differing ART eligibility thresholds (CD4 <350  cells/μl, CD4 <500  cells/μl, immediate ART eligibility upon infection). We report disability-adjusted life-years averted per 100 person-years on ART (DALYaverted/100PYonART) as a measure of the health benefits generated from incremental changes in ART eligibility. Sensitivity analyses explored impact on sexual HIV and vertical HIV, HCV, and HBV transmission.

RESULTS

For HBV/HIV-coinfected adults, a switch to ART initiation at CD4 count below 500  cells/μl from CD4 below 350  cells/μl generates 9% greater health benefits per year on ART (48 DALYaverted/100PYonART) than for HIV-monoinfected adults (44 DALYaverted/100PYonART). Additionally, ART at CD4 below 500  cells/μl could prevent 25% and 32% of vertical transmissions of HIV and HBV, respectively. For HCV/HIV-coinfected adults, ART at CD4 below 500  cells/μl generates 10% fewer health benefits (40 DALYaverted/100PYonART) than for HIV monoinfection, unless ART reduces progression to cirrhosis by more than 70% (33% in base-case).

CONCLUSIONS

The additional therapeutic benefits of ART for HBV-related liver disease results in ART generating more health benefits among HBV/HIV-coinfected adults than HIV-monoinfected individuals, whereas less health benefits are generated amongst HCV/HIV coinfection in a generalized HIV epidemic setting.

Variation between Canadian centres in the uptake of treatment for hepatitis C by patients coinfected with HIV: a prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Uptake of treatment for hepatitis C virus (HCV) is low in Canada despite its publicly funded health care system. We explored the uptake of HCV treatment within the Canadian Co-infection Cohort to determine if some treatment centres have been more successful than others at starting patients with HIV-HCV coinfection on HCV treatment.

METHODS

We estimated the variation between 16 centres in the uptake of HCV treatment using a Weibull time-to-event model with adjustment for patient characteristics that are thought likely to influence the uptake of treatment. We asked the principal investigator at each centre about access to hepatitis-related specialists and services and the importance of various criteria when determining if a patient with HIV-HCV coinfection should receive treatment for HCV.

RESULTS

Among 681 untreated patients in the Canadian Co-infection Cohort, 163 patients with HIV-HCV coinfection started HCV treatment over a period of 1827 patient-years (9 per 100 patient-years). Even after adjustment for case mix, there was still appreciable variation in treatment uptake between centres, with mean hazard ratios of 0.43 (95% credible interval 0.11-1.3) and 3.6 (95% credible interval 1.7-8.4) for the centres least and most likely to start an average patient with HIV-HCV coinfection on HCV treatment. The most important criteria reported by principal investigators for determining eligibility for treatment were severity of fibrosis, current psychiatric comorbidities, current alcohol intake, past HCV treatment and a history of reinfection with HCV. However, the opinions were wide-ranging: 8 of the 15 criteria elicited both the responses "less important" and "very important."

INTERPRETATION

The magnitude of the centre effects and diverse opinions about the importance of treatment eligibility criteria suggest that provider-related barriers to HCV treatment uptake are as important as patient-related barriers.

Cost effectiveness of hepatitis C-related interventions targeting substance users and other high-risk groups: a systematic review

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

In developed countries, injection drug users have the highest prevalence and incidence of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. Clinicians and policy makers have several options for reducing morbidity and mortality related to HCV infection, including preventing new infections, screening high-risk populations, and optimizing uptake and delivery of antiviral therapy. Cost-effectiveness analyses provide an estimate of the value for money associated with adopting healthcare interventions. Our objective was to determine the cost effectiveness of hepatitis C interventions (prevention, screening, treatment) targeting substance users and other groups with a high proportion of substance users.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, HealthSTAR and EconLit, and the grey literature. Studies were critically appraised using the Drummond and Jefferson, Neumann et al. and Philips et al. checklists. We developed and applied a quality appraisal instrument specific to cost-effectiveness analyses of HCV interventions. In addition, we summarized cost-effectiveness estimates using a single currency and year ($US, year 2009 values).

RESULTS

Twenty-one economic evaluations were included, which addressed prevention (three), screening (ten) and treatment (eight). The quality of the analyses varied greatly. A significant proportion did not incorporate important aspects of HCV natural history, disease costs and antiviral therapy. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) ranged from dominant (less costly and more effective) to $US603,352 per QALY. However, many ICERs were less than $US100,000 per QALY. Screening and treatment interventions involving pegylated interferon and ribavirin were generally cost effective at the $US100,000 per QALY threshold, with the exception of some subgroups, such as immune compromised patients with genotype 1 infections.

CONCLUSIONS

No clear consensus emerged from the studies demonstrating that prevention, screening or treatment provides better value for money as each approach can be economically attractive in certain subgroups. More high-quality economic evaluations of preventing, identifying and treating HCV infection in substance users are needed.

Direct medical care costs among pegylated interferon plus ribavirin-treated and untreated chronic hepatitis C patients

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) is a common and expensive infectious disease. The current standard of care for HCV infection, pegylated interferon with ribavirin (PEG-RBV), is costly and has a significant adverse event profile.

AIM

To quantify the direct economic burden of HCV infection and PEG-RBV treatment for HCV.

METHODS

Using a large administrative claims database, we evaluated the medical and prescription drug costs of patients with HCV from 2002 to 2007. A cohort of patients with PEG-RBV was 1:1 propensity score-matched to a cohort of untreated HCV patients. Multivariate models adjusted for demographic and clinical characteristics in evaluating the effect of PEG-RBV treatment on direct medical expenditure.

RESULTS

The matched analysis included 20,002 patients. PEG-RBV-treated patients had higher total direct medical costs ($28,547 vs. $21,752; P < 0.001), outpatient pharmacy costs ($17,419 vs. $2,900; P < 0.001), and outpatient physician visit costs ($894 vs. $787; P < 0.001), but lower inpatient costs ($3,942 vs. $9,543; P < 0.001) and emergency room costs ($366 vs. $505; P < 0.001). After multivariate adjustment, PEG-RBV use was associated with an additional $9,423 in total direct medical costs and an additional $12,244 in HCV-related total medical costs.

CONCLUSION

Total HCV-related medical costs are higher for treated than untreated patients, driven mostly by higher outpatient pharmacy costs, which outweigh higher HCV-related inpatient costs incurred by untreated patients.

The current economic burden of cirrhosis

Cirrhosis is a worldwide problem that is associated with a substantial economic burden. Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection, hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection, and alcoholic liver disease are the main causes of cirrhosis, but cost-effective preventive strategies are only available for HBV infection. Treatment algorithms for HBV infection and HCV infection are numerous and may be economically advantageous, depending on the regimen utilized; however, effective treatment for alcoholic liver disease is lacking, with abstinence from alcohol consumption continuing to be the main treatment strategy. In addition, liver transplantation (the only cure for cirrhosis) continues to consume substantial economic resources despite a recent reduction in overall cost. More sensitive predictors of post-liver transplantation disability could reduce this cost by allowing interventions that would promote productivity and increase health-related quality of life after liver transplantation. This paper highlights recent publications that evaluate the cost-effectiveness of strategies that prevent or treat the main causes of cirrhosis as well as publications that assess the impact of quality of life on the overall cost burden of the disease.

Update on the treatment and management of patients with hepatitis

Hepatitis is an inflammation of the liver that can be mild to life-threatening, based on the causative agent. Hepatitis viruses A through G are described along with potential treatments and infusion therapies. Nonviral causes of hepatitis include autoimmune, toxic, drug-induced, and alcoholic. The role of the infusion nurse is critical in prevention, patient education regarding all aspects of the condition, and administering and monitoring appropriate therapy.

Effect of hepatitis C virus and its treatment on survival

The effect of hepatitis C virus (HCV) and its treatment on survival is not well defined. We undertook this study to determine the effect of HCV and its treatment on survival in a national cohort of HCV-infected veterans and uninfected controls. We used a national sample of HCV-infected persons and HCV-uninfected controls from the Electronically Retrieved Cohort of HCV Infected Veterans (ERCHIVES) to compare survival between the two groups. We also compared the effect of treatment and treatment duration on survival in the HCV-infected group. We used matched Cox proportional hazards model to determine the predictors of mortality. Kaplan-Meier survival plots were generated to determine and compare survival among HCV-infected and HCV-uninfected persons, and among treated and untreated HCV-infected persons.We identified 34,480 matched pairs of HCV-infected subjects and controls. HCV infection was independently associated with a higher risk of mortality (hazards ratio, 1.37; 95% confidence interval, 1.31-1.47). Subjects treated for 48 weeks or longer had the lowest mortality among HCV-infected subjects (hazards ratio, 0.41; 95% confidence interval, 0.27-0.64), whereas those who received less than 48 week of treatment had intermediate mortality (hazards ratio, 0.71 and 0.60 for 0-23 weeks and 24-47 weeks of treatment, respectively) compared with untreated subjects.

CONCLUSION

HCV infection is associated with a substantial increase in mortality. Subjects who are initiated on treatment, and particularly those who proceed to finish a full course of treatment, have significantly reduced risk of mortality. Further studies are warranted to determine the effect of virological control on survival.