Validation of the TREAT-B score for hepatitis B treatment eligibility in a large Asian cohort: TREAT-B improves with age

Treat All versus targeted strategies to select HBV-infected people for antiviral therapy in The Gambia, west Africa: a cost-effectiveness analysis

BACKGROUND

Global elimination of hepatitis B virus (HBV) requires expanded uptake of antiviral therapy, potentially by simplifying testing algorithms, especially in resource-limited countries. We evaluated the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and budget impact of three strategies that determine eligibility for anti-HBV treatment, as compared with the WHO 2015 treatment eligibility criteria, in The Gambia.

METHODS

We developed a microsimulation model of natural history using data from the Prevention of Liver Fibrosis and Cancer in Africa programme (known as PROLIFICA) in The Gambia, for an HBV-infected cohort of individuals aged 20 years. The algorithms included in the model were a conventional strategy using the European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL) 2017 criteria, a simplified algorithm using hepatitis B e antigen and alanine aminotransferase (the Treatment Eligibility in Africa for the Hepatitis B Virus [TREAT-B] score), a Treat All approach for all HBV-infected individuals, and the WHO 2015 criteria. Outcomes to measure effectiveness were disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) and years of life saved (YLS), which were used to calculate incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) with the WHO 2015 criteria as the base-case scenario. Costs were assessed from a modified social perspective. A budget impact analysis was also done. We tested the robustness of results with a range of sensitiviy analyses including probabilistic sensitivity analysis.

FINDINGS

Compared with the WHO criteria, TREAT-B resulted in 4877 DALYs averted and Treat All resulted in 9352 DALYs averted, whereas the EASL criteria led to an excess of 795 DALYs. TREAT-B was cost-saving, whereas the ICER for Treat All (US$2149 per DALY averted) was higher than the cost-effectiveness threshold for The Gambia (0·5 times the country's gross domestic product per capita: $352). These patterns did not change when YLS was the outcome. In a modelled cohort of 5000 adults (aged 20 years) with chronic HBV infection from The Gambia, the 5-year budget impact was $1·14 million for Treat All, $0·66 million for TREAT-B, $1·03 million for the WHO criteria, and $1·16 million for the EASL criteria. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated that among the Treat All, EASL, and TREAT-B algorithms, Treat All would become the most preferred strategy only with a willingness-to-pay threshold exceeding approximately $72 000 per DALY averted or $110 000 per YLS.

INTERPRETATION

Although the Treat All strategy might be the most effective, it is unlikely to be cost-effective in The Gambia. A simplified strategy such as TREAT-B might be a cost-saving alternative.

FUNDING

UK Research and Innovation (Medical Research Council).

TRANSLATION

For the French translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Validation of a novel point-of-care test for alanine aminotransferase measurement: A pilot cohort study

BACKGROUND

Alanine aminotransferase (ALT) measurement is essential for evaluation of liver disease. We validated a novel rapid point-of-care (POC) test for ALT1 against laboratory ALT.

METHODS

Stored plasma samples from adults with chronic liver disease (Test cohort n = 240; Validation cohort n = 491) were analysed using the BioPoint® antigen immunoassay POC ALT1 lateral flow test, which provides quantitative ALT results (Axxin handheld reader) or semi-quantitative results (visual read, cut off 40 IU/ml). The accuracy of POC ALT1 to detect ALT > 40 IU/L was determined by ROC analysis. In patients with chronic hepatitis B, treatment eligibility (EASL criteria) was determined using POC ALT1 and compared to laboratory ALT.

RESULTS

POC ALT1 test had good accuracy for laboratory ALT > 40 IU/L: AUROC 0.93 (95% CI: 0.89-0.96) in the Test cohort and AUROC 0.92 (95% CI: 0.88-0.95) in the Validation cohort. POC ALT1 cut off of 0.8 for ALT > 40 IU/L maximised sensitivity (97%) and specificity (71%) in the Test cohort (42% laboratory ALT > 40 IU/L) and yielded PPV 84% and NPV 91% in the Validation cohort (19% laboratory ALT > 40 IU/L). Semi-quantitative POC ALT1 had good accuracy for laboratory ALT in the Validation cohort (AUROC 0.85, 95% CI: 0.81-0.99; sensitivity 77% and specificity 93%). Combined with HBV DNA and transient elastography, both quantitative and semi-quantitative POC ALT1 tests had good accuracy for excluding hepatitis B treatment needs (sensitivity 96%, specificity 78% and NPV 99%).

CONCLUSION

The POC ALT1 test had good accuracy for elevated ALT levels and for determining treatment eligibility among people with chronic hepatitis B.

Assessment and validation of the TREAT-B score to assess the treatment eligibility of patients with chronic hepatitis B virus infection

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Access to Hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA testing to determine treatment eligibility is limited in low-income countries. Therefore, this study aimed to assess and validate the TREAT-B score proposed as the treatment threshold in an Asian cohort in determining the HBV treatment eligibility.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was conducted on consecutive patients with treatment-naïve chronic HBV mono-infection who visited the liver clinic at Chulalongkorn University Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand, from 2016 to 2020. The 2018 American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases guideline was the reference standard.

RESULTS

Overall, 825 patients with chronic HBV infection were enrolled, comprising 409 (50.4%) males, with a median age of 50 (38-58) years. Of these, 216 (26.2%), 565 (68.5%), and 377 (45.7%) were eligible for treatment based on the AASLD, TREAT-B score, and simplified WHO criteria, respectively. The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUROC) of the TREAT-B ≥ 2 was better than the simplified WHO criteria (0.69 vs. 0.62, p = 0.006) for selecting patients eligible for antiviral therapy. The sensitivity and specificity of the TREAT-B ≥ 2 were 96.3% and 41.4%, respectively. Applying the TREAT-B ≥ 3 improved the specificity (89.0%) and AUROC (0.80, 95% CI 0.76-0.84, but reduced the sensitivity (70.8%) for selecting eligible patients for HBV therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

In resource-constrained countries where HBV DNA is unavailable, the TREAT-B score is an alternative criteria for indicating treatment eligibility. The TREAT-B score of ≥3 is highly accurate and may minimize the number of patients unnecessarily treated in Asian HBV patients.

Assessment and simplification of treatment eligibility among patients with chronic hepatitis B infection in Vietnam

BACKGROUND

Treatment eligibility and the accuracy of its simplified criteria have been poorly documented in patients with chronic HBV infection worldwide, especially in low-and-middle-income countries.

METHODS

From a cohort of HBV-infected patients in Vietnam, we assessed the proportion of patients eligible for treatment using the national guidelines based on reference tests (HBV DNA quantification and FibroScan); and the accuracy of simplified treatment criteria free from HBV DNA and FibroScan (TREAT-B score and simplified WHO criteria) to select patients for antiviral therapy using the national guidelines as a reference.

RESULTS

We analysed 400 consecutive treatment-naïve HBV-monoinfected patients: 49% males, median age 38 years (range: 18-86), 32% HBeAg-positive, median HBV DNA 4.8 log10 IU/ml (undetectable-8.4), median FibroScan 5.3kPa (3.0-67.8), 25% having significant liver fibrosis including 12% with cirrhosis. Of them 167 (42%) fulfilled treatment criteria according to the national guidelines. Using the national criteria as a reference, the performance of TREAT-B to select patients for treatment was high (AUROC: 0.89 (95%CI: 0.87-0.92)) with a sensitivity of 74.3% and a specificity of 88.4%. In a subset of patients with two ALT measurements over a 6-month period (n=89), the AUROC of TREAT-B was significantly higher than that of the simplified WHO criteria (p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Our study suggests that a large proportion of patients with chronic HBV infection require antiviral therapy in Vietnam. Compared to the simplified WHO criteria free from HBV DNA quantification, TREAT-B is a better alternative to easily indicate treatment eligibility and might help scale-up treatment intervention in Vietnam.

Point-of-Care Tests for Hepatitis B: An Overview

Despite the heavy disease burden posed by hepatitis B, around 90% of people living with hepatitis B are not diagnosed globally. Many of the affected populations still have limited or no access to essential blood tests for hepatitis B. Compared to conventional blood tests which heavily rely on centralised laboratory facilities, point-of-care testing for hepatitis B has the potential to broaden testing access in low-resource settings and to engage hard-to-reach populations. Few hepatitis B point-of-care tests have been ratified for clinical use by international and regional regulatory bodies, and countries have been slow to adopt point-of-care testing into hepatitis B programs. This review presents currently available point-of-care tests for hepatitis B and their roles in the care cascade, reviewing evidence for testing performance, utility, acceptability, costs and cost-effectiveness when integrated into hepatitis B diagnosis and monitoring programs. We further discuss challenges and future directions in aspects of technology, implementation, and regulation when adopting point-of-care testing in hepatitis B programs.