Cost-effectiveness of sofosbuvir-based treatments for chronic hepatitis C in the US

Bothropstoxins I and II as potent phospholipase A2 molecules from Bothrops jararacussu to impair Hepatitis C virus infection

Hepatitis C is a hepatological disorder induced by the Hepacivirus hominis (Hepatitis C virus, HCV), with approximately 170 million individuals estimated to be presently affected globally. The current treatment for infected patients primarily relies on direct-acting antivirals (DAAs). However, this treatment is marked by its high cost, numerous side effects, and documented instances of antiviral resistance. These challenges underscore the imperative for developing novel therapeutic strategies. In this framework, naturally occurring compounds have exhibited considerable medical significance attributable to their biological functionalities. Compounds extracted from snake venoms have evidenced antiviral efficacy against a variety of viral pathogens including Orthoflavivirus denguei (DENV), Orthoflavivirus flavi (YFV), Orthoflavivirus zikaense (ZIKV), and HCV. Here, the activity of 10 proteins isolated from snakes' venom of Bothrops genus were evaluated against HCV replicative cycle. The full-length JFH-1 HCV system was used to infect the Huh-7.5 cell. Cell viability was measured simultaneously through MTT assay. Eight compounds inhibited up to 99% of HCV infection, being the most potent inhibitory rates observed in BthTX-I and BthTX-II, with an SI of 13.5 and 1736, respectively, being able to block 84.7% and 96% of HCV infectivity, in the same order. BthTX-II also demonstrated a protective effect in cells treated prior to HCV infection of approximately 86.7%. Molecular docking calculations suggest interactions between the two proteins with HCV E1-E2 glycoprotein complex. BthTX-II exhibited stronger interactions, indicated by 22 hydrophobic interactions. In conclusion, these compounds were shown to inhibit HCV infectivity by either acting on the virus particles or protecting the cells against infection.

Estimating the Allocation of the Economic Value Generated by Utilization of All-Oral Direct-Acting Antivirals for Hepatitis C in the United States, 2015 to 2019

OBJECTIVES

Between 2013 to 2019, several all-oral direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) were launched with the potential to cure patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV). They generated economic value in terms of the health gains for patients and cost-savings for the US healthcare system. We estimated the share of this value allocated to 4 manufacturers vs society.

METHODS

For 2015 to 2019, we estimated the incremental impact of DAAs on HCV health outcomes and costs. We used the Center for Disease Analysis Foundation Polaris Observatory database to estimate utilization. Per-patient projections of lifetime quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained and medical costs avoided were based on a standard 9-state HCV disease-progression model for DAA treatment vs alternatives. Annual QALY gains were valued at $114 000 per QALY. Outcomes and costs were discounted at 3%. Estimated revenues were based on reported sales.

RESULTS

An estimated 1 080 000 patients received DAAs: 81.5% would not have received the pre-DAA standard of care. On average, these patients were projected to gain 4.4 QALYs and save $104 400 in lifetime healthcare costs, generating $531.8 billion in value. Those who would have received treatment gained 1.7 QALYs and saved $41 500 in lifetime costs, generating $47.4 billion in economic value. As treatment costs fell nearly 75%, the 4 manufacturers reported $37.4 billion from DAA sales-an allocation of 6.5% of the total value.

CONCLUSIONS

The significant majority (∼90%) of the economic value of curing HCV with DAAs were health benefits to patients and net cost-savings to society. DAA manufacturers received a minority share (6.5%) of the aggregate economic value generated.

Cost of providing co-located hepatitis C treatment at a syringe service program exceeds potential reimbursement: Results from a clinical trial

Background

Co-located hepatitis C treatment at syringe service programs (SSP) is an emerging model of care for people who inject drugs (PWID). Implementation of these models can be informed by understanding the program costs.

Methods

We conducted an economic evaluation of a hepatitis C treatment intervention at an SSP in New York City implemented as one arm of a randomized trial from 2017 to 2021. Start-up and operating costs were determined from the treatment program's perspective using micro-costing and were compared to potential Medicaid reimbursement. We applied nationally representative unit costs and wage rates. Results are reported in 2020 USD.

Results

The treatment program was staffed by one physician and one care coordinator. Participants were offered hepatitis C clinical evaluation and treatment, a 45-min reinfection prevention education session, and additional care coordination as needed. The trial enrolled 84 PWID with hepatitis C in the intervention arm; 64 initiated treatment and 55 achieved sustained virological response. Start-up costs including training and equipment totaled $4677. Overhead costs including rent, utilities and software totaled $2229 per month. Clinical and care coordination totaled $4867 per participant, of which $3722 was care coordination. The total cost excluding startup was $6035 per enrolled participant and $7921 per treated participant; estimated potential reimbursement was $628 per enrolled participant.

Conclusion

Our results provide insight to US-based SSPs seeking to provide co-located hepatitis C care and highlight the intensive care coordination services provided. Successful implementation likely requires funding sources beyond health insurers or substantial changes to insurance reimbursement for care coordination.

Improving Access to High-Value, High-Cost Medicines: The Use of Subscription Models to Treat Hepatitis C Using Direct-Acting Antivirals in the United States

State payers may face financial incentives to restrict use of high-cost medications. Yet, restrictions on access to high-value medications may have deleterious effects on population health. Direct-acting antivirals (DAAs), available since 2013, can cure chronic infection with hepatitis C virus (HCV). With prices upward of $90,000 for a treatment course, states have struggled to ensure access to DAAs for Medicaid beneficiaries and the incarcerated, populations with a disproportionate share of HCV. Advance purchase commitments (APCs), wherein a payer commits to purchase a certain quantity of medications at lower prices, offer payers incentives to increase access to high-value medications while also offering companies guaranteed revenue. This article discusses the use of subscription models, a type of APC, to support increased access to high-value DAAs for treating HCV. First, the authors provide background information about HCV, its treatment, and state financing of prescription medications. They then review the implementation of HCV subscription models in two states, Louisiana and Washington, and the early evidence of their impact. The article discusses challenges to evaluating state-sponsored subscription models, and it concludes by discussing implications of subscription models that target DAAs and other high-value, high-cost medicines.

Pharmaceutical policies and regulations of oral antiviral drugs for treatment of hepatitis C in Egypt-case study

BACKGROUND

There are limited studies on the role of efficient regulatory mechanisms in facilitating greater access to Hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment. Evidence to support the importance of effective pharmaceutical policies and regulations in improving access to oral viral drugs towards the elimination of HCV is needed. This study aims to explore the adequacy of the implemented pharmaceutical policies and regulations in Egypt and their role to improve the availability and affordability of direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) to achieve universal access to the treatment of HCV.

METHODS

The study adopts a qualitative methodology using desk review of regulatory and legislative information, literature review, and semi-structured interviews with key experts from the concerned governmental regulatory agencies, pharmaceutical industries, academic organizations, professional associations, civil society organizations, and clinicians who are working in researching treatments for hepatitis C.

FINDINGS

The common DAAs available in the market are Daclatasvir, Sofosbuvir, and Sofosbuvir-based direct-acting antiviral combinations. Fast-track medicines registration pathway for marketing authorization of DAAs is used to reduce market access time frames. The pricing policies are supplemented using price negotiation to set up affordable prices that led to a reasonable price for DAAs. Using Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs) flexibility and local production of quality generics DAAs at lower prices. In addition, political will and collaboration between the government, civil society, and pharmaceutical companies improved patients' access to affordable DAAs and succeeding hepatitis C treatment in Egypt.

CONCLUSIONS

The study findings indicated that the implemented pharmaceutical policies and regulations have an immense role in enhancing access to medicines towards the elimination of hepatitis C in Egypt.

Beyond clinical outcomes: the social and healthcare system implications of hepatitis C treatment

Background

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections in people who inject drugs (PWID) can now be treated and cured. However, the impact that HCV treatment has on drug-user health, practices and wellbeing is not known. The aim of this research was to understand the non-clinical impact that HCV treatment has in PWID and their reasons for accessing and completing treatment.

Methods

Participants aged 25–67 years who had injected opioids or stimulants (currently or in the past) and had completed direct-acting antiviral treatment were recruited from seven European countries. Participants completed a 30-min online survey administered face-to-face between September 2018 and April 2019. The questionnaire responses were used to assess the mental and physical impact of having completed treatment.

Results

Of the 124 participants who completed the survey questionnaire, 75% were male, 69% were over 45 years old and 65% were using opioids and/or stimulants at the start of HCV treatment. Participants reported improvements in the following areas after completing HCV treatment: outlook for the future (79%); self-esteem (73%); ability to plan for the future (69%); belief in their abilities (68%); confidence (67%); empowerment (62%); energy levels (59%); and ability to look after themselves (58%). The most common reasons for starting HCV treatment were: becoming aware of treatments that were well tolerated (77%) and effective (75%); and understanding the potentially severe consequences of HCV (75%).

Conclusions

The benefits of HCV treatment go beyond clinical outcomes and are linked to improved drug-user health and wellbeing. Sharing information about well-tolerated and effective HCV treatments, and raising awareness about the potentially severe consequences of untreated HCV are likely to increase the number of PWID who are motivated to access and complete HCV treatment in future.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Beyond cost-effectiveness: A five-step framework for appraising the value of health technologies in Asia-Pacific

Given resource constraints and the potential for increasingly high-cost, cost-effective medicines to become available, policymakers require strategies that go beyond cost-effectiveness when making resource allocation decisions. This manuscript presents a five-step framework that complements traditional health technology assessment (HTA) guidance documents that policymakers in Asia-Pacific and elsewhere may consider when setting up HTA guidelines and/or evaluating whether or not to subsidize a medicine or other health innovations. The framework recommends that subsidy decisions be based on five criteria: the relative burden of the condition as compared with other conditions (step 1), comparative and cost-effectiveness of the medicine (steps 2 and 3), the short-term impact on the budget (step 4), and other considerations including patient and societal preferences (step 5). Our approach, which is a complement to traditional HTA guidance documents, is not prescriptive but provides an evidence-based framework that HTA agencies in Asia-Pacific can follow as they aim to deliver value-based medicines to their constituents.

Economic evaluation of direct-acting antivirals for the treatment of genotype 3 hepatitis C infection in Singapore

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The prohibitively high cost of direct-acting antivirals (DAA) for hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection remains a barrier to treatment access in Singapore. We aimed to evaluate whether DAA as first-line therapy would be cost-effective for genotype 3 (GT3) HCV patients compared with pegylated interferon and ribavirin (PR).

METHODS

A decision tree analysis was used to compare the costs and outcomes of DAA and PR as first-line therapy. Treatment effectiveness, defined as sustained virological response, was assessed using a retrospective cohort of treated GT3 HCV patients. Direct medical costs were estimated from the payer's perspective using billing information. We obtained health utilities from published literature. We performed extensive one-way sensitivity analyses and probabilistic sensitivity analyses to account for uncertainties regarding the model parameters.

RESULTS

In base case analysis, first-line therapy with DAA and PR yielded quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) of 0.69 and 0.62 at a cost of USD 54 634 and USD 23 857, respectively. The resultant incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) (USD 449 232/QALY) exceeded the willingness-to-pay threshold (USD 53 302/QALY). The ICER was robust for uncertainties regarding the model parameters. The cost of DAA is the key factor influencing the cost-effectiveness of HCV treatment. At current price, DAA as first-line therapy is not cost-effective compared with PR, with or without consideration of retreatment. Threshold analysis suggested that DAA can be cost-effective if it costs less than USD 17 002 for a 12-week treatment course.

CONCLUSION

At current price, DAA as first-line therapy is not cost-effective compared with PR in GT3 HCV patients in Singapore.

Was It Worth Introducing Health Economic Evaluation of Innovative Drugs in the French Regulatory Setting? The Case of New Hepatitis C Drugs

OBJECTIVE

This paper constitutes the first attempt to draw lessons from the recent uptake of health economic evaluation of innovative drugs in the French regulatory framework.

STUDY DESIGN

Taking the example of new direct-acting antivirals against hepatitis C virus, the paper asks whether and how the cost-effectiveness (CE) opinions issued by the French National Health Authority improve the information available to support the pricing decisions.

METHODS

The analysis compares the assessment of these drugs based on three different sources: CE opinions, clinical opinions, and the published cost-utility analyses (CUA) available in the literature and identified through a systematic review.

RESULTS

The results show that CE opinions bring to the fore three issues prone to impact the incremental cost utility ratio and those were not available to the decision maker through clinical opinions or published CUA: the stage of treatment initiation, the modeling of the disease progression, and the uncertainty around the efficacy rates.

CONCLUSIONS

France has introduced the criterion of the cost per QALY gained in the pricing and regulation of innovative pharmaceuticals since 2013. Our analysis shows that the use of CUA does enhance the information available to the decision makers on the value of the treatments.

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

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

Eight-Week Hepatitis C Treatment with New Direct Acting Antivirals Has a Better Safety Profile While Being Effective in the Treatment-Naïve Geriatric Population Without Liver Cirrhosis and Hepatitis C Virus-RNA < 6 Million IU/mL

AIM

Results of recent studies have confirmed the efficacy of an 8-week course of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir (LDV/SOF) in patients who are non-cirrhotics, native to treatment, are infected with hepatitis C (HCV) genotype 1, and have HCV viral load < 6 million IU/mL. However, there are limited data on a shortened treatment course in patients who are over the age of 65.

METHODS

A retrospective study was performed to examine the safety, tolerability, and sustained viral response rates (SVR) of the 8-week LDV/SOF therapy compared to the 12-week LDV/SOF therapy among non-cirrhotic, treatment-naïve, genotype 1 HCV patients with viral load < 6 million IU/mL who are 65 years of age or older.

RESULTS

A total of 454 patients were identified of which 182 non-cirrhotic, genotype 1 HCV-RNA < 6 million IU/mL patients received the 8-week LDV/SOF treatment and 272 received the 12-week LDV/SOF treatment. Mean [± standard deviation (SD)] aspartate aminotransferase to platelet ratio index score for the entire cohort was 0.45 ± 0.03. The mean (± SD) age for the 8-week treatment was 69.7 (± 7) years, 54.7% male and 45.3% female. The mean (± SD) age of the 12-week treatment was 71.7 (± 3) years, 56.4% male and 43.6% female. Overall, SVR-12 for the 8-week regimen was 93% and SVR-12 for the 12-week regimen was 95%. For the 182 treated with the 8-week LDV/SOF treatment, there were no serious adverse events requiring hospitalization or signs of liver failure requiring transplantation. Overall, the 8-week treatment patient cohort experienced less fatigue, headache, dry mouth, and diarrhea. This finding was statistically significant with a P value < 0.001.

CONCLUSION

Eight-week LDV/SOF therapy in treatment-naive, non-cirrhotic, genotype 1 HCV patients with RNA < 6 million IU/mL was found safe, better tolerated, effective, and required less upfront cost when compared with the 12-week LDV/SOF treatment regimen in properly selected geriatric population.

Cost-utility analysis of second-generation direct-acting antivirals for hepatitis C: a systematic review

High prices of second-generation direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) in the treatment of chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) patients led to reimbursement decisions based on cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Areas covered: We performed a systematic review of cost-utility analyses (CUA) comparing interventions with second-generation DAA therapies with no treatment, and with previous therapies for chronic HCV patients until July 2017. A total of 36 studies were included: 30 studies from the perspective of the healthcare payer, 3 from the societal perspective, and 3 did not report the perspective. For genotype 1, the highest number of ICER comparison corresponds to sofosbuvir (SOF) triple therapy and SOF-based combinations which reported a cost per QALY systematically ranging from negative to lower than US$100,000 when compared with no treatment or dual therapy or Simeprevir triple therapy. Expert commentary: Selected studies may be overestimating the true cost per QALY of second-generation DAAs in the treatment of HCV, mainly because of neglecting non-healthcare costs, using official list prices which are higher than actual transaction prices and not adopting the long run drug price in a dynamic approach. In addition, the impact of important price reductions of several DAAs in recent years on cost per QALY should be considered.

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.

Assessing Racial Disparities in HCV Infection and Care Outcomes in a Southern Urban Population

OBJECTIVES

This study assessed racial disparities in access to healthcare services, hepatitis C virus (HCV) exposure, and retention in a treatment cascade in two indigent populations in an urban center in the Southern US.

PARTICIPANTS/METHODS

Opt-in HCV antibody screening was offered at two large homeless centers and three residential substance abuse treatment centers (SATCs) in New Orleans, LA. Five hundred ninety-four participants experiencing homelessness and 342 residents of SATCs were assessed for previous access/perceived barriers to healthcare services and high-risk behaviors associated with HCV exposure. Participants were then screened using rapid HCV antibody testing and tracked through a treatment cascade involving referral to a primary care provider (PCP), RNA confirmation, and specialist referral.

RESULTS

In both the homeless and SATC populations, whites were more likely to report barriers to accessing healthcare and high-risk behaviors, especially prior intravenous drug use (IVDU). Interaction between age and race demonstrates a protective effect of white ethnicity at higher ages, at a level approaching statistical significance. Non-whites were equally likely to access follow-up care and treatment as whites.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite many more risk factors reported by the white population, HCV antibody positivity was largely equal between the two racial groups. Known interactions between race and age in the African American population were demonstrated in these high-risk, urban populations. Whites were no more likely to achieve various levels of a treatment and care cascade. The results may demonstrate the impact of improved access to testing services and primary care, although access to treatment remains a significant barrier to eliminating racial disparities in HCV infection.

Multiple effects of toxins isolated from Crotalus durissus terrificus on the hepatitis C virus life cycle

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) is one of the main causes of liver disease and transplantation worldwide. Current therapy is expensive, presents additional side effects and viral resistance has been described. Therefore, studies for developing more efficient antivirals against HCV are needed. Compounds isolated from animal venoms have shown antiviral activity against some viruses such as Dengue virus, Yellow fever virus and Measles virus. In this study, we evaluated the effect of the complex crotoxin (CX) and its subunits crotapotin (CP) and phospholipase A2 (PLA2-CB) isolated from the venom of Crotalus durissus terrificus on HCV life cycle. Huh 7.5 cells were infected with HCVcc JFH-1 strain in the presence or absence of these toxins and virus was titrated by focus formation units assay or by qPCR. Toxins were added to the cells at different time points depending on the stage of virus life cycle to be evaluated. The results showed that treatment with PLA2-CB inhibited HCV entry and replication but no effect on HCV release was observed. CX reduced virus entry and release but not replication. By treating cells with CP, an antiviral effect was observed on HCV release, the only stage inhibited by this compound. Our data demonstrated the multiple antiviral effects of toxins from animal venoms on HCV life cycle.

The cost of successful antiviral therapy in hepatitis C patients: a comparison of IFN-free versus IFN-based regimens at an individual patient level in Australia

Background

Chronic hepatitis C remains a major global health burden with serious long-term consequences if left untreated. Recently the treatment standard of care has shifted to new interferon (IFN)-free drug regimens, which have been shown to be safe and effective. The aim of our study was to assess and compare medical resource utilization and costs of successfully treating patients with IFN-based and IFN-free therapies in Australia.

Methods

We performed a retrospective chart review of 30 HCV-infected patients successfully treated with IFN-based therapy between 2013 and 2015. We also generated a model for a virtual group of 100 genotype 1 (GT1) and 100 genotype 3 (GT3) patients treated with IFN-free therapy derived from national guidelines and clinical trial data.

Results

In comparison to virtual patients receiving IFN-free therapy, our IFN-treated patients on average had distinctively more liver clinic visits and blood tests. However, mean total cost per patient was $19,164 and $85,300 (AUD) more for GT1 and GT3 patients receiving IFN-free therapy, respectively. This difference was largely accounted for by higher antiviral drug costs. Of our 30 patients treated with IFN, total mean cost per patient during the study period was $33,595.

Conclusion

Resource utilization is lower with IFN-free treatment, which reflects the reduced need for patient monitoring and improved side-effect profile of these new drugs. However, total costs are still largely dominated by antiviral drug costs, representing a huge burden on national budgets. Our insight into resource utilization and costs associated with both types of treatment can serve as a reference for future studies.

Systematic review: cost-effectiveness of direct-acting antivirals for treatment of hepatitis C genotypes 2-6

BACKGROUND

The availability of direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) has dramatically changed the landscape of hepatitis C virus (HCV) therapy; however, the cost and budget requirements for DAA treatment have been widely debated.

AIMS

To systematically review published studies evaluating the cost-effectiveness of DAAs for HCV genotype 2-6 infections, and synthesise and re-evaluate results with updated drug prices.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search of various electronic databases, including Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane library and EconLit for cost-effectiveness studies published from 2011 to 2016. Studies evaluating DAAs for genotypes 2-6 were included. Reported costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were abstracted. We re-estimated ICERs by varying the price of DAAs from $20 000 to $100 000, and estimated the threshold price at which DAA regimens would be deemed cost-effective (ICER≤$100 000/QALY).

RESULTS

A total of 92 ICERs for 7 different DAA regimens from 10 published articles were included. Among the abstracted 92 ICERs, 20 were for genotype 2, 40 for genotype 3, 30 for genotype 4, 2 for genotype 5 and none for genotype 6; therefore, only genotypes 2-5 were analysed. At the discounted price of $40 000, 87.0% analyses found DAA regiments to be cost-effective, and 7.6% found to be cost-saving. The median threshold price below which DAAs would be deemed cost-effective was between $144 400 and $225 000, and cost-saving between $17 300 and $25 400.

CONCLUSIONS

HCV treatment with DAAs is highly cost-effective in patients with HCV genotypes 2-5 at a $100 000/QALY threshold. Timely HCV treatment would be an optimal strategy from both a public health and economic perspective.

"Where's My Choice?" An Examination of Veteran and Provider Experiences With Hepatitis C Treatment Through the Veteran Affairs Choice Program

BACKGROUND

The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is the country's largest provider for chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. The VA created the Choice Program, which allows eligible veterans to seek care from community providers, who are reimbursed by the VA.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to examine perspectives and experiences with the VA Choice Program among veteran patients and their HCV providers.

RESEARCH DESIGN

Qualitative study based on semistructured interviews with veteran patients and VA providers. Interview transcripts were analyzed using rapid assessment procedures based in grounded theory.

SUBJECTS

A total of 38 veterans and 10 VA providers involved in HCV treatment across 3 VA medical centers were interviewed.

MEASURES

Veterans and providers were asked open-ended questions about their experiences with HCV treatment in the VA and through the Choice Program, including barriers and facilitators to treatment access and completion.

RESULTS

Four themes were identified: (1) there were difficulties in enrollment, ongoing support, and billing with third-party administrators; (2) veterans experienced a lack of choice in location of treatment; (3) fragmented care led to coordination challenges between VA and community providers; and (4) VA providers expressed reservations about sending veterans to community providers.

CONCLUSIONS

The Choice Program has the potential to increase veteran access to HCV treatment, but veterans and VA providers have described substantial problems in the initial years of the program. Enhancing care coordination, incorporating shared decision-making, and establishing a wide network of community providers may be important areas for further development in designing community-based specialist services for needy veterans.

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.

The value of cure associated with treating treatment-naïve chronic hepatitis C genotype 1: Are the new all-oral regimens good value to society?

BACKGROUND & AIMS

All-oral regimens are associated with high cure rates in hepatitis C virus-genotype 1 (HCV-GT1) patients. Our aim was to assess the value of cure to the society for treating HCV infection.

METHODS

Markov model for HCV-GT1 projected long-term health outcomes, life years, and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained. The model compared second-generation triple (sofosbuvir+pegylated interferon+ribavirin [PR] and simeprevir+PR) and all-oral (ledipasvir/sofosbuvir and ombitasvir+paritaprevir/ritonavir+dasabuvir±ribavirin) therapies with no treatment. Sustained virological response rates were based on Phase III RCTs. We assumed that 80% and 95% of HCV-GT1 patients were eligible for second-generation triple and all-oral regimens. Transition probabilities, utility and mortality were based on literature review. The value of cure was calculated by the difference in the savings from the economic gains associated with additional QALYs.

RESULTS

Model estimated 1.52 million treatment-naïve HCV-GT1 patients in the US. Treating all eligible HCV-GT1 patients with second-generation triple and all-oral therapies resulted in 3.2 million and 4.8 million additional QALYs gained compared to no treatment respectively. Using $50,000 as value of QALY, these regimens lead to savings of $185 billion and $299 billion; costs of these regimens were $109 billion and $128 billion. The value of cure with second-generation triple and all-oral regimens was $55 billion and $111 billion, when we conservatively assumed only drug costs. Cost savings were greater for HCV-GT1 patient cured with cirrhosis compared to patients without cirrhosis.

CONCLUSIONS

The recent evolution of regimens for HCV GT1 has increased efficacy and value of cure.

Cost-Effectiveness of Direct-Acting Antiviral Treatment in Hepatitis C-Infected Liver Transplant Candidates With Compensated Cirrhosis and Hepatocellular Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis C virus (HCV)(+) donors represent an effective strategy to increase liver donor availability to HCV-infected recipients. However, many HCV(+) transplant candidates are now receiving treatment with direct-acting anti-viral (DAA) agents that lower the risk of posttransplant HCV recurrence but could make the patient ineligible for HCV(+) livers.

METHODS

We compared pretransplant DAA treatment versus deferred DAA treatment using a cost-effectiveness decision analysis model to estimate incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (cost per quality-adjusted life year gained) from the societal perspective across a range of HCV(+) liver availability rates. For practical considerations, the population modeled was restricted to well-compensated HCV(+) cirrhotics listed for liver transplantation with hepatocellular carcinoma MELD exception points.

RESULTS

Under base case conditions, the deferred DAA treatment strategy was found to be the "dominant" strategy. That is, it provided superior health outcomes at cost savings compared to the pretransplant DAA treatment strategy. The pretransplant DAA treatment strategy trended towards cost-effectiveness as HCV(+) donor liver availability declined. However, only in 1 scenario that was highly optimized for favorable outcomes in the pretransplant DAA treatment arm (low availability of HCV(+) organs, low cost of DAA treatment, high cost of HCV recurrence) was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio associated with HCV DAA treatment before transplant less than US $150 000/quality-adjusted life-year gained.

CONCLUSIONS

Deferring HCV treatment until after liver transplant and maintaining access to the expanded pool of HCV(+) donors appears to be the most cost-effective strategy for well-compensated HCV-infected cirrhotics listed for liver transplantation with hepatocellular carcinoma, even in geographic areas of relatively low HCV(+) donor availability.

Cost utility of ERCP-based modalities for the diagnosis of cholangiocarcinoma in primary sclerosing cholangitis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC). Although several ERCP-based diagnostic modalities are available for diagnosing CCA, it is unclear whether one modality is more cost-effective than the others. The primary aim of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of ERCP-based techniques for diagnosing CCA in patients with PSC-induced biliary strictures.

METHODS

We performed a cost utility analysis to assess the net monetary benefit for accurately diagnosing CCA using 5 different diagnostic strategies: (1) ERCP with bile duct brushing for cytology, (2) ERCP with brushings for cytology and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH)-trisomy, (3) ERCP with brushings for cytology and FISH-polysomy, (4) ERCP with intraductal biopsy sampling, and (5) single-operator cholangioscopy (SOC) with targeted biopsy sampling. A Monte Carlo simulation assessed outcomes including quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Sensitivity analyses were also performed.

RESULTS

SOC with targeted biopsy sampling, as compared with ERCP with brushing for FISH-polysomy, produced an incremental QALY gain of .22 at an additional cost of $8562.44, resulting in a base case ICER of $39,277.25. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses demonstrated that diagnosis with SOC was cost-effective at conventional willingness-to-pay thresholds of $50,000 and $100,000. SOC was the most cost-effective diagnostic strategy.

CONCLUSIONS

SOC with biopsy sampling is the most cost-effective diagnostic modality for CCA in PSC strictures.

Financial Impact of Direct-Acting Oral Anticoagulants in Medicaid: Budgetary Assessment Based on Number Needed to Treat

BACKGROUND

Faced with rising healthcare costs, state Medicaid programs need short-term, easily calculated budgetary estimates for new drugs, accounting for medical cost offsets due to clinical advantages.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the budgetary impact of direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) compared with warfarin, an older, lower-cost vitamin K antagonist, on 12-month Medicaid expenditures for nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) using number needed to treat (NNT).

METHOD

Medicaid utilization files, 2009 through second quarter 2015, were used to estimate OAC cost accounting for generic/brand statutory minimum (13/23%) and assumed maximum (13/50%) manufacturer rebates. NNTs were calculated from clinical trial reports to estimate avoided medical events for a hypothetical population of 500,000 enrollees (approximate NVAF prevalence × Medicaid enrollment) under two DOAC market share scenarios: 2015 actual and 50% increase. Medical service costs were based on published sources. Costs were inflation-adjusted (2015 US$).

RESULTS

From 2009-2015, OAC reimbursement per claim increased by 173 and 279% under maximum and minimum rebate scenarios, respectively, while DOAC market share increased from 0 to 21%. Compared with a warfarin-only counterfactual, counts of ischemic strokes, intracranial hemorrhages, and systemic embolisms declined by 36, 280, and 111, respectively; counts of gastrointestinal hemorrhages increased by 794. Avoided events and reduced monitoring, respectively, offset 3-5% and 15-24% of increased drug cost. Net of offsets, DOAC-related cost increases were US$258-US$464 per patient per year (PPPY) in 2015 and US$309-US$579 PPPY after market share increase.

CONCLUSIONS

Avoided medical events offset a small portion of DOAC-related drug cost increase. NNT-based calculations provide a transparent source of budgetary-impact information for new medications.

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.

Cost-Effectiveness of Treating Hepatitis C with Sofosbuvir/Ledipasvir in Germany

BACKGROUND

Infections with the hepatitis C virus (HCV) are a global public health problem. Long-term consequences are the development of liver cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma. Newly introduced direct acting antivirals, especially interferon-free regimens, have improved rates of sustained viral response above 90% in most patient groups and allow treating patients who were ineligible for treatment in the past. These new regimens have replaced former treatment and are recommended by current guidelines. However, there is an ongoing discussion on high pharmaceutical prices. Our aim was to assess the long-term cost-effectiveness of treating hepatitis C genotype 1 patients with sofosbuvir/ledipasvir (SOF/LDV) treatment in Germany.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We used a Markov cohort model to simulate disease progression and assess cost-effectiveness. The model calculates lifetime costs and outcomes (quality-adjusted life years, QALYs) of SOF/LDV and other strategies. Patients were stratified by treatment status (treatment-naive and treatment-experienced) and absence/presence of cirrhosis. Different treatment strategies were compared to prior standard of care. Sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate model robustness.

RESULTS

Base-case analyses results show that in treatment-naive non-cirrhotic patients treatment with SOF/LDV dominates the prior standard of care (is more effective and less costly). In cirrhotic patients an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of 3,383 €/QALY was estimated. In treatment-experienced patients ICERs were 26,426 €/QALY and 1,397 €/QALY for treatment-naive and treatment-experienced patients, respectively. Robustness of results was confirmed in sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Our analysis shows that treatment with SOF/LDV is cost-effective compared to prior standard of care in all patient groups considering international costs per QALY thresholds.

Drug therapies for chronic hepatitis C infection: a cost-effectiveness analysis

BACKGROUND

Before 2011, pegylated interferon plus ribavirin was the standard therapy for chronic hepatitis C. Interferon-free direct-acting antiviral agents were then approved. Although these treatments appear to be more effective, they are substantially more expensive. In anticipation of the need for information regarding the comparative cost-effectiveness of new regimens in a recent therapeutic review, we conducted the analysis to inform listing decision in Canada.

METHODS

A state-transition model was developed in the form of a cost-utility analysis. Regimens included in the analysis were comprehensive. The cohort under consideration had a mean age of 50 years. The cohort was defined by treatment status and cirrhosis status. Inputs for the model were derived from published sources and validated by clinical experts.

RESULTS

For each genotype 1 population, at least 1 of the interferon-free agents appeared to be economically attractive compared with pegylated interferon-ribavirin, at a willingness-to-pay of $50 000 per quality-adjusted life-year. The drug that was the most cost-effective varied by population. For genotype 2-4 population, the direct-acting antiviral therapies appeared not to be economically attractive compared with pegylated interferon-ribavirin for the treatment-naive; however, there were direct-acting antiviral therapies that appeared to be attractive when compared with no treatment for the treatment-experienced.

INTERPRETATION

Public health policy should be informed by consideration of health benefit, social and ethical values, feasibility and cost-effectiveness. Our analysis assists the development of reimbursements and policies for interferon-free direct-acting antiviral agent regimens for chronic hepatitis C infection by informing the last criterion. Considering the rapid development of treatments for chronic hepatitis C, further update and expanded reviews will be necessary.

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.

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

BACKGROUND

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

AIM

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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

Background: Chronic hepatitis C viral (HCV) infection affects millions of Americans. Health care systems face complex choices between highly efficacious, costly treatments. This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of treatments for chronic, genotype 1 HCV monoinfected, treatment-naïve individuals in the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and general US health care systems. Methods: The study used a decision-analytic Markov model, employing appropriate payer perspectives and time horizons, and discounting benefits and costs at 3% annually. Interventions included the following: sofosbuvir/ledipasvir (SOF-LDV); ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir/dasabuvir (3D); sofosbuvir/simeprevir (SOF-SMV); sofosbuvir/pegylated interferon/ribavirin (SOF-RBV-PEG); boceprevir/pegylated interferon/ribavirin (BOC-RBV-PEG); and pegylated interferon/ribavirin (PEG-RBV). Outcomes were sustained virologic response (SVR), advanced liver disease, costs, quality adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness. Results: SOF-LDV and 3D achieve high SVR rates, reducing advanced liver disease (>20% relative to no treatment), and increasing QALYs by >2 years per person. For the non-VA population, at current prices ($5040 per week for SOF-LDV; $4796 per week for 3D), SOF-LDV’s lifetime cost ($293,370) is $18,000 lower than 3D’s because of its shorter duration in subgroups. SOF-LDV costs $17,100 per QALY gained relative to no treatment. 3D costs $208,000 per QALY gained relative to SOF-LDV. Both dominate other treatments and are even more cost-effective for the VA, though VA aggregate treatment costs still exceed $4 billion at SOF-LDV prices of $3308 per week. Drug prices strongly determine relative cost-effectiveness for SOF-LDV and 3D; with price reductions of 20% to 30% depending on health system, 3D could be cost-effective relative to SOF-LDV. We currently lack head-to-head regimen effectiveness trials. Conclusions: New HCV treatments are cost-effective in multiple health care systems if trial-estimated efficacy is achieved in practice, though, at current prices, total expenditures could present substantial challenges.

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

BACKGROUND

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

AIM

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Economic evaluation of ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir and dasabuvir for the treatment of chronic genotype 1 hepatitis c virus infection

OBJECTIVES

To estimate clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness of ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir and dasabuvir ± ribavirin (OMB/PTV/r + DSV ± RBV) compared with treatment regimens including pegylated interferon (PegIFN) for patients with chronic genotype 1 hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection.

METHODS

An Excel spreadsheet Markov model tracking progression through stages of liver disease was developed. Costs and patient utilities for liver disease stages were taken from published studies. Rates of disease progression were based on studies of untreated HCV infection and long-term follow-up of those achieving sustained virologic response (SVR) after drug treatment. Impact of OMB/PTV/r + DSV ± RBV and other drug regimens on progression was estimated through SVR rates from clinical trials. Analyses were performed for treatment-naive and treatment-experienced patients. Impact of alternative scenarios and input parameter uncertainty on the results were tested.

RESULTS

For genotype 1 treatment-naive HCV patients, for OMB/PTV/r + DSV ± RBV, PegIFN + ribavirin (PegIFN/RBV), sofosbuvir + PegIFN/RBV, telaprevir + PegIFN/RBV, boceprevir + PegIFN/RBV, lifetime risk of decompensated liver disease was 5.6%, 18.9%, 7.4%, 11.7%, and 14.9%; hepatocellular carcinoma was 5.4%, 9.2%, 5.7%, 7.0%, and 7.4%; and death from liver disease was 8.7%, 22.2%, 10.4%, 14.8%, and 17.6%, respectively. Estimates of the cost-effectiveness of OMB/PTV/r + DSV ± RBV for treatment-naive and treatment-experienced patients indicated that it dominated all other regimens except PegIFN/RBV. Compared with PegIFN/RBV, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were £13,864 and £10,258 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) for treatment-naive and treatment-experienced patients, respectively. The results were similar for alternative scenarios and uncertainty analyses.

LIMITATIONS

A mixed-treatment comparison for SVR rates for the different treatment regimens was not feasible, because many regimens did not have comparator arms; instead SVR rates were based on those from recent trials.

CONCLUSIONS

OMB/PTV/r + DSV ± RBV is a cost-effective oral treatment regimen for chronic genotype 1 HCV infection compared with standard treatment regimens and is estimated to reduce the lifetime risks of advanced liver disease.

Health Economic Evaluations of Sofosbuvir for Treatment of Chronic Hepatitis C: a Systematic Review

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The approval of sofosbuvir offers new therapeutic options for patients suffering from chronic hepatitis C. In phase III trials, it has demonstrated significantly greater efficacy and safety in comparison with the old standard of care. In addition, it provides the first interferon-free regimen allowing treatment of patients without previous therapeutic options. A current debate regarding pricing and affordability can be attributed to high treatment costs. The objective of this review was to compare health economic evaluations of sofosbuvir for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C in terms of models, patient populations, interventions and results.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted using the data sources Medline (1946-09/2015), Embase (1974-09/2015), the Health Technology Assessment Database (September 2015) and the UK National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (September 2015). We included health economic evaluations that measured the cost-effectiveness of sofosbuvir-based regimens compared with regimens without sofosbuvir for the treatment of adult patients infected with chronic hepatitis C. The articles were then critically appraised regarding the effectiveness data, cost data and models utilised.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies were included, which analysed the cost-effectiveness of sofosbuvir in seven different countries. Differences in study characteristics were found regarding study populations, modelling and willingness-to-pay thresholds. The study results demonstrated the cost-effectiveness of the treatment combination of sofosbuvir with pegylated interferon and ribavirin in comparison with the old standard of care. Dual therapy with sofosbuvir and ribavirin was considered cost effective only in comparison with no therapy.

CONCLUSION

Despite high costs, the included studies indicate that sofosbuvir-based regimens are cost effective in most patients. While the results are unequivocal with regard to sofosbuvir-based triple therapy, the cost-effectiveness of sofosbuvir-based dual therapy heavily depends on country-specific willingness to pay. Although interferon-containing triple therapy has now been replaced by newly approved direct-acting antivirals in most middle- and high-income countries, the availability of these oral treatment combinations is poor in low-income countries. Therefore, the findings of our review are still of relevance.

Cost-effectiveness of currently recommended direct-acting antiviral treatments in patients infected with genotypes 1 or 4 hepatitis C virus in the US

OBJECTIVE

This study compared the cost-effectiveness of direct-acting antiviral therapies currently recommended for treating genotypes (GT) 1 and 4 chronic hepatitis C (CHC) patients in the US.

METHODS

A cost-effectiveness analysis of treatments for CHC from a US payer's perspective over a lifelong time horizon was performed. A Markov model based on the natural history of CHC was used for a population that included treatment-naïve and -experienced patients. Treatment alternatives considered for GT1 included ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir + dasabuvir ± ribavirin (3D ± R), sofosbuvir + ledipasvir (SOF/LDV), sofosbuvir + simeprevir (SOF + SMV), simeprevir + pegylated interferon/ribavirin (SMV + PR) and no treatment (NT). For GT4 treatments, ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir + ribavirin (2D + R), SOF/LDV and NT were compared. Transition probabilities, utilities and costs were obtained from published literature. Outcomes included rates of compensated cirrhosis (CC), decompensated cirrhosis (DCC), hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and liver-related death (LrD), total costs, life-years and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Costs and QALYs were used to calculate incremental cost-effectiveness ratios.

RESULTS

In GT1 patients, 3D ± R and SOF-containing regimens have similar long-term outcomes; 3D ± R had the lowest lifetime risks of all liver disease outcomes: CC = 30.2%, DCC = 5.0 %, HCC = 6.8%, LT = 1.9% and LrD = 9.2%. In GT1 patients, 3D ± R had the lowest cost and the highest QALYs. As a result, 3D ± R dominated these treatment options. In GT4 patients, 2D + R had lower rates of liver morbidity and mortality, lower cost and more QALYs than SOF/LDV and NT.

LIMITATIONS

While the results are based on input values, which were obtained from a variety of heterogeneous sources-including clinical trials, the findings were robust across a plausible range of input values, as demonstrated in probabilistic sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Among currently recommended treatments for GT1 and GT4 in the US, 3D ± R (for GT1) and 2D + R (for GT4) have a favorable cost-effectiveness profile.

Outcomes and Costs of Treating Hepatitis C Patients in the Era of First Generation Protease Inhibitors - Results from the PAN Study

1 OBJECTIVE

Chronic hepatitis C virus infections (HCV) cause a significant public health burden. Introduction of telaprevir (TVR) and boceprevir (BOC) has increased sustained virologic response rates (SVR) in genotype 1 patients but were accompanied by higher treatment costs and more side effects. Aim of the study was to assess outcomes and costs of treating HCV with TVR or BOC in routine care.

2 MATERIAL AND METHODS

Data was obtained from a non-interventional study. This analysis relates on a subset of 1,786 patients for whom resource utilisation was documented. Sociodemografic and clinical parameters as well as resource utilisation were collected using a web-based data recording system. Costs were calculated using official remuneration schemes.

3 RESULTS

Mean age of patients was 49.2 years, 58.6% were male. In treatment-naive patients SVR-rates of 62.2% and 55.7% for TVR and BOC were observed (prior relapser: 68.5% for TVR and 63.5% for BOC; prior non-responder: 45.6% for TVR and 39.1% for BOC). Treatment costs are dominated by costs for pharmaceuticals and range between €39,081 and €53,491. We calculated average costs per SVR of €81,347 (TVR) and €70,163 (BOC) in treatment-naive patients (prior relapser: 78,089 €/SVR for TVR and 82,077 €/SVR for BOC; prior non-responder: 116,509 €/SVR for TVR and 110,156 €/SVR for BOC). Quality of life data showed a considerable decrease during treatment.

4 CONCLUSION

Our study is one of few investigating both, outcomes and costs, of treating HCV in a real-life setting. Data can serve as a reference in the discussion of increasing costs in recently introduced agents.

What Are the Incentives for Medicare Prescription Drug Plans to Consider Long-Term Outcomes and Cost?

BACKGROUND

Medicare Prescription Drug Plans (PDPs) do not have incentives to consider long-term outcomes and costs associated with both medical and pharmacy benefits (LTOCMP) when making formulary decisions.

OBJECTIVE

To identify existing quality measures, payment models, and public reporting tools for PDPs that are related to formulary decision making and that could be used as potential incentives for PDPs to consider LTOCMP.

METHODS

PubMed, Google, and quality measure databases, as well as Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation and Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) websites, were searched for appropriate quality measures, payment models, and public reporting tools.

RESULTS

Few quality measures and other mechanisms exist that are related to formulary decision making and have the potential to be incentives for PDPs to consider LTOCMP. Only 3 such tools were identified: (1) Medicare Part D star ratings quality measures in use by CMS, (2) the Medicare Plan Finder website, and (3) URAC PBM Accreditation standards and measures. Furthermore, the majority of the quality initiatives identified were only indirectly related to motivating PDPs to consider LTOCMP.

CONCLUSIONS

Efforts are needed to develop mechanisms to align PDP incentives with LTOCMP.

DISCLOSURES

No outside funding supported this research/study. Hung reports part-time employment by CVS Health and Blue Cross Blue Shield Association, as well as past paid internships with Biotechnology Industry Organization and AMCP Foundation/Allergan. Perfetto reports advisory board, consultancy, and lecture fees from Pfizer, Otsuka, Sanofi, National Pharmaceutical Council, and AMCP Foundation, as well as employment by the National Health Council and Journal of Managed Care & Specialty Pharmacy. Both authors contributed to study concept and design, data interpretation, and manuscript revision. Hung collected the data and prepared the manuscript.

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

Recently approved, interferon-free medication regimens for treating hepatitis C are highly effective, but extremely costly. We aimed to identify cost-effective strategies for managing treatment-naïve U.S. veterans with new hepatitis C medication regimens. We developed a Markov model with 1-year cycle length for a cohort of 60-year-old veterans with untreated genotype 1 hepatitis C seeking treatment in a typical year. We compared using sofosbuvir/ledipasvir or ombitasvir/ritonavir/paritaprevir/dasabuvir to treat: (1) any patient seeking treatment; (2) only patients with advanced fibrosis or cirrhosis; or (3) patients with advanced disease first and healthier patients 1 year later. The previous standard of care, sofosbuvir/simeprevir or sofosbuvir/pegylated interferon/ribavirin, was included for comparison. Patients could develop progressive fibrosis, cirrhosis, or hepatocellular carcinoma, undergo transplantation, or die. Complications were less likely after sustained virological response. We calculated the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) and varied model inputs in one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. We used the Veterans Health Administration perspective with a lifetime time horizon and 3% annual discounting. Treating any patient with ombitasvir-based therapy was the preferred strategy ($35,560; 14.0 QALYs). All other strategies were dominated (greater costs/QALY gained than more effective strategies). Varying treatment efficacy, price, and/or duration changed the preferred strategy. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, treating any patient with ombitasvir-based therapy was cost-effective in 70% of iterations at a $50,000/QALY threshold and 65% of iterations at a $100,000/QALY threshold.

CONCLUSION

Managing any treatment-naïve genotype 1 hepatitis C patient with ombitasvir-based therapy is the most economically efficient strategy, although price and efficacy can impact cost-effectiveness. It is economically unfavorable to restrict treatment to patients with advanced disease or use a staged treatment strategy. (Hepatology 2016;63:428-436).