The Optimal Timing of Hepatitis C Therapy in Transplant Eligible Patients With Child B and C Cirrhosis: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

Review article: current and emerging therapies for the management of cirrhosis and its complications

BACKGROUND

Cirrhosis is increasingly common and morbid. Optimal utilisation of therapeutic strategies to prevent and control the complications of cirrhosis are central to improving clinical and patient-reported outcomes.

METHODS

We conducted a narrative review of the literature focusing on the most recent advances.

RESULTS

We review the aetiology-focused therapies that can prevent cirrhosis and its complications. These include anti-viral therapies, psychopharmacological therapy for alcohol-use disorder, and the current landscape of clinical trials for non-alcoholic steatohepatitis. We review the current standard of care and latest developments in the management of hepatic encephalopathy (HE), ascites and hepatorenal syndrome. We evaluate the promise and drawbacks of chemopreventative therapies that have been examined in trials and observational studies which may reduce the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma and cirrhosis complications. Finally, we examine the therapies which address the non-pain symptoms of cirrhosis including pruritis, muscle cramps, sexual dysfunction and fatigue.

CONCLUSION

The improvement of clinical and patient-reported outcomes for patients with cirrhosis is possible by applying evidence-based pharmacotherapeutic approaches to the prevention and treatment of cirrhosis complications.

Treatment of hepatitis C virus infection in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: Truth or dare?

The discovery of direct acting antivirals (DAA) with high rates of sustained virusological response is the biggest epoch-making event in the history of hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment. DAAs improve liver function, prevent hepatic decompensation, and might even reverse liver fibrosis. Although initial research pointed towards a potential drawback, it is now known beyond doubt that DAA treatment reduces hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) occurrence or recurrence after curative treatments. Unfortunately, the story has reached another plot twist, as several other issues have emerged: (i) Should we treat patients with early HCC and HCV before or after surgery/ablation? (ii) Should patients with HCC on the waiting list receive DAA before or after liver transplantation? (iii) Should we use interferon-free in patients with intermediate stage HCC or in patients under systemic treatments? In this review, we aim to offer some evidence-based answers to these changing clinical dilemmas where possible, or at least some educated guesses in cases were no or little data exists.

Management of Hepatitis C in Special Populations: HIV Coinfection, Renal Disease, and Decompensated Cirrhosis

Answer questions and earn CME.

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.

HCV Eradication with Direct-Acting Antivirals Does Not Impact HCC Progression on the Waiting List or HCC Recurrence after Liver Transplantation

BACKGROUND

The introduction of direct-acting antivirals (DAA) for HCV has led to high rates of HCV eradication. Treatment of patients awaiting liver transplantation (LT) has been controversial. Recent data suggests that DAA treatment may accelerate recurrent HCC. The impact of DAA on delisting for HCC progression or recurrent HCC post-LT has not been well characterized.

METHODS

A retrospective review of both waitlist patients and LT recipients at a single institution was performed. Patient demographics, HCV treatment, HCC features and treatments, biopsy results, and graft and patient survival were evaluated. Patients on the LT waitlist or who were transplanted between January 2014 and December 2015 were included. Data was collected through December 2017 to have a minimum of two years of follow-up.

RESULTS

In the study period, 128 adult LT were performed. 44 patients were HCV+, and 68.2% (N=30) also had HCC. 38.6% (N=17) of HCV+ patients received DAA pre-LT, and 94.1% (N=16/17) achieved sustained virologic response (SVR) pre-LT. Among untreated HCV+ patients who underwent LT, 81.5% (N=22/27) received DAA post-LT, with 82.6% achieving SVR post-LT (N=18/22). 82.1% (N=23/28) of untreated post-LT patients underwent liver biopsy prior to therapy, and 52.2% had at least F1 METAVIR fibrosis. 87.5% (N=14/16) of active waitlist patients received DAA and achieved SVR. HCV eradication did not result in higher rates of delisting for HCC progression. Due to local HCC listing criteria of total tumor volume and AFP, 60% (N=18/30) of HCV+/HCC patients were beyond Milan criteria at the time of LT. Despite this, there was no difference in HCC recurrence rates post-LT, whether patients achieved SVR pre- or post-LT.

CONCLUSIONS

These data suggest that HCV eradication pre-LT does not significantly impact waitlist time for HCV+ patients with HCC. HCV eradication does not impact rates of delisting for HCC progression or rates of HCC recurrence post-LT.

A risk score to predict the development of hepatic encephalopathy in a population-based cohort of patients with cirrhosis

Over 40% of patients with cirrhosis will develop hepatic encephalopathy (HE). HE is associated with decreased survival, falls, motor vehicle accidents, and frequent hospitalization. Accordingly, we aimed to develop a tool to risk-stratify patients for HE development. We studied a population-based cohort of all patients with cirrhosis without baseline HE (n = 1,979) from the Veterans Administration from Michigan, Indiana, and Ohio (January 1, 2005-December 31, 2010) using demographic, clinical, laboratory, and pharmacy data. The primary outcome was the development of HE. Risk scores were constructed with both baseline and longitudinal data (annually updated parameters) and validated using bootstrapping. The cohort had a mean age of 58.0 ± 8.3 years, 36% had hepatitis C, and 17% had ascites. Opiates, benzodiazepines, statins, and nonselective beta-blockers were taken at baseline by 24%, 13%, 17%, and 12%, respectively. Overall, 863 (43.7%) developed HE within 5 years. In multivariable models, risk factors (hazard ratio, 95% confidence interval) for HE included higher bilirubin (1.07, 1.05-1.09) and nonselective beta-blocker use (1.34, 1.09-1.64), while higher albumin (0.54, 0.48-0.59) and statin use (0.80, 0.65-0.98) were protective. Other clinical factors, including opiate and benzodiazepine use, were not predictive. The areas under the receiver operating characteristics curve for HE using the four significant variables in baseline and longitudinal models were 0.68 (0.66-0.70) and 0.73 (0.71-0.75), respectively. Model effects were validated and converted into a risk score. A score ≤0 in our longitudinal model assigns a 6% 1-year probability of HE, while a score >20 assigns a 38% 1-year risk.

CONCLUSION

Patients with cirrhosis can be stratified by a simple risk score for HE that accounts for changing clinical data; our data also highlight a role for statins in reducing cirrhosis complications including HE. (Hepatology 2017).

Hepatitis C virus-infected kidney waitlist patients: Treat now or treat later?

Currently many but not all centers transplant hepatitis C virus (HCV) viremic positive (+) donor kidneys into HCV+ recipients. Directed donation of HCV+ organs reduces the wait time to transplantation for HCV+ patients. Direct-acting antiviral (DAA) therapy can cure HCV in virtually all who are infected. Some have suggested that treatment of HCV+ waitlisted patients be deferred with the hope that earlier transplantation will provide better outcomes than early DAA therapy. However, there are not enough organs to guarantee prompt transplantation for the current waitlist of infected candidates. A Markov medical decision analysis model was created to compare the overall outcomes of delayed DAA therapy (Option 1) to immediate DAA therapy (Option 2) in waitlisted HCV+ patients. Option 1 patients were modeled to be transplanted 1 year earlier, with a higher cumulative transplant incidence (54% at 5 years post-listing vs 45% for Option 2). Despite this, Option 2 provided 0.43 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.38-0.49) more life years than Option 1. However, Option 1 was preferred for regions with much greater access to HCV+ organs or in patients with very low HCV+-associated mortality. The best option from an individual patient's perspective will differ by region and candidate.

Changes in practice and perception of hepatitis C and liver transplantation: Results of a national survey

With new practice guidelines, it is important to understand how liver transplant (LT) centers have incorporated direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) into the management of hepatitis C virus-infected (HCV+) candidates and recipients. To explore how DAAs have affected LT centers' willingness to treat HCV+ candidates and recipients and to use HCV+ donors, we surveyed high volume US LT centers (11/2014-12/2015) regarding practices for HCV+ candidates, recipients, and donors, before vs after DAAs. We used the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients to compare centers' number of LTs, HCV+ recipients, and HCV+ donors in the years before (1/1/2012-12/31/2013) and after (1/1/2016-12/31/2017) survey administration. Of 80 centers contacted, 57 (71.3%) responded, representing 69.0% of the total volume of LTs in 2013. After DAAs, most centers increased treating candidates with low (≤15) model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) (85.2%), intermediate/high (>15) MELD (92.6%), and hepatocellular carcinoma (79.6%). There was consensus to treat low MELD candidates (90.8% "most of the time/always"), but less certainty for intermediate/high MELD candidates (48.2% "sometimes"). Universal post-LT HCV treatment increased (7.4% vs 57.4%). After DAAs, 42.6% were more willing to use HCV+ donors for HCV+ candidates, and 38.9% were willing to consider using HCV+ donors for HCV- candidates. Overall, with DAAs, centers were more willing to treat HCV+ candidates and recipients and to use HCV+ donors; recent recommendations may help to guide treatment decisions for intermediate/high MELD candidates.

The optimal timing of hepatitis C therapy in liver transplant-eligible patients: Cost-effectiveness analysis of new opportunities

Different strategies of DAAs treatment are currently possible both pre- and postliver transplantation (LT). Clinical and economic consequences of these strategies still need to be adequately investigated; this study aims at assessing their cost-effectiveness. A decision analytical model was created to simulate the progression of HCV-infected patients listed for decompensated cirrhosis (DCC) or for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Three DAAs treatment strategies were compared: (i) a 12-week course of DAAs prior to transplantation (PRE-LT), (ii) a 4-week course of DAAs starting at the time of transplantation (PERI-LT) and (iii) a 12-week course of DAAs administered at disease recurrence (POST-LT). The population was substratified according to HCC presence and, in those without HCC, according to the MELD score at listing. Data on DAAs effectiveness were estimated using a cohort of patients still followed by 11 transplant centres of the European Liver and Intestine Transplant Association and by data available in the literature. In this study, PRE-LT treatment strategy was dominant for DCC patients with MELD<16 and cost-effective for those with MELD16-20, while POST-LT strategy emerged as cost-effective for DCC patients with MELD>20 and for those with HCC. Sensitivity analyses confirmed PRE-LT as the cost-effective strategy for patients with MELD≤20. In conclusion, PRE-LT treatment is cost-effective for patients with MELD≤20 without HCC, while treatments after LT are cost-effective in cirrhotic patients with MELD>20 and in those with HCC. It is worth reminding, though, that the final choice of a specific regimen at the patient level will have to be personalized based on clinical, social and transplant-related factors.

Cost Effectiveness of Pre- vs Post-Liver Transplant Hepatitis C Treatment With Direct-Acting Antivirals

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Oral direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) for hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment offer new hope to both pre- and post-liver transplant (LT) patients. However, whether to treat HCV patients before vs after LT is not clear because treatment can improve liver function but could reduce the chance of receiving an LT while on the waiting list. Our objective was to evaluate the cost effectiveness of pre-LT vs post-LT HCV treatment with oral DAAs in decompensated cirrhotic patients on the LT waiting list.

METHODS

We used a validated mathematical model that simulated a virtual trial comparing long-term clinical and cost outcomes of pre-LT vs post-LT HCV treatment with oral DAAs. Model parameters were estimated from United Network for Organ Sharing data, SOLAR-1 and 2 trials, and published studies. For each strategy, we estimated the quality-adjusted life-year, life expectancy, cost, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio.

RESULTS

For lower MELD scores, quality-adjusted life-years were higher with pre-LT HCV treatment compared with post-LT treatment. Pre-LT HCV treatment was cost saving in patients with MELD scores of 15 or less, and cost effective in patients with MELD scores of 16 to 21. In contrast, post-LT HCV treatment was cost effective in patients with MELD scores of 22 to 29 and cost saving if MELD scores were 30 or higher. Results varied by drug prices and by United Network for Organ Sharing regions.

CONCLUSIONS

For cirrhotic patients awaiting LT, pre-LT HCV treatment with DAAs is cost effective/saving in patients with MELD scores of 21 or lower, whereas post-LT HCV treatment is cost effective/saving in patients with MELD scores of 22 or higher.

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.

Negativization of viremia prior to liver transplant reduces early allograft dysfunction in hepatitis C-positive recipients

Although early allograft dysfunction (EAD) negatively impacts survival from the first months following liver transplantation (LT), direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs) have revolutionized hepatitis C virus (HCV) therapy. We investigated the EAD definition best predicting 90-day graft loss and identified EAD risk factors in HCV-positive recipients. From November 2002 to June 2016, 603 HCV-positive patients (hepatocellular carcinoma, 53.4%) underwent a first LT with HCV-negative donors. The median recipient Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score was 15, and the median donor age was 63 years. At LT, 77 (12.8%) patients were HCV RNA negative; negativization was achieved and maintained by pre-LT antiviral therapy (61 patients) or pre-LT plus a pre-emptive post-LT course (16 patients); 60 (77.9%) patients received DAAs and 17 (22.1%) interferon. We compared 3 different EAD definitions: (1) bilirubin ≥ 10 mg/dL or international normalized ratio ≥ 1.6 on day 7 after LT or aspartate aminotransferase or alanine aminotransferase > 2000 IU/L within 7 days of LT; (2) bilirubin > 10 mg/dL on days 2-7 after LT; and (3) MELD ≥ 19 on day 5 after LT. EAD defined by MELD ≥ 19 on day 5 after LT had the lowest negative (0.1) and the highest positive (1.9) likelihood ratio to predict 90-day graft loss. At 90 days after LT, 9.2% of recipients with EAD lost their graft as opposed to 0.7% of those without EAD (P < 0.001). At multivariate analysis, considering variables available at LT, MELD at LT of >25 (OR = 7.4) or 15-25 (OR = 3.2), graft macrovesicular steatosis ≥ 30% (OR = 6.7), HCV RNA positive at LT (OR = 2.7), donor age > 70 years (OR = 2.0), earlier LT era (OR = 1.8), and cold ischemia time ≥ 8 hours (OR = 1.8) were significant risk factors for EAD. In conclusion, in HCV-positive patients, MELD ≥ 19 on day 5 after LT best predicts 90-day graft loss. Preventing graft infection by pre-/peri-LT antiviral therapy reduces EAD incidence and could be most beneficial in high-MELD patients and recipients of suboptimal grafts. Liver Transplantation 23 915-924 2017 AASLD.

Optimal timing of hepatitis C treatment for patients on the liver transplant waiting list

The availability of oral direct-acting antivirals has altered the hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment paradigm for both pre-liver transplant (LT) and post-LT patients. There is a perceived trade-off between pre-LT versus post-LT treatment of HCV-treatment may improve liver function but potentially decrease the likelihood of a necessary LT. Our objective was to identify LT-eligible patients with decompensated cirrhosis who would benefit (and not benefit) from pre-LT treatment based on their Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) scores. We simulated a virtual trial comparing long-term outcomes of pre-LT versus post-LT HCV treatment with oral direct-acting antivirals for patients with MELD scores between 10 and 40. We developed a Markov-based microsimulation model, which simulated the life course of patients on the transplant waiting list and after LT. Simulation of LT integrated data from recent trials of oral direct-acting antivirals (SOLAR 1 and 2), the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS), and other studies. The outcomes of the model included life expectancy, 1-year and 5-year patient survival, and mortality. Model-predicted patient survival was validated with UNOS data. We found that, at the national level, treating HCV before LT increased life expectancy if MELD was ≤27 but could decrease life expectancy at higher MELD scores. Depending on the UNOS region, the threshold MELD score to treat HCV pre-LT varied between 23 and 27 and was lower for UNOS regions 3, 10, and 11 and higher for regions 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, and 9. Sensitivity analysis showed that the thresholds were stable.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that the optimal MELD threshold below which decompensated cirrhosis patients should receive HCV treatment while awaiting LT is between 23 and 27, depending on the UNOS region. (Hepatology 2017;65:777-788).

Developing therapies to treat hepatitis C infection in post-liver transplant recipients

INTRODUCTION

Currently, hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection remains the most common indication for liver transplant in the United States (US) with almost universal HCV recurrence in the post-liver transplant setting. Previous interferon (IFN)-related efficacy and tolerability concerns about worsening liver function have limited treatment options for many patients with HCV-associated decompensated liver disease and post-liver transplant recipients. However, the last decade has seen a seen a radical shift in the management of HCV with multiple direct-acting antiviral (DAA) treatments that provide more effective, all-oral, IFN-free alternatives. Areas covered: This review will serve to highlight the various pharmacotherapies available to clinicians for patients with HCV recurrence post-liver transplant. A brief history of prior regimens is provided with evidence for newer treatments presented. Also detailed are updated guidelines from societal organizations. Finally, timing of HCV treatment is discussed as the decision to treat patients in a pre or post-liver transplant setting remains challenging. Expert opinion: While there are many potential available therapies for HCV recurrence in the post-liver transplant setting, daclatasvir/sofosbuvir and ledipasvir/sofosbuvir have been the most extensively studied. Newer, pangenotypic generation drugs require more evidence before routine utilization in post-liver transplant recipients.