Boceprevir for previously untreated patients with chronic hepatitis C Genotype 1 infection: a US-based cost-effectiveness modeling study

Cost-Utility of All-Oral Direct-Acting Antiviral Regimens for the Treatment of Genotype 1 Chronic Hepatitis C Virus-Infected Patients in Hong Kong

BACKGROUND

Direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) are entering the hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment landscape in Hong Kong, prompting the need for cost-effectiveness evaluations of these interventions to enable optimal use of healthcare resources.

AIMS

This study aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness of DAAs to standard-of-care pegylated interferon plus ribavirin (RBV) in treatment-naïve patients without significant liver fibrosis and to compare different DAAs in patients who are treatment-experienced and/or have advanced liver disease.

METHODS

A Markov model was constructed to evaluate cost-effectiveness over a lifetime time horizon from the payer perspective. The target population was treatment-naïve and treatment-experienced HCV genotype 1 patients, stratified by degree of liver fibrosis. The model consists of 16 health states encompassing METAVIR fibrosis score (F0-F4), treatment success or failure, decompensated cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma, liver transplant, and liver-related death. The proportions of patients achieving sustained virologic response were obtained from clinical trials. Other inputs were obtained from published and local data. The primary outcome was incremental cost-utility ratio for each DAA versus pegylated interferon + ribavirin and among different DAAs.

RESULTS

In treatment-naïve F0-2 HCV patients, all DAAs were cost-effective in genotype 1a and daclatasvir + asunaprevir, elbasvir/grazoprevir, ledipasvir/sofosbuvir, and glecaprevir/pibrentasvir were cost-effective compared to pegylated interferon + ribavirin in genotype 1b. In genotypes 1a and 1b, treatment-experienced patients, and F3-4 patients, elbasvir/grazoprevir was the least costly DAA and economically dominant over most other DAAs.

CONCLUSIONS

DAAs can be a cost-effective option for the treatment of genotype 1 HCV patients in Hong Kong, and elbasvir/grazoprevir is cost-effective.

Epidemiology of hepatitis C virus infection in a country with universal access to direct-acting antiviral agents: Data for designing a cost-effective elimination policy in Spain

Accurate HCV prevalence estimates are necessary for guiding elimination policies. Our aim was to determine the HCV prevalence and assess the cost-effectiveness of a screen-and-treat strategy in the Spanish population. A population-based, cross-sectional study (PREVHEP-ETHON Cohort, Epidemiological sTudy of Hepatic infectiONs; NCT02749864) was performed from July 2015-April 2017. Participants from three Spanish regions were selected using two-stage conglomerate sampling, and stratified by age, with randomized subject selection. Anthropometric and demographic data were collected, and blood samples were taken to detect anti-HCV antibodies/quantify HCV RNA. The cost-effectiveness of the screening strategies and treatment were analysed using a Markov model. Among 12 246 participants aged 20-74 (58.4% females), the overall anti-HCV prevalence was 1.2% (95% CI 1.0-1.4), whereas the detectable HCV-RNA prevalence was 0.3% (0.2-0.4). Infection rates were highest in subjects aged 50-74 years [anti-HCV 1.6% (1.3-1.9), HCV RNA 0.4% (0.3-0.6]. Among the 147 anti-HCV + subjects, 38 (25.9%) had active infections while 109 (74.1%) had been cleared of infection; 44 (40.4%) had cleared after antiviral treatment, whereas 65 (59.6%) had cleared spontaneously. Overall, 59.8% of the anti-HCV + participants were aware of their serological status. Considering a cost of treatment of €7000/patient, implementing screening programmes is cost-effective across all age cohorts, particularly in patients aged 50-54 (negative incremental cost-effectiveness ratio which indicates a cost-saving strategy). The current HCV burden is lower than previously estimated, with approximately 25% of anti-HCV + individuals having an active infection. A strategy of screening and treatment at current treatment prices in Spain is cost-effective across all age cohorts.

Real-world health care utilization in treatment of HCV: Results from the Canadian SIMPLE observational trial

Background: As hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment continues to evolve, there is an ongoing need to understand and optimize real-world disease management. The primary objective of the SIMPLE study was to describe the real-life management of genotype 1 (G1) HCV in Canada treated with boceprevir + pegylated interferon and ribavirin therapy. Methods: This was an observational, prospective cohort, multicentre, non-interventional study of patients with G1 HCV. A single cohort of adult patients were to be managed as per standard of care (SoC) and treated with 4 weeks of PegRBV dual therapy, followed by boceprevir + PegRBV for 24–44 weeks, with 24-weeks follow-up. Treatment compliance, health care resource utilization (HCRU), HCV viral load, and hematological adverse event (AE) data were collected. Results: This study enrolled 159 patients. All investigators were well educated on the Canadian consensus guidelines for HCV management but only a minority of patients were treated according to treatment guidelines. Viral response was achieved by >50% of patients by week 8 of therapy and in 50%–60% of tested patients during follow-up. An average of 17.9 HCRU visits were reported during the study period. The most commonly used resources were nursing visits for routine follow-up. Conclusions: Results from this real-world study suggest that most patients were not treated according to the product monograph. Further studies are required to determine how oral treatments fit into this paradigm and how these findings extrapolate to the current treatment model. This study can serve as a benchmark for future real-world treatment including heath care utilization analyses.

Projected impact of elbasvir/grazoprevir in patients with hepatitis C virus genotype 1 and chronic kidney disease in Vietnam

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is an important cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). The objective of this study was to predict the impact of EBR/GZR on the incidence of liver and kidney related complications compared with no treatment (NoTx) and pegylated interferon plus ribavirin (pegIFN/RBV) in patients with CKD stage 4/5 in Vietnam.

METHODS

We developed a mathematical model of the natural history of chronic HCV, CKD, and liver disease. Efficacy of EBR/GZR and pegIFN/RBV were derived from the C-SURFER trial and a meta-analysis, respectively. We calculated lifetime cumulative morbidity and mortality rates, including incidence of decompensated cirrhosis (DC), hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and life expectancy.

RESULTS

Estimated lifetime incidence of DC was significantly reduced in patients receiving EBR/GZR (3.47%) compared to NoTx (18.14%) and pegIFN/RBV (9.01%). Estimated incidence of HCC was 1.02%, 21.64%, and 8.90%, and 1.02% in patients receiving EBR/GZR, NoTx, and pegIFN/RBV. EBR/GZR was estimated to extend life expectancy by 4.2 and 2.0 years compared with NoTx and pegIFN/RBV.

CONCLUSIONS

Our model predicted that EBR/GZR will significantly reduce the incidence of liver-related complications and prolong life in patients with chronic HCV GT1 infection and CKD compared with NoTx or pegIFN/RBV.

Healthcare value of implementing hepatitis C screening in the adult general population in Spain

BACKGROUND

Elimination of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection requires high diagnostic rates and universal access to treatment. Around 40% of infected individuals are unaware of their infection, which indicates that effective screening strategies are needed. We analyzed the efficiency (incremental cost-utility ratio, ICUR) of 3 HCV screening strategies: a) general population of adults, b) high-risk groups, and c) population with the highest anti-HCV prevalence plus high-risk groups.

METHODS

An analytical decision model, projecting progression of the disease over a lifetime, was used to establish the candidate population for HCV screening. HCV data were obtained from the literature: anti-HCV prevalence (0.56%-1.54%), viremic patients (31.5%), and percentage of undiagnosed persons among those with viremia (35%). It was assumed that most patients would be treated and have HCV therapy response (98% SVR); transition probabilities, utilities, and disease management annual costs were obtained from the literature. Efficiency over the life of patients under the National Health System perspective was measured as quality-adjusted life years (QALY) and total cost (screening, diagnosis, pharmacological and disease management). A discount rate of 3% was applied to costs and outcomes.

RESULTS

Screening of the adult population would identify a larger number of additional chronic hepatitis C cases (N = 52,694) than screening the highest anti-HCV prevalence population plus high-risk groups (N = 42,027) or screening high-risk groups (N = 26,128). ICUR for the general population vs. high-risk groups was €8914/QALY gained per patient (€18,157 incremental cost and 2.037 QALY). ICUR for the general population vs. population with highest anti-HCV prevalence plus high-risk groups was €7,448/QALY gained per patient (€7,733 incremental cost and 1.038 QALY). These ICUR values are below the accepted efficiency threshold (€22,000-€30,000).

CONCLUSION

HCV screening and treatment of the general adult population is cost-effective compared to screening of high-risk groups or the population with the highest anti-HCV prevalence plus high-risk groups.

Value and innovation of direct-acting antivirals: long-term health outcomes of the strategic plan for the management of hepatitis C in Spain

OBJECTIVE

To assess the long-term healthcare costs and health outcomes in association with the access to new direct-acting antivirals (DAAs), during the first year of the National Strategic Plan for Chronic Hepatitis C (SPCHC) in patients with chronic hepatitis C (CHC) in Spain.

METHODS

A decision tree and a lifetime Markov model were developed to simulate the natural history, morbidity, and mortality of a cohort of 51,900 patients with CHC before (pre-DAA strategy) and after (post-DAA strategy) access to DAAs, following SPCHC approval. The percentage of patients treated, transition probabilities, disease management costs, health state utility values, sustained virologic response rates and treatment costs were obtained from the literature and published data from Spain. The results were expressed in terms of costs (€, 2016), quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and prevention of clinical events, with an annual discount rate of 3%.

RESULTS

The post-DAA strategy would prevent 8,667 cases of decompensated cirrhosis, 5,471 cases of hepatocellular carcinoma, 1,137 liver transplants and 9,608 liver-related deaths. The cohort of 51,900 patients would require investments of 1,606 and 1,230 million euros with the post-DAA and pre-DAA strategies, respectively. This would produce 819,674 and 665,703 QALYs.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of new DAA-based treatments in CHC patients during the first year after the implementation of the SPCHC significantly reduced long-term morbidity and mortality and increased quality of life; demonstrating that this plan is an efficient use of public health resources.

Cost-effectiveness of diagnostic and therapeutic interventions for chronic hepatitis C: a systematic review of model-based analyses

BACKGROUND

Decisions about which subgroup of chronic hepatitis C (CHC) patients should be treated with direct acting anti-viral agents (DAAs) have economic importance due to high drug prices. Treat-all DAA strategies for CHC have gained acceptance despite high drug acquisition costs. However, there are also costs associated with the surveillance of CHC to determine a subgroup of patients with significant impairment. The aim of this systematic review was to describe the modelling methods used and summarise results in cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) of both CHC treatment with DAAs and surveillance of liver disease.

METHODS

Electronic databases including Embase and Medline were searched from inception to May 2015. Eligible studies included models predicting costs and/or outcomes for interventions, surveillance, or management of people with CHC. Narrative and quantitative synthesis were conducted. Quality appraisal was conducted using validated checklists. The review was conducted following principles published by NHS Centre for Research and Dissemination.

RESULTS

Forty-one CEAs met the eligibility criteria for the review; 37 evaluated an intervention and four evaluated surveillance strategies for targeting DAA treatment to those likely to gain most benefit. Included studies were of variable quality mostly due to reporting omissions. Of the 37 CEAs, eight models that enabled comparative analysis were fully appraised and synthesized. These models provided non-unique cost-effectiveness estimates in a specific DAA comparison in a specific population defined in terms of genotype, prior treatment status, and presence or absence of cirrhosis. Marked heterogeneity in cost-effectiveness estimates was observed despite this stratification. Approximately half of the estimates suggested that DAAs were cost-effective considering a threshold of US$30,000 and 73% with threshold of US$50,000. Two models evaluating surveillance strategies suggested that treating all CHC patients regardless of the staging of liver disease could be cost-effective.

CONCLUSIONS

CEAs of CHC treatments need to better account for variability in their estimates. This analysis suggested that there are still circumstances where DAAs are not cost-effective. Surveillance in place of a treat-all strategy may still need to be considered as an option for deploying DAAs, particularly where acquisition cost is at the limit of affordability for a given health system.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of elbasvir-grazoprevir regimen for treating hepatitis C virus genotype 1 infection in stage 4-5 chronic kidney disease patients in France

Objective

To assess the cost-effectiveness of the elbasvir/grazoprevir (EBR/GZR) regimen in patients with genotype 1 chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection with severe and end-stage renal disease compared to no treatment.

Design

This study uses a health economic model to estimate the cost-effectiveness of treating previously untreated and treatment experienced chronic hepatitis C patients who have severe and end stage renal disease with the elbasvir-grazoprevir regimen versus no treatment in the French context. The lifetime homogeneous markovian model comprises of forty combined health states including hepatitis C virus and chronic kidney disease. The model parameters were from a multicentre randomized controlled trial, ANRS CO22 HEPATHER French cohort and literature. 1000 Monte Carlo simulations of patient health states for each treatment strategy are used for probabilistic sensitivity analysis and 95% confidence intervals calculations. The results were expressed in cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained.

Patients

The mean age of patients in the HEPATHER French cohort was 59.6 years and 56% of them were men. 22.3% of patients had a F0 fibrosis stage (no fibrosis), 24.1% a F1 stage (portal fibrosis without septa), 7.1% a F2 stage (portal fibrosis with few septa), 21.4% a F3 stage (numerous septa without fibrosis) and 25% a F4 fibrosis stage (compensated cirrhosis). Among these HCV genotype 1 patients, 30% had severe renal impairment stage 4, 33% had a severe renal insufficiency stage 5 and 37% had terminal severe renal impairment stage 5 treated by dialysis.

Intervention

Fixed-dose combination of direct-acting antiviral agents elbasvir and grazoprevir compared to no-treatment.

Results

EBR/GZR increased the number of life years (6.3 years) compared to no treatment (5.1 years) on a lifetime horizon. The total number of QALYs was higher for the new treatment because of better utility on health conditions (6.2 versus 3.7 QALYs). The incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) was of €15,212 per QALY gained for the base case analysis.

Conclusions

This cost-utility model is an innovative approach that simultaneously looks at the disease evolution of chronic hepatitis C and chronic kidney disease. EBR/GZR without interferon and ribavirin, produced the greatest benefit in terms of life expectancy and quality-adjusted life years (QALY) in treatment-naïve or experienced patients with chronic hepatitis C genotype 1 and stage 4–5 chronic kidney disease including dialysis patients. Based on shape of the acceptability curve, EBR/GZR can be considered cost-effective at a willingness to pay of €20,000 /QALY for patients with renal insufficiency with severe and end-stage renal disease compared to no treatment.

Direct-acting antivirals for chronic hepatitis C

BACKGROUND

Millions of people worldwide suffer from hepatitis C, which can lead to severe liver disease, liver cancer, and death. Direct-acting antivirals (DAAs), e.g. sofosbuvir, are relatively new and expensive interventions for chronic hepatitis C, and preliminary results suggest that DAAs may eradicate hepatitis C virus (HCV) from the blood (sustained virological response). Sustained virological response (SVR) is used by investigators and regulatory agencies as a surrogate outcome for morbidity and mortality, based solely on observational evidence. However, there have been no randomised trials that have validated that usage.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of DAAs in people with chronic HCV.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched for all published and unpublished trials in The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, LILACS, and BIOSIS; the Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), China Network Knowledge Information (CNKI), the Chinese Science Journal Database (VIP), Google Scholar, The Turning Research into Practice (TRIP) Database, ClinicalTrials.gov, European Medicines Agency (EMA) (www.ema.europa.eu/ema/), WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (www.who.int/ictrp), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) (www.fda.gov), and pharmaceutical company sources for ongoing or unpublished trials. Searches were last run in October 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials comparing DAAs versus no intervention or placebo, alone or with co-interventions, in adults with chronic HCV. We included trials irrespective of publication type, publication status, and language.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Our primary outcomes were hepatitis C-related morbidity, serious adverse events, and health-related quality of life. Our secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality, ascites, variceal bleeding, hepato-renal syndrome, hepatic encephalopathy, hepatocellular carcinoma, non-serious adverse events (each reported separately), and SVR. We systematically assessed risks of bias, performed Trial Sequential Analysis, and followed an eight-step procedure to assess thresholds for statistical and clinical significance. We evaluated the overall quality of the evidence, using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 138 trials randomising a total of 25,232 participants. The trials were generally short-term trials and designed primarily to assess the effect of treatment on SVR. The trials evaluated 51 different DAAs. Of these, 128 trials employed matching placebo in the control group. All included trials were at high risk of bias. Eighty-four trials involved DAAs on the market or under development (13,466 participants). Fifty-seven trials administered DAAs that were discontinued or withdrawn from the market. Study populations were treatment-naive in 95 trials, had been exposed to treatment in 17 trials, and comprised both treatment-naive and treatment-experienced individuals in 24 trials. The HCV genotypes were genotype 1 (119 trials), genotype 2 (eight trials), genotype 3 (six trials), genotype 4 (nine trials), and genotype 6 (one trial). We identified two ongoing trials.We could not reliably determine the effect of DAAs on the market or under development on our primary outcome of hepatitis C-related morbidity or all-cause mortality. There were no data on hepatitis C-related morbidity and only limited data on mortality from 11 trials (DAA 15/2377 (0.63%) versus control 1/617 (0.16%); OR 3.72, 95% CI 0.53 to 26.18, very low-quality evidence). We did not perform Trial Sequential Analysis on this outcome.There is very low quality evidence that DAAs on the market or under development do not influence serious adverse events (DAA 5.2% versus control 5.6%; OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.15 , 15,817 participants, 43 trials). The Trial Sequential Analysis showed that there was sufficient information to rule out that DAAs reduce the relative risk of a serious adverse event by 20% when compared with placebo. The only DAA that showed a lower risk of serious adverse events when meta-analysed separately was simeprevir (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.86). However, Trial Sequential Analysis showed that there was not enough information to confirm or reject a relative risk reduction of 20%, and when one trial with an extreme result was excluded, the meta-analysis result showed no evidence of a difference.DAAs on the market or under development may reduce the risk of no SVR from 54.1% in untreated people to 23.8% in people treated with DAA (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.52, 6886 participants, 32 trials, low quality evidence). Trial Sequential Analysis confirmed this meta-analysis result.Only 1/84 trials on the market or under development assessed the effects of DAAs on health-related quality of life (SF-36 mental score and SF-36 physical score).There was insufficient evidence from trials on withdrawn or discontinued DAAs to determine their effect on hepatitis C-related morbidity and all-cause mortality (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.79; 5 trials, very low-quality evidence). However, these DAAs seemed to increase the risk of serious adverse events (OR 1.45, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.73; 29 trials, very low-quality evidence). Trial Sequential Analysis confirmed this meta-analysis result.None of the 138 trials provided useful data to assess the effects of DAAs on the remaining secondary outcomes (ascites, variceal bleeding, hepato-renal syndrome, hepatic encephalopathy, and hepatocellular carcinoma).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence for our main outcomes of interest come from short-term trials, and we are unable to determine the effect of long-term treatment with DAAs. The rates of hepatitis C morbidity and mortality observed in the trials are relatively low and we are uncertain as to how DAAs affect this outcome. Overall, there is very low quality evidence that DAAs on the market or under development do not influence serious adverse events. There is insufficient evidence to judge if DAAs have beneficial or harmful effects on other clinical outcomes for chronic HCV. Simeprevir may have beneficial effects on risk of serious adverse event. In all remaining analyses, we could neither confirm nor reject that DAAs had any clinical effects. DAAs may reduce the number of people with detectable virus in their blood, but we do not have sufficient evidence from randomised trials that enables us to understand how SVR affects long-term clinical outcomes. SVR is still an outcome that needs proper validation in randomised clinical trials.

Distribution-Weighted Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Using Lifetime Health Loss

BACKGROUND

It is widely acknowledged that concerns for the worse off need to be integrated with the concern for cost effectiveness in priority setting, and several countries are seeking to do so. In Norway, a comprehensive framework for priority setting was recently proposed to specify the worse off in terms of lifetime loss of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). However, few studies have shown how to calculate such health losses, how to integrate health loss into cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) and how such integration impacts the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). The aim of this study was to do so.

METHODS

The proposed framework was applied to data from 15 recent economic evaluations of drugs. Available data were used to calculate the lifetime health loss of the target groups, and the proposed marginal weighting function was employed to adjust standard ICERs according to the size of this loss. Standard and weighted ICERs were compared to a threshold of US$35,000 per QALY gained.

RESULTS

Lifetime health loss can be calculated with the use of available data and integrated by a marginal weighting function with CEAs. Such integration affected standard ICERs to a varying degree and changed the number of interventions considered cost effective from three to eight.

CONCLUSION

Calculation of lifetime health loss and its integration with CEA is feasible and can influence the reimbursement and ranking of interventions. To facilitate regular integration, guidelines for economic evaluations could require (i) adjustment according to distributional concerns and (ii) that data on health loss are extracted directly from the models and reported. Generic databases on health loss could be developed alongside such efforts.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir in patients with chronic hepatitis C: Treatment of patients with absence or mild fibrosis compared to patients with advanced fibrosis

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir (LDV/SOF) in treatment-naïve patients with chronic hepatitis C (CHC) genotype 1 (GT1) in the absence or mild fibrosis (F0-F1) versus advanced fibrosis (F2-F4), from the perspective of the Spanish Health System. A Markov model was developed to simulate disease progression, estimating costs and outcomes [life years gained (LYG) and quality-adjusted life years (QALY)] derived from starting with LDV/SOF in patients with F0-F1 compared with F2-F4. Therapy duration was 8 weeks in noncirrhotic patients with viral load <6 million IU/mL and 12 weeks in the remaining patients. Sustained virologic response rates were obtained from real-world cohort studies. Transition probabilities, utilities and direct costs were obtained from the literature. A 3% annual discount rate was applied to costs and outcomes. Sensitivity analyses were performed. LDV/SOF in F0-F1 patients was a dominant strategy, being more effective (19.85 LYG and 19.80 QALY) than beginning treatment in F2-F4 patients (18.63 LYG and 16.25 QALY), generating savings of €9228 per patient (€3661 due to disease management and monitoring). In a cohort of 1000 patients, LDV/SOF in F0-F1 patients decreased the number of cases of decompensated cirrhosis (93%), hepatocellular carcinoma (97%) and liver-related deaths (95%) and prevented 6 liver transplants compared to initiating LDV/SOF in F2-F4 patients. In CHC treatment-naïve GT1 patients, starting treatment with LDV/SOF in patients with F0-F1 compared to those with F2-F4 increases effectiveness by 1.22 LYG and 3.55 QALY gained and reduces disease burden and it is associated with cost savings.

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.

Cost-effectiveness of combination daclatasvir-sofosbuvir for treatment of genotype 3 chronic hepatitis C infection in the United States

BACKGROUND

A phase III trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of Daklinza (daclatasvir or DCV) in combination with sofosbuvir (SOF) for treatment of genotype (GT) 3 hepatitis C virus (HCV) patients.

AIM

This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of DCV + SOF vs SOF in combination with ribavirin (RBV) over a 20-year time horizon from the perspective of a United States (US) payer.

METHODS

A published Markov model was adapted to reflect US demographic characteristics, treatment patterns, costs of drug acquisition, monitoring, disease and adverse event management, and mortality risks. Clinical inputs came from the ALLY-3 and VALENCE trials. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-utility ratio. Life-years, incidence of complications, number of patients achieving sustained virological response (SVR), and the total cost per SVR were secondary outcomes. Costs (2014 USD) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were discounted at 3% per year. Deterministic, probabilistic, and scenario sensitivity analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

DCV + SOF was associated with lower costs and better effectiveness than SOF + RBV in the base case and in almost all scenarios (i.e. treatment-experienced, non-cirrhotic, time horizons of 5, 10, and 80 years). DCV + SOF was less costly, but also slightly less effective than SOF + RBV in the cirrhotic and treatment-naïve population scenarios. Results were sensitive to variations in the probability of achieving SVR for both treatment arms. DCV + SOF costs less than $50,000 per QALY gained in 79% of all probabilistic iterations compared with SOF + RBV.

CONCLUSION

DCV + SOF is a dominant option compared with SOF + RBV in the US for the overall GT 3 HCV patient population.

Direct-acting antivirals for chronic hepatitis C

BACKGROUND

Millions of people worldwide suffer from hepatitis C, which can lead to severe liver disease, liver cancer, and death. Direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) are relatively new and expensive interventions for chronic hepatitis C, and preliminary results suggest that DAAs may eradicate hepatitis C virus (HCV) from the blood (sustained virological response). However, it is still questionable if eradication of hepatitis C virus in the blood eliminates hepatitis C in the body, and improves survival and leads to fewer complications.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of DAAs in people with chronic HCV.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched for all published and unpublished trials in The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, LILACS, and BIOSIS; the Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), China Network Knowledge Information (CNKI), the Chinese Science Journal Database (VIP), Google Scholar, The Turning Research into Practice (TRIP) Database, ClinicalTrials.gov, European Medicines Agency (EMA) (www.ema.europa.eu/ema/), WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (www.who.int/ictrp), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) (www.fda.gov), and pharmaceutical company sources for ongoing or unpublished trials. Searches were last run in October 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials comparing DAAs versus no intervention or placebo, alone or with co-interventions, in adults with chronic HCV. We included trials irrespective of publication type, publication status, and language.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Our primary outcomes were hepatitis C-related morbidity, serious adverse events, and quality of life. Our secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality, ascites, variceal bleeding, hepato-renal syndrome, hepatic encephalopathy, hepatocellular carcinoma, non-serious adverse events (each reported separately), and sustained virological response. We systematically assessed risks of bias, performed Trial Sequential Analysis, and followed an eight-step procedure to assess thresholds for statistical and clinical significance. The overall quality of the evidence was evaluated using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 138 trials randomising a total of 25,232 participants. The 138 trials assessed the effects of 51 different DAAs. Of these, 128 trials employed matching placebo in the control group. All included trials were at high risk of bias. Eighty-four trials involved DAAs on the market or under development (13,466 participants). Fifty-seven trials administered withdrawn or discontinued DAAs. Trial participants were treatment-naive (95 trials), treatment-experienced (17 trials), or both treatment-naive and treatment-experienced (24 trials). The HCV genotypes were genotype 1 (119 trials), genotype 2 (eight trials), genotype 3 (six trials), genotype 4 (nine trials), and genotype 6 (one trial). We identified two ongoing trials.Meta-analysis of the effects of all DAAs on the market or under development showed no evidence of a difference when assessing hepatitis C-related morbidity or all-cause mortality (OR 3.72, 95% CI 0.53 to 26.18, P = 0.19, I² = 0%, 2,996 participants, 11 trials, very low-quality evidence). As there were no data on hepatitis C-related morbidity and very few data on mortality (DAA 15/2377 (0.63%) versus control 1/617 (0.16%)), it was not possible to perform Trial Sequential Analysis on hepatitis C-related morbidity or all-cause mortality.Meta-analysis of all DAAs on the market or under development showed no evidence of a difference when assessing serious adverse events (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.15, P = 0.52, I² = 0%, 15,817 participants, 43 trials, very low-quality evidence). The Trial Sequential Analysis showed that the cumulative Z-score crossed the trial sequential boundary for futility, showing that there was sufficient information to rule out that DAAs compared with placebo reduced the relative risk of a serious adverse event by 20%. The only DAA that showed a significant difference on risk of serious adverse events when meta-analysed separately was simeprevir (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.86). However, Trial Sequential Analysis showed that there was not enough information to confirm or reject a relative risk reduction of 20%, and when one trial with an extreme result was excluded, then the meta-analysis result showed no evidence of a difference.DAAs on the market or under development seemed to reduce the risk of no sustained virological response (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.52, P < 0.00001, I² = 77%, 6886 participants, 32 trials, very low-quality evidence) and Trial Sequential Analysis confirmed this meta-analysis result.Only 1/84 trials on the market or under development assessed the effects of DAAs on health-related quality of life (SF-36 mental score and SF-36 physical score).Withdrawn or discontinued DAAs had no evidence of a difference when assessing hepatitis C-related morbidity and all-cause mortality (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.79, P = 0.40, I² = 0%; 5 trials, very low-quality evidence). However, withdrawn DAAs seemed to increase the risk of serious adverse events (OR 1.45, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.73, P = 0.001, I² = 0%, 29 trials, very low-quality evidence), and Trial Sequential Analysis confirmed this meta-analysis result.Most of all outcome results were short-term results; therefore, we could neither confirm nor reject any long-term effects of DAAs. None of the 138 trials provided useful data to assess the effects of DAAs on the remaining secondary outcomes (ascites, variceal bleeding, hepato-renal syndrome, hepatic encephalopathy, and hepatocellular carcinoma).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Overall, DAAs on the market or under development do not seem to have any effects on risk of serious adverse events. Simeprevir may have beneficial effects on risk of serious adverse event. In all remaining analyses, we could neither confirm nor reject that DAAs had any clinical effects. DAAs seemed to reduce the risk of no sustained virological response. The clinical relevance of the effects of DAAs on no sustained virological response is questionable, as it is a non-validated surrogate outcome. All trials and outcome results were at high risk of bias, so our results presumably overestimate benefit and underestimate harm. The quality of the evidence was very low.

Direct-Acting Antiviral Agents for Patients With Hepatitis C Virus Genotype 1 Infection Are Cost-Saving

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) are effective in treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 1 infection, but their cost and value have been debated. We performed a systematic review of published cost-effectiveness analyses of DAAs, synthesized their results with updated drug prices, and calculated the maximum price at which DAA therapy for HCV genotype 1 infection is cost-effective (increased quality-adjusted life-years [QALYs] and increased cost that the society is willing to pay) and cost-saving (increased QALYs and decreased costs).

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of the PubMed, Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane library, EconLit, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database, Health Technology Assessment, and Tufts University databases for cost-effectiveness analyses published from 2011 through 2015. Our analysis included cost effectiveness of DAAs versus previous standard-of-care regimens (peginterferon and ribavirin, boceprevir and telaprevir), or no treatment, performed for patients with HCV genotype 1 infection. We excluded studies that were not written in English or those that did not report QALYs. Reported incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) and treatment costs for each comparison were extracted; the threshold price was estimated for each analysis in which regimens were found to be cost-effective (ICER ≤$100,000/QALY) or cost-saving (ICER <$0), those that decreased costs and increased QALYs.

RESULTS

We identified 24 cost-effectiveness studies that reported 170 ICERs for combinations of 11 drugs, from 11 countries. Of those, 81 ICERs were determined for first-generation DAAs (boceprevir and telaprevir) and 89 ICERs were determined for second-generation DAAs (drugs approved after the first-generation DAAs) as a primary intervention. The median threshold prices at which first-generation and second-generation DAAs became cost-effective were estimated as $120,100 (interquartile range, $90,700-$176,800) and $227,200 (interquartile range, $142,800-$355,800), respectively. At the discounted price of $60,000, a total of 71% of the analyses found second-generation DAAs to be cost-saving and 22% to be cost-effective.

CONCLUSIONS

In a systematic review, we found treatment of HCV genotype 1 infection with second-generation DAAs to be cost-effective when they cost less than and $227,200; these drugs produced cost savings at current discounts.

Estimating cost-effectiveness associated with all-oral regimen for chronic hepatitis C in China

Background

All-oral regimens are associated with higher effectiveness and shorter treatment duration for chronic hepatitis C. Given its superior effect and enormous patients in China, clinicians or patients may be compelled to consider delaying treatment for all-oral regimen.

Objective

To estimate cost-effectiveness of delaying treatment for all-oral regimen in the subsequent years under different assumptions about their price and efficacy compared with standard of care in China.

Methods

A state-transition Markov model was developed to estimate lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and net monetary benefit (NB) were calculated. And sensitivity analyses were also performed to assess the impact of uncertainty.

Results

For treatment naive patients with Genotype 1, immediate treatment with all-oral regimen under assumed cost and efficacy at present was cost-effective compared with peginterferon α-2a (PegIFN) regimen at present with an ICER of $12536 per QALY gained and a positive NB of $6832 at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $21209. And it was more than 95% likely to be cost-effective if weekly drug cost was less than $1000. Moreover, patients delaying treatment for all-oral regimen in the 1^st year were associated with increase in QALYs of 0.62 and increase in cost of $10114 compared with initiating PegIFN regimen at present, which resulted in a positive NB of $3115.

Conclusion

From a payer perspective, all-oral regimen is associated with good long-term health and economic benefit for treatment-naive patients infected with HCV genotype 1. Particularly, if all-oral regimen would become available at lower price in the future, delaying treatment for all-oral regimen may be a good choice for patients in China.

Cost-effectiveness of elbasvir/grazoprevir use in treatment-naive and treatment-experienced patients with hepatitis C virus genotype 1 infection and chronic kidney disease in the United States

Among patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) in the United States, HCV infection causes significant morbidity and mortality and results in substantial healthcare costs. A once-daily oral regimen of elbasvir/grazoprevir (EBR/GZR) for 12 weeks was found to be a safe and efficacious treatment for HCV in patients with CKD. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of EBR/GZR in treatment-naïve and treatment-experienced CKD patients compared with no treatment (NoTx) and pegylated interferon plus ribavirin (peg-IFN/RBV) using a computer-based model of the natural history of chronic HCV genotype 1 infection, CKD and liver disease. Data on baseline characteristics of the simulated patients were obtained from NHANES, 2000-2010. Model inputs were estimated from published studies. Cost of treatment with EBR/GZR and peg-INF/RBV were based on wholesale acquisition cost. All costs were from a third-party payer perspective and were expressed in 2015 U.S. dollars. We estimated lifetime incidence of liver-related complications, liver transplantation, kidney transplantation, end-stage live disease mortality and end-stage renal disease mortality; lifetime quality-adjusted life years (QALY); and incremental cost-utility ratios (ICUR). The model predicted that EBR/GZR will significantly reduce the incidence of liver-related complications and prolong life in patients with chronic HCV genotype 1 infection and CKD compared with NoTx or use of peg-IFN/RBV. EBR/GZR-based regimens resulted in higher average remaining QALYs and higher costs (11.5716, $191 242) compared with NoTx (8.9199, $156 236) or peg-INF/RBV (10.2857, $186 701). Peg-IFN/RBV is not cost-effective, and the ICUR of EBR/GZR compared with NoTx was $13 200/QALY. Treatment of a patient on haemodialysis with EBR/GZR resulted in a higher ICUR ($217 000/QALY). Assuming a threshold of $100 000 per QALY gained for cost-effectiveness, use of elbasvir/grazoprevir to treat an average patient with CKD can be considered cost-effective in the United States.

The cost-effectiveness of testing for NS5a resistance-associated polymorphisms at baseline in genotype 1a-infected (treatment-naïve and treatment-experienced) subjects treated with all-oral elbasvir/grazoprevir regimens in the United States

BACKGROUND

The presence of baseline NS5A resistance-associated variants (RAVs) impacted treatment response in HCV genotype 1a (GT1a)-infected patients treated with elbasvir/grazoprevir (EBR/GZR) for 12 weeks, but not patients treated with EBR/GZR and ribavirin (RBV) for 16 weeks.

AIMS

To assess the cost-effectiveness of baseline testing for NS5A RAVs in EBR/GZR-treated patients compared without testing, and with current treatments for GT1a patients.

METHODS

We simulated the course of treatment with EBR/GZR, ledipasvir/sofosbuvir (LDV/SOF) and ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir+dasabuvir (3D) with or without RBV and natural history of disease of GT1a patients. Treatment-related data from clinical trials were used in a state-transition model of the natural history of chronic HCV GT1a infection and liver disease to project lifetime costs (US$2015) and quality-adjusted life years (QALY). Other clinical and economic inputs were estimated from published sources. We conducted base case and sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

RAVs testing-guided treatment with EBR/GZR resulted in more QALYs than EBR/GZR without testing, 3D+RBV, or LDV/SOF8. This strategy was cost-saving relative to 3D+RBV or LDV/SOF8 and was cost-effective compared with EBR/GZR without testing. LDV/SOF12 was not cost-effective compared with the EBR/GZR RAVs testing-based strategy. Treatment with EBR/GZR guided by RAVs testing is the most effective regimen among treatment-experienced patients without cirrhosis and cirrhotic patients. In sensitivity analysis, RAVs testing was cost-effective in 48-55% and 63-85% among noncirrhotic and cirrhotic patients respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

RAVs testing before treatment with EBR/GZR is likely to be a cost-effective alternative to the use of EBR/GZR without testing, LDV/SOF, or 3D among GT1a treatment-naïve or treatment-experienced patients.

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.

Value of Treating All Stages of Chronic Hepatitis C: A Comprehensive Review of Clinical and Economic Evidence

INTRODUCTION

The goal of chronic hepatitis C (CHC) treatment is to achieve a sustained virologic response (SVR). The new generation of direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) offers 90-100% SVR rates. However, access to these treatments is generally limited to patients with advanced liver disease. The aim of this review is to provide an overview of the clinical and economic benefits of achieving SVR and to better understand the full value of CHC treatment in all stages of liver disease.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature review was performed using the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library databases to identify articles examining the clinical, economic, and quality of life benefits associated with SVR. Articles were limited to those published in English language from January 2006 through January 2016. Inclusion criteria were (1) patients with CHC, (2) retrospective and prospective studies, (3) reporting of mortality, liver morbidity, extrahepatic manifestations (EHMs), and economic outcomes and, (4) availability of an abstract or full-text publication.

RESULTS

Overall this review identified 354 studies involving more than 500,000 CHC patients worldwide. Evidence from 38 studies (n = 73,861) shows a significant mortality benefit of achieving SVR in patients with all stages of fibrosis. Long-term studies with follow-up of 5-12 years suggest that, particularly among non-cirrhotic patients, there is a significant decrease in mortality in SVR versus non-SVR groups. Ninety-nine studies conducted in 235,891 CHC patients in all stages of fibrosis show that SVR reduces liver-related mortality, incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and decompensation. A total of 233 studies show that chronic HCV infection is associated with several serious EHMs, some of which can have high mortality. Evidence from four modeling studies shows that delaying treatment to CHC patient populations could significantly increase mortality, morbidity, and medical costs.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a robust body of evidence demonstrating diverse sources of value from achieving SVR in all stages of liver disease. While access to treatment is generally limited to late-stage patients, less restrictive treatment strategies that target HCV eradication have the potential to abate the burdens of mortality, liver morbidity and extrahepatic manifestations, and the associated healthcare costs.

Cost-Effectiveness of Hepatitis C Treatment for People Who Inject Drugs and the Impact of the Type of Epidemic; Extrapolating from Amsterdam, the Netherlands

BACKGROUND

People who inject drugs (PWID) are disproportionally affected by the hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. The efficacy of HCV treatment has significantly improved in recent years with the introduction of direct-acting antivirals (DAAs). However, DAAs are more costly than pegylated-interferon and ribavirin (PegIFN/RBV). We aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of four HCV treatment strategies among PWID and treatment scale-up.

METHODS

An individual-based model was used describing HIV and HCV transmission and disease progression among PWID. We considered two epidemiological situations. A declining epidemic, based on the situation in Amsterdam, the Netherlands, and a stable HCV epidemic, as observed in other settings. Data on HCV incidence, prevalence, treatment setting and uptake were derived from observed data among PWID in Amsterdam. We assessed the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER, costs in €/quality-adjusted life year (QALY)) of four treatment strategies: 1) PegIFN/RBV; 2) sofosbuvir/RBV for genotype 2-3 and dual DAA for genotype 1-4; 3) Dual DAA for all genotypes; 4) Dual DAA with 3x treatment uptake.

RESULTS

In both types of epidemic, dual DAA therapy was most cost-effective strategy. In the declining epidemic, dual DAA yielded an ICER of 344 €/QALY while in the stable epidemic dual DAA led to cost-savings. Scaling-up treatment was also highly cost-effective. Our results were robust over a range of sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSION

HCV treatment with DAA-containing regimens is a highly cost-effective intervention among PWID. Based on the economic and population benefits of scaling-up treatment, stronger efforts are needed to achieve higher uptake rates among PWID.

Cost-effectiveness of strategy-based approach to treatment of genotype 1 chronic hepatitis C

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The high cost of chronic hepatitis C (HCV) direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) poses significant financial challenges for health payers, especially in Asia. A personalized treatment strategy based on individualized probability of virological response using oral DAAs as second-line therapy would seem practical but has not been studied.

METHODS

We performed a Markov model to project health outcomes and costs for patients with genotype 1 HCV through 10 treatment strategies over a lifetime period. The implication of retreatment was also incorporated to reflect real-life situation.

RESULTS

Using boceprevir and peginterferon/ribavirin (BOC/PR, the least costly treatment) as a base case, the all-oral therapies such as ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir-dasabuvir are cost-effective with an incremental cost-effective ratio of $US50 828. However, the all-oral DAAs would no longer be cost-effective compared with conventional therapies if retreatment were taken into account. A road map strategy using rapid virological response to guide use of BOC/PR and sofosbuvir/PR had the most favorable incremental cost-effective ratio ($US27 782) relative to BOC/PR. Nevertheless, the trade-off with the cost-effectiveness of the road map strategy is an increased number of liver-related deaths compared with all-oral DAAs (52 vs 10-20 per 10 000 patients) by incorporating retreatment.

CONCLUSIONS

The 12-week all-oral DAAs were cost-effective options using conventional drug-to-drug comparison. However, they cease to be cost-effective when treatment strategies incorporating DAA retreatment for interferon failures are incorporated. HCV management can be optimized by adopting individualized treatment algorithm providing a practical solution to health payers to make oral DAAs accessible to those who need them most.

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.

Systematic Review of Modelling Approaches for the Cost Effectiveness of Hepatitis C Treatment with Direct-Acting Antivirals

BACKGROUND

New direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) are highly effective for hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment. However, their prices have been widely debated. Decision-analytic models can project the long-term value of HCV treatment. Therefore, understanding of the methods used in these models and how they could influence results is important.

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to describe and systematically review the methodological approaches in published cost-effectiveness models of chronic HCV treatment with DAAs.

DATA SOURCES

We searched several electronic databases, including Medline, Embase and EconLit, from 2011 to 2015.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY

Study selection was performed by two reviewers independently. We included any cost-effectiveness analysis comparing DAAs with the old standard of care for HCV treatment. We excluded non-English-language studies and studies not reporting quality-adjusted life-years.

STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHOD

One reviewer collected data and assessed the quality of reporting, using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement. Another reviewer crosschecked the abstracted information. The development methods of the included studies were synthetized on the basis of good modelling practice recommendations.

RESULTS

Review of 304 citations revealed 36 cost-effectiveness analyses. The reporting quality scores of most articles were rated as acceptable, between 67 and 100 %. The majority of the studies were conducted in Europe (50 %), followed by the USA (44 %). Fifty-six percent of the 36 studies evaluated the cost effectiveness of HCV treatment in both treatment-naive and treatment-experienced patients, 97 % included genotype 1 patients and 53 % evaluated the cost effectiveness of second-generation or oral DAAs in comparison with the previous standard of care or other DAAs. Twenty-one models defined health states in terms of METAVIR fibrosis scores. Only one study used a discrete-event simulation approach, and the remainder used state-transition models. The time horizons varied; however, 89 % of studies used a lifetime horizon. One study was conducted from a societal perspective. Thirty-three percent of studies did not conduct any model validation. We also noted that none of the studies modelled HCV treatment as a prevention strategy, 86 % of models did not consider the possibility of re-infection with HCV after successful treatment, 97 % of studies did not consider indirect economic benefits resulting from HCV treatment and none of the studies evaluating oral DAAs used real-world data.

LIMITATIONS

The search was limited by date (from 1 January 2011 to 8 September 2015) and was also limited to English-language and published reports.

CONCLUSIONS

Most modelling studies used a similar modelling structure and could have underestimated the value of HCV treatment. Future modelling efforts should consider the benefits of HCV treatment in preventing transmission, extra-hepatic and indirect economic benefits of HCV treatment, real-world cost-effectiveness analysis and cost effectiveness of HCV treatment in low- and middle-income countries.

[Cost-effectiveness analysis of sofosbuvir, peginterferon and ribavirin in patients with chronic hepatitis C: Early treatment in the initial stage of fibrosis vs. delayed treatment in advanced fibrosis]

AIMS

Cost-effectiveness analysis of sofosbuvir combined with peginterferon alpha-2a and ribavirin (SOF/Peg-IFN/RBV) in early versus advanced fibrosis in previously untreated patients with chronic hepatitis C genotype 1 (CHC-GT1), from the perspective of the Spanish National Health System (NHS).

METHODS

A Markov model was developed to compare lifetime costs and outcomes (life years gained [LYGs] and quality-adjusted life years [QALYs]) of 2 treatment strategies: SOF/Peg-IFN/RBV administered during early fibrosis (mild-moderate fibrosis; F2-F3) or advanced fibrosis (cirrhosis; F4). Efficacy (sustained virologic response), annual transition probabilities, disease management costs and utilities were obtained from the literature. Costs and outcomes were discounted annually at 3%. Direct costs were considered, expressed in Euros (€, 2014). Probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) was also performed.

RESULTS

SOF/Peg-IFN/RBV therapy at F2-F3 was more effective (19.12 LYGs and 14.14 QALYs) compared to F4. In a cohort of 1,000 patients, SOF/Peg-IFN/RBV prevented 66 cases of decompensated cirrhosis, 60 hepatocellular carcinomas and 4 liver transplantations compared with therapy in advanced fibrosis. The total lifetime cost of early therapy (€43,263) was less than the cost of treatment in the advanced stage (€49,018). Early therapy was a dominant strategy, more effective and less costly in all simulations. In the PSA analysis, administration of SOF/PEG-IFN/RBV at F2-F3 was dominant in all simulations.

CONCLUSIONS

Starting SOF/Peg-IFN/RBV therapy at F2-F3, compared with therapy at F4, reduced the incidence of liver disease complications and was associated with cost savings for the Spanish NHS in CHC-GT1 patients.

Vitamin D and chronic hepatitis C: effects on success rate and prevention of side effects associated with pegylated interferon-α and ribavirin

Chronic hepatitis C (CHC) is one of the most common causes of liver diseases worldwide, affecting 3% of the world population and 3 to 4 million people acquire new infection annually. Despite the recent introduction of novel antiviral drugs for the treatment of CHC, these drugs are expensive and the access to them is not an option for many patients. Hence, the traditional therapy by pegylated interferon-α (Peg-IFN-α) and ribavirin may still have a role in the clinical management of CHC especially in developing countries. However, this standard therapy is associated with several severe extra-hepatic side effects and the most common adverse events are hematological abnormalities and thyroid disorders and they could result in dose reduction and/or termination of therapy. Vitamin D has been shown to be a key regulatory element of the immune system, and its serum concentrations correlate with the severity of liver damage and the development of liver fibrosis/cirrhosis. Furthermore, supplementation with vitamin D with Peg-IFN-α based therapy for the treatment of CHC could be beneficial in increase the response rate to Peg-INF-α based therapy. Vitamin D has also been shown to regulate the thyroid functions and the process of erythropoiesis. This review appraises the data to date researching the role of vitamin D during the treatment of CHC and the potential role of vitamin D in preventing/treating Peg-IFN-α induced thyroiditis and anemia during the course of treatment.

Boceprevir for Chronic Genotype 1 Hepatitis C Virus in the Current Health Care Setting in Greece: A Cost-effectiveness Analysis

PURPOSE

Boceprevir, as an add-on to the standard of care (SOC) for chronic genotype 1 hepatitis C virus (G1 HCV), pegylated interferon + ribavirin for 48 weeks (PEG + RBV), has been reported to have a clinical profile superior to that of SOC alone. The objective of the present study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of triple therapy with PEG + RBV + boceprevir to that of SOC in treatment-naive and treatment-experienced patients with G1 HCV in Greece.

METHODS

A Markov model that simulated the quality-adjusted life expectancy and corresponding costs of treating G1 HCV infection provided the basis of the analysis. Treatment strategies under consideration were those in the Phase III boceprevir trials: (1) boceprevir response-guided therapy (shortened treatment duration for early responders); (2) fixed-duration (4-week) SOC plus 44 weeks of triple therapy; and (3) 48-week SOC. Efficacy data and the baseline characteristics of the study population were based on data from the SPRINT-2 (Serine Protease Inhibitor Therapy 2) and RESPOND-2 (Retreatment with HCV Serine Protease Inhibitor Boceprevir and PegIntron/Rebetol 2) clinical trials. Health care resource utilization and costs reflect the local clinical setting, with a 3% discount per annum, and were assessed from a third-party payer perspective.

FINDINGS

Triple therapy was projected to reduce liver complications (eg, decompensated cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma, need for liver transplantation, and liver-related death) by 44% to 45% and 49% to 53% in treatment-naive and treatment-experienced patients, respectively, over a lifetime horizon, leading to corresponding gains of 0.87 and 1.25 quality-adjusted life-years gained per patient. Taking into account the costs of medications, treatment, and outcomes management, the estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of triple therapy versus SOC were €10,003 and €10,852 per quality-adjusted life-years gained in treatment-naïve and treatment-experienced patients. Extensive sensitivity analyses suggested that the findings were robust over a wide range of inputs.

IMPLICATIONS

Based on the findings from the present analysis, the addition of boceprevir to PEG + RBV for the treatment of patients with G1 HCV may be a cost-effective alternative in the health care setting in Greece.

Activins and Follistatin in Chronic Hepatitis C and Its Treatment with Pegylated-Interferon-α Based Therapy

Pegylated-interferon-α based therapy for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C (CHC) is considered suboptimal as not all patients respond to the treatment and it is associated with several side effects that could lead to dose reduction and/or termination of therapy. The currently used markers to monitor the response to treatment are based on viral kinetics and their performance in the prediction of treatment outcome is moderate and does not combine accuracy and their values have several limitations. Hence, the development of new sensitive and specific predictor markers could provide a useful tool for the clinicians and healthcare providers, especially in the new era of interferon-free therapy, for the classification of patients according to their response to the standard therapy and only subscribing the novel directly acting antiviral drugs to those who are anticipated not to respond to the conventional therapy and/or have absolute contraindications for its use. The importance of activins and follistatin in the regulation of immune system, liver biology, and pathology has recently emerged. This review appraises the up-to-date knowledge regarding the role of activins and follistatin in liver biology and immune system and their role in the pathophysiology of CHC.

Cost-effectiveness and budget impact of hepatitis C virus treatment with sofosbuvir and ledipasvir in the United States

BACKGROUND

Sofosbuvir and ledipasvir, which have recently been approved for treatment of chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection, are more efficacious and safer than the old standard of care (oSOC) but are substantially more expensive. Whether and in which patients their improved efficacy justifies their increased cost is unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness and budget impact of sofosbuvir and ledipasvir.

DESIGN

Microsimulation model of the natural history of HCV infection.

DATA SOURCES

Published literature.

TARGET POPULATION

Treatment-naive and treatment-experienced HCV population defined on the basis of HCV genotype, age, and fibrosis distribution in the United States.

TIME HORIZON

Lifetime.

PERSPECTIVE

Third-party payer.

INTERVENTION

Simulation of sofosbuvir-ledipasvir compared with the oSOC (interferon-based therapies).

OUTCOME MEASURES

Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), and 5-year spending on antiviral drugs.

RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS

Sofosbuvir-based therapies added 0.56 QALY relative to the oSOC at an ICER of $55 400 per additional QALY. The ICERs ranged from $9700 to $284 300 per QALY depending on the patient's status with respect to treatment history, HCV genotype, and presence of cirrhosis. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000 per QALY, sofosbuvir-based therapies were cost-effective in 83% of treatment-naive and 81% of treatment-experienced patients. Compared with the oSOC, treating eligible HCV-infected persons in the United States with the new drugs would cost an additional $65 billion in the next 5 years, whereas the resulting cost offsets would be $16 billion.

RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS

Results were sensitive to drug price, drug efficacy, and quality of life after successful treatment.

LIMITATION

Data on real-world effectiveness of new antivirals are lacking.

CONCLUSION

Treatment of HCV is cost-effective in most patients, but additional resources and value-based patient prioritization are needed to manage patients with HCV.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

National Institutes of Health.

Cost-effectiveness of novel regimens for the treatment of hepatitis C virus

BACKGROUND

New regimens for hepatitis C virus (HCV) have shorter treatment durations and increased rates of sustained virologic response compared with existing therapies but are extremely expensive.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of these treatments under different assumptions about their price and efficacy.

DESIGN

Discrete-event simulation.

DATA SOURCES

Published literature.

TARGET POPULATION

Treatment-naive patients infected with chronic HCV genotype 1, 2, or 3.

TIME HORIZON

Lifetime.

PERSPECTIVE

Societal.

INTERVENTION

Usual care (boceprevir-ribavirin-pegylated interferon [PEG]) was compared with sofosbuvir-ribavirin-PEG and 3 PEG-free regimens: sofosbuvir-simeprevir, sofosbuvir-daclatasvir, and sofosbuvir-ledipasvir. For genotypes 2 and 3, usual care (ribavirin-PEG) was compared with sofosbuvir-ribavirin, sofosbuvir-daclatasvir, and sofosbuvir-ledipasvir-ribavirin (genotype 3 only).

OUTCOME MEASURES

Discounted costs (in 2014 U.S. dollars), quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios.

RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS

Assuming sofosbuvir, simeprevir, daclatasvir, and ledipasvir cost $7000, $5500, $5500, and $875 per week, respectively, sofosbuvir-ledipasvir was cost-effective for genotype 1 and cost $12 825 more per QALY than usual care. For genotype 2, sofosbuvir-ribavirin and sofosbuvir-daclatasvir cost $110 000 and $691 000 per QALY, respectively. For genotype 3, sofosbuvir-ledipasvir-ribavirin cost $73 000 per QALY, sofosbuvir-ribavirin was more costly and less effective than usual care, and sofosbuvir-daclatasvir cost more than $396 000 per QALY at assumed prices.

RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS

Sofosbuvir-ledipasvir was the optimal strategy in most simulations for genotype 1 and would be cost-saving if sofosbuvir cost less than $5500. For genotype 2, sofosbuvir-ribavirin-PEG would be cost-saving if sofosbuvir cost less than $2250 per week. For genotype 3, sofosbuvir-ledipasvir-ribavirin would be cost-saving if sofosbuvir cost less than $1500 per week.

LIMITATION

Data are lacking on real-world effectiveness of new treatments and some prices.

CONCLUSION

From a societal perspective, novel treatments for HCV are cost-effective compared with usual care for genotype 1 and probably genotype 3 but not for genotype 2.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

CVS Health.

A cost-effectiveness model to personalize antiviral therapy in naive patients with genotype 1 chronic hepatitis C

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Rapid virologic response is the best predictor of sustained virologic response with dual therapy in genotype-1 chronic hepatitis C, and its evaluation was proposed to tailor triple therapy in F0-F2 patients. Bio-mathematical modelling of viral dynamics during dual therapy has potentially higher accuracy than rapid virologic in the identification of patients who will eventually achieve sustained response. Study's objective was the cost-effectiveness analysis of a personalized therapy in naïve F0-F2 patients with chronic hepatitis C based on a bio-mathematical model (model-guided strategy) rather than on rapid virologic response (guideline-guided strategy).

METHODS

A deterministic bio-mathematical model of the infected cell dynamics was validated in a cohort of 135 patients treated with dual therapy. A decision-analytic economic model was then developed to compare model-guided and guideline-guided strategies in the Italian setting.

RESULTS

The outcomes of the cost-effectiveness analysis with model-guided and guideline-guided strategy were 19.1-19.4 and 18.9-19.3 quality-adjusted-life-years. Total per-patient lifetime costs were €25,200-€26,000 with model-guided strategy and €28,800-€29,900 with guideline-guided strategy. When comparing model-guided with guideline-guided strategy the former resulted more effective and less costly.

CONCLUSIONS

The adoption of the bio-mathematical predictive criterion has the potential to improve the cost-effectiveness of a personalized therapy for chronic hepatitis C, reserving triple therapy for those patients who really need it.

Impact of IL28B on the treatment decision in naïve and experienced patients with genotype 1 and 4 chronic hepatitis C in real-life clinical practice: a prospective multicenter cohort

BACKGROUND

The impact of the IL28B genotype on the real-life treatment decisions for patients infected with the hepatitis C virus (HCV) is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To prospectively analyze the impact of IL28B genotype in HCV genotype 1 (G1)- or 4 (G4)-infected patients using buccal epithelial cell samples in real-life clinical practices.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From October 2011 to March 2013, 1007 CHC patients were included among 127 French clinical centers.

RESULTS

The IL28B CC, CT, and TT genotype distribution was 252 (25%), 576 (57%), and 177 (18%), respectively. The treatment decisions were recorded and matched with the initial intentions for 433 patients. Multivariate analysis on intention to start treatment showed that patients with HCV G4 were less likely to be intended to be treated than HCV G1 patients (odds ratio [OR]=0.43 [95% CI 0.19-0.97], P=0.04); similarly HIV-HCV coinfected patients were less likely to be intended to be treated than HCV monoinfected patients (OR=0.20 [0.09-0.41], P<.0001); conversely, F3-F4 patients were more likely to be intended to be treated than F0-F2 patients (OR=2.24 [1.29-3.89], P=0.004). Multivariate analysis on final decision to treat showed that Patients with F3-F4 were more likely to be treated than others (OR=2.06 [1.26-3.38], P=0.004). Conversely, although P-values are not significant, patients recruited in public hospitals tended to be less treated (OR=0.65 [0.40-1.04], P=0.069), similarly to HIV-HCV coinfected patients (OR=0.55 [0.28-1.11], P=0.095).

CONCLUSION

Our study showed that the IL28B genotype is used for the management of HCV-infected patients. In the context of future treatments, IL28B genotyping may remain useful if it can be used to develop individualized treatment strategies, identifying patients who can be successfully treated with shorter, simpler, or cheaper regimens.

Ribavirin induced anaemia: the effect of vitamin D supplementation on erythropoietin and erythrocyte indices in normal Wistar rat

OBJECTIVES

To measure the effect of vitamin D3 (VitD) supplementation on erythrocyte indices, serum and kidney erythropoietin (EPO) in normal rats treated with Pegylated interferon-α (Peg-INF-α) and ribavirin (RBV).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Eighty male Wistar rats were divided equally into 8 groups. 'Control'; 'P': only received Peg-INF-α; 'PD': Peg-INF-α/VitD; 'PR': Peg-INF-α/RBV; 'PRD': Peg-INF-α/RBV/VitD; 'R': only received RBV; 'RD': RBV/VitD and 'VitD': only received vitamin D3. Peg-INF-α-2a was injected subcutaneously (6 µg/rat/week) for 4 weeks. RBV (4 mg/rat/day) and VitD (500 IU/rat/day) were given orally for 5 weeks. Blood samples were collected to measure erythrocyte indices and serum 25(OH) vitamin D. EPO was measured in serum samples and kidney specimens by ELISA.

RESULTS

Peg-INF-α alone did not affect the RBCs count, haemoglobin, serum and kidney EPO compared to control (P > 0.05). RBV significantly decreased (P < 0.05) the erythrocyte count, haemoglobin and EPO levels in kidney and serum, either individually (R group) or combined with Peg-INF-α (PR group), compared to 'Control' and 'P' groups. VitD prevented the development of anaemia and significantly increased the concentrations of EPO at serum and kidney levels in the 'RD' and 'PRD' groups compared to 'R' and 'PR' groups. There was a significant positive correlation between blood levels of VitD with serum and kidney EPO, Red cell count and haemoglobin concentrations.

CONCLUSION

VitD could have a potential beneficial role in the prevention of ribavirin-induced anaemia by promoting endogenous EPO. Further studies are needed to explore the role of vitamin D in the prevention of ribavirin associated anaemia.

Cost-effectiveness of boceprevir co-administration versus pegylated interferon-α2b and ribavirin only for patients with hepatitis C genotype 1 in Singapore

BACKGROUND

Patients infected with chronic HCV genotype 1 experience liver complications as the disease progresses. This study aims to project the long-term reduction of liver complications and cost-effectiveness of treatment strategies, including co-administrating boceprevir (BOC) with pegylated interferon-α2b (PEG-IFN) and ribavirin compared with standard of care (SOC) of PEG-IFN and ribavirin only.

METHODS

A Markov model was created to estimate the expected costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) associated with treatment strategies outlined in the BOC package insert in Singapore. Patient characteristics were from pivotal trials, the transition probabilities and QALYs were estimated from publications, and the pharmaceutical and health status costs were obtained from a public hospital in Singapore. The threshold of cost-effectiveness was chosen as 65,000 SGD for this study.

RESULTS

For treatment-naive patients, BOC is highly cost-effective compared with SOC (179 SGD/QALY) and cost-saving for patients who have failed prior treatment, due to higher QALYs from better sustained virological response (SVR) and lower costs from avoidance of complications. Sub-group analyses show that BOC is cost-effective for non-cirrhotic treatment-experienced patients and null responders. It out-performs SOC for treatment-naive non-cirrhotic and cirrhotic patients who have failed prior treatment. Even after adjusting for higher prevalence of favourable IL28B genotype in Asians, BOC is cost-effective compared with SOC. Only untreated cirrhotic patients showed inconclusive cost-effectiveness for BOC.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with SOC, BOC prevents more HCV liver complications from HCV genotype 1, particularly in patients who have failed previous SOC. Improved SVR and shortened duration of treatment result in BOC being potentially cost-saving or cost-effective in an Asian population.

Serum Activins and Follistatin during the Treatment of Chronic Hepatitis C Genotypes 1 and 4 and Their Correlations with Viral Load and Liver Enzymes: A Preliminary Report

Aims. To measure the effect of pegylated interferon-α therapy on serum activin-A, activin-B, and follistatin and their correlation with viral load and liver fibrosis in chronic hepatitis C (CHC). Methods. This study was cross-sectional and sera were collected from 165 participants classified into 7 groups: 40 healthy negative control, 33 treatment naïve patients as positive control, 19 patients at week 4, 22 at week 12, and 19 at week 24 of treatment initiation and 21 responders and 11 nonresponders at the end of 48-week treatment protocol. Serum candidate proteins were measured using ELISA and liver fibrosis was assessed by AST platelet ratio index (APRI). Results. CHC significantly increased activins and decreased follistatin compared to negative control (P < 0.05). Activin-A and follistatin levels returned to the levels of negative control group at weeks 4, 12, and 24 following treatment initiation and were significantly different from positive control (P < 0.05). Both proteins were significantly different between responders and nonresponders. Activin-A correlated positively and significantly with the viral load and APRI. Conclusion. CHC modulates serum activin-A and follistatin and they appear to be influenced by pegylated interferon-α therapy. Further studies are needed to explore the role of activins in CHC.

Cost-effectiveness of viral hepatitis B & C treatment

With the availability of effective antiviral therapies for chronic viral hepatitis B and C, cost-effectiveness studies have been performed to assess the outcomes and costs of these therapies to support health policy. It is now accepted that treatment of active CHB is cost-effective versus no treatment, although there are a variety of options. And with the new developments around CHC treatment and diagnostic tools it is of interest to both the clinician and policy makers to know both the costs and effects of these choices. The purpose of this article is to provide the reader with an insight into the recent treatment developments and cost-effectiveness issues related to chronic hepatitis B and C treatment, and an overview of recent cost-effectiveness studies evolving around HBV and HCV therapy.

Cost-effectiveness of boceprevir in patients previously treated for chronic hepatitis C genotype 1 infection in the United States

OBJECTIVES

The phase 3 trial, Serine Protease Inhibitor Boceprevir and PegIntron/Rebetol-2 (RESPOND-2), demonstrated that the addition of boceprevir (BOC) to peginterferon-ribavirin (PR) resulted in significantly higher rates of sustained virologic response (SVR) in previously treated patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype-1 infection as compared with PR alone. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of treatment with BOC in previously treated patients with chronic hepatitis C in the United States using treatment-related data from RESPOND-2 and PROVIDE studies.

METHODS

We developed a Markov cohort model to project the burden of HCV disease, lifetime costs, and quality-adjusted life-years associated with PR and two BOC-based therapies-response-guided therapy (BOC/RGT) and fixed-duration therapy for 48 weeks (BOC/PR48). We estimated treatment-related inputs (efficacy, adverse events, and discontinuations) from clinical trials and obtained disease progression rates, costs, and quality-of-life data from published studies. We estimated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for BOC-based regimens as studied in RESPOND-2, as well as by patient's prior response to treatment and the IL-28B genotype.

RESULTS

BOC-based regimens were projected to reduce the lifetime incidence of liver-related complications by 43% to 53% in comparison with treatment with PR. The ICER of BOC/RGT in comparison with that of PR was $30,200, and the ICER of BOC/PR48 in comparison with that of BOC/RGT was $91,500. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000, the probabilities of BOC/RGT and BOC/PR48 being the preferred option were 0.74 and 0.25, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients previously treated for chronic HCV genotype-1 infection, BOC was projected to increase quality-adjusted life-years and reduce the lifetime incidence of liver complications. In addition, BOC-based therapies were projected to be cost-effective in comparison with PR alone at commonly used willingness-to-pay thresholds.