Cost-effectiveness of Hepatitis C Virus Treatment Models for People Who Inject Drugs in Opioid Agonist Treatment Programs

Real-world hepatitis C prevalence and treatment uptake at opioid agonist therapy clinics in Ontario, Canada

Widespread screening for hepatitis C virus (HCV) is necessary for Canada to meet its HCV elimination goals by 2030. People who currently or previously injected drugs are at high risk for HCV. Opioid agonist therapy (OAT, such as methadone and buprenorphine) has been shown to help stabilize the lives of people who are opioid-dependent. The distribution of OAT in North America typically requires daily, weekly, or monthly clinic visits and presents an opportunity for engagement, screening and treatment for those at high-risk of HCV. In this study, HCV screening was conducted by staff at OAT clinics in Ontario from 2016 to 2020 and those with chronic infections were treated on-site with direct-acting antivirals. Point-of-care or dried blood spot (DBS) testing was used for antibodies, DBS or serum for HCV RNA and serum for HCV RNA at SVR12 (sustained virological response). Clinics screened 1954 people (mean age 40 years ±12, 63% male). Forty-five percent were antibody positive, of whom 64% were HCV RNA+. Eighty percent of those RNA+ set an appointment in which 99% attended. Ninety-six percent started treatment with 87% completing treatment. Sixty-eight percent of people who completed treatment submitted a sample for SVR12 testing of which 97% achieved a virological cure. Results suggest that HCV screening and treatment at OAT clinics is feasible, effective and warrants expansion. Data suggest strong treatment adherence due to high rates of SVR12 comparable with other OAT-based HCV treatment programs. The lack of SVR12 sampling could be addressed by either on-site phlebotomy or incentivizing SVR12 sampling.

Cost-effectiveness of integrated treatment for hepatitis C virus (HCV) among people who inject drugs in Norway: An economic evaluation of the INTRO-HCV trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The INTRO-HCV randomized controlled trial conducted in Norway over 2017-2019 found that integrated treatment, compared with standard-of-care hospital treatment, for hepatitis C virus (HCV) with direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) improved treatment outcomes among people who inject drugs (PWID). We evaluated cost-effectiveness of the INTRO-HCV intervention.

DESIGN

A Markov health state transition model of HCV disease progression and treatment with cost-effectiveness analysis from the health-provider perspective. Primary cost, utility, and health outcome data were derived from the trial. Costs and health benefits (quality-adjusted life-years, QALYs) were tracked over 50 years. Probabilistic and univariate sensitivity analyses investigated DAA price reductions and variations in HCV treatment and disease care cost assumptions, using costs from different countries (Norway, United Kingdom, United States, France, Australia).

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

PWID attending community-based drug treatment centers for people with opioid dependence in Norway.

MEASUREMENTS

Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) in terms of cost per QALY gained, compared against a conventional (€70 000/QALY) willingness-to-pay threshold for Norway and lower (€20 000/QALY) threshold common among high-income countries.

FINDINGS

Integrated treatment resulted in an ICER of €13 300/QALY gained, with 99% and 71% probability of being cost-effective against conventional and lower willingness-to-pay thresholds, respectively. A 30% lower DAA price reduced the ICER to €6 900/QALY gained, with 91% probability of being cost-effective at the lower willingness-to-pay threshold. A 60% and 90% lower DAA price had 36% and >99% probability of being cost-saving, respectively. Sensitivity analyses suggest integrated treatment was cost-effective at the lower willingness-to-pay threshold (>60% probability) across different assumptions on HCV treatment and disease care costs with 30% DAA price reduction, and became cost-saving with 60%-90% price reductions.

CONCLUSIONS

Integrated hepatitis C virus treatment for people who inject drugs in community settings is likely cost-effective compared with standard-of-care referral pathways in Norway and may be cost-saving in settings with particular characteristics.

Development, implementation, and feasibility of site-specific hepatitis C virus treatment workflows for treating vulnerable, high-risk populations: protocol of the Erase Hep C study - a prospective single-arm intervention trial

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) is the leading indication for liver transplantation and liver-related mortality. The development of direct-acting antivirals (DAA) and a simplified treatment algorithm with a > 97% cure rate should make global elimination of HCV an achievable goal. Yet, vulnerable populations with high rates of HCV still have limited access to treatment. By designing locally contextualized site-specific HCV treatment workflows, we aim to cure HCV in vulnerable, high-risk populations, including people experiencing homelessness (PEH) and people who inject drugs (PWID), in Austin, TX, USA.

METHODS

Our implementation science study will utilize a qualitative and design thinking approach to characterize patient and systemic barriers and facilitators to HCV treatment in vulnerable, high-risk populations seeking care across seven diverse primary care clinics serving PEHs and PWIDs. Qualitative interviews guided by the Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM) framework will identify barriers and facilitators by leveraging knowledge and experience from both clinic staff and patients. Data synthesized using thematic analysis and design thinking will feed into workshops with clinic stakeholders for idea generation to design site-specific HCV treatment workflows. Providers will be trained on the use of a simplified HCV treatment algorithm with DAAs and clinic staff on the new site-specific HCV treatment workflows. These workflows will be implemented by the seven diverse primary care clinics serving vulnerable, high-risk populations. Implementation and clinical outcomes will be measured using data collected through interviews with staff as well as through medical chart review.

DISCUSSION

Our study provides a model of how to contextualize and implement site-specific HCV treatment workflows targeting vulnerable, high-risk populations in other geographic locations. This model can be adopted for future implementation research programs aiming to develop and implement site-specific treatment workflows for vulnerable, high-risk populations and in primary care clinical settings for other disease states beyond just HCV.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registered on ClinicalTrials.gov on July, 14, 2022. Identifier: NCT05460130 .

Linkage to hepatitis C treatment in two opioid substitution treatment units in Gothenburg, Sweden: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Chronic infection with the hepatitis C virus (HCV) is common in people with former or current injection drug use. Among the patients in the opioid substitution treatment (OST) program in Gothenburg, Sweden, more than 50% had been infected with HCV. However, many patients did not have any follow-up for their infection and the linkage to treatment could be improved.

METHODS

A model of care for HCV was introduced at an OST unit in Gothenburg, Sweden, in 2017. The aim was to increase testing and linkage to HCV treatment. A nurse and a medical doctor, both specialized in infectious diseases, performed on-site testing at the OST unit with transient liver elastography (Fibroscan) to evaluate the fibrosis stage and initiated HCV treatment. This study retrospectively reviewed the patients' medical records to assess information regarding participation in the model of care, hepatitis C status, linkage to treatment and treatment outcome.

RESULTS

Among the 225 patients enrolled in OST at baseline, 181 were still in the OST program at the end of study (December 31st, 2018). In total, 29 patients, most of whom did not attend the Clinic of Infectious Diseases, were referred to the model of care. By the end of study, 17 patients (100% of those treated) reached sustained virologic response. In parallel, an additional 19 patients got treatment directly at the Clinic of Infectious Diseases.

CONCLUSION

Integrating HCV screening and examination in an OST unit successfully linked patients to treatment. However, not all patients received treatment. To reach the goal of eliminating HCV, different models of care are needed.

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.

Barriers to hepatitis C diagnosis and treatment in the DAA era: Preliminary results of a community-based survey of primary care practitioners

Notwithstanding the groundbreaking achievement of hepatitis C curative treatment with direct-acting antiviral therapies, Canada faces an uphill battle in reaching the 2030 goal of viral elimination set forth by the World Health Organization, a goal made more difficult by the COVID-19 pandemic. There is limited understanding of the diagnostic and treatment barriers, and challenges in linkage to care in Canada, especially as it pertains to primary care providers in a community context. Therefore, in this article, the authors conducted a survey study to evaluate the following factors: primary care providers’ knowledge of specialist treatment options and the importance of screening and treatment; and patient factors, including transportation, linguistic barriers, and other socio-economic status indicators that impact the screening and management of hepatitis C. The results suggest that public health campaigns that protocolize and/or incentivize screening and referrals may provide solutions to addressing such barriers.

Cost-effectiveness of the HepCATT intervention in specialist drug clinics to improve case-finding and engagement with HCV treatment for people who inject drugs in England

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

People who inject drugs (PWID) are at high risk of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection; however, ~50% are undiagnosed in England and linkage-to-care is poor. This study investigated the cost-effectiveness of an intervention (HepCATT) to improve case-finding and referral to HCV treatment compared with standard-of-care pathways in drug treatment centres in England.

DESIGN

HCV transmission and disease progression model with cost-effectiveness analysis using a health-care perspective. Primary outcome and cost data from the HepCATT study parameterized the intervention, suggesting that HepCATT increased HCV testing in drug treatment centres 2.5-fold and engagement onto the HCV treatment pathway 10-fold. A model was used to estimate the decrease in HCV infections and HCV-related deaths from 2016, with costs and health benefits (quality-adjusted life-years or QALYs) tracked over 50 years. Univariable and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were undertaken.

SETTING

England-specific epidemic with 40% prevalence of chronic HCV among PWID.

PARTICIPANTS

PWID attending drug treatment centres.

INTERVENTION

Nurse facilitator in drug treatment centres to improve the HCV care pathway from HCV case-finding to referral and linkage to specialist care. Comparator was the standard-of-care HCV care pathway.

MEASUREMENTS

Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) in terms of cost per QALY gained through improved case-finding.

FINDINGS

Over 50 years per 1000 PWID, the HepCATT intervention could prevent 75 (95% central interval 37-129) deaths and 1330 (827-2040) or 51% (30-67%) of all new infections. The mean ICER was £7986 per QALY gained, with all PSA simulations being cost-effective at a £20 000 per QALY willingness-to-pay threshold. Univariable sensitivity analyses suggest the intervention would become cost-saving if the cost of HCV treatment reduces to £3900. If scaled up to all PWID in England, the intervention would cost £8.8 million and decrease incidence by 56% (33-70%) by 2030.

CONCLUSIONS

Increasing hepatitis C virus infection case-finding and treatment referral in drug treatment centres could be a highly cost-effective strategy for decreasing hepatitis C virus incidence among people who inject drugs.

Co-Located hepatitis C virus infection treatment within an opioid treatment program promotes opioid agonist treatment retention

BACKGROUND

Co-located treatment for hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection for patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) within an opioid treatment program (OTP) addresses gaps in the HCV care continuum. Few reports have analyzed outcomes related to OUD treatment, such as retention, associated with co-located HCV treatment.

METHODS

Patients (n = 89) treated for OUD and chronic HCV infection in a Northeast US OTP from January 2014 through July 2017 were compared to control patients (n = 199) being treated for OUD and diagnosed with but not treated for HCV during the same period. All patients received opioid agonist treatment (OAT). The outcome of interest is patient retention in the OTP from January 2014 through September 2018, analyzed using logistic regression and survival analysis based on OTP loss to follow-up dates.

RESULTS

After adjusting for baseline covariates, patients who completed HCV treatment had 2.22 (95 % CI: 1.11, 4.45) increased likelihood of remaining in the OTP compared to patients in the control group. Survival analysis indicated the HCV treatment group had a significantly greater probability of being retained over the duration of the study compared with the control group.

CONCLUSION

Results indicate that a co-located model of care is associated with improved OTP treatment retention following HCV treatment, and suggest that co-locating HCV and OUD treatment has a secondary impact on keeping patients engaged in OAT.

Health and economic outcomes of treatment with extended-release naltrexone among pre-release prisoners with opioid use disorder (HOPPER): protocol for an evaluation of two randomized effectiveness trials

BACKGROUND

Persons with an opioid use disorder (OUD) who were incarcerated face many challenges to remaining abstinent; concomitantly, opioid-overdose is the leading cause of death among this population, with the initial weeks following release proving especially fatal. Extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) is the most widely-accepted, evidence-based OUD pharmacotherapy in criminal justice settings, and ensures approximately 30 days of protection from opioid overdose. The high cost of XR-NTX serves as a barrier to uptake by many prison/jail systems; however, the cost of the medication should not be viewed in isolation. Prison/jail healthcare budgets are ultimately determined by policymakers, and the benefits/cost-offsets associated with effective OUD treatment will directly and indirectly affect their overall budgets, and society as a whole.

METHODS

This protocol describes a study funded by the National Institute of Drug Abuse (NIDA) to: evaluate changes in healthcare utilization, health-related quality-of-life, and other resources associated with different strategies of XR-NTX delivery to persons with OUD being released from incarceration; and estimate the relative "value" of each strategy. Data from two ongoing, publicly-funded, randomized-controlled trials will be used to evaluate these questions. In Study A, (XR-NTX Before vs. After Reentry), participants are randomized to receive their first XR-NTX dose before release, or at a nearby program post-release. In Study B, (enhanced XR-NTX vs. XR-NTX), both arms receive XR-NTX prior to release; the enhanced arm receives mobile medical (place of residence) XR-NTX treatment post-release, and the XR-NTX arm receives referral to a community treatment program post-release. The economic data collection instruments required to evaluate outcomes of interest were incorporated into both studies from baseline. Moreover, because the same instruments are being used in both trials on comparable populations, we have the opportunity to not only assess differences in outcomes between study arms within each trial, but also to merge the data sets and test for differences across trials.

DISCUSSION

Initiating XR-NTX for OUD prior to release from incarceration may improve patient health and well-being, while also producing downstream cost-offsets. This study offers the unique opportunity to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of multiple strategies, according to different stakeholder perspectives.