Patients' preferences and health utility assessment with SF-6D and EQ-5D in patients with chronic hepatitis C treated with sofosbuvir regimens

Impact of sofosbuvir and daclastavir on health-related quality of life in patients co-infected with hepatitis C and human immunodeficiency virus

BACKGROUND

We conducted a real-life study of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) transformation before and 12 weeks after sofosbuvir and daclatasvir therapy in HCV/HIV co-infected patients. Factors related to the significant changes of each HRQoL domain/item were also evaluated.

METHODS

A prospective study was performed in the HIV integrated clinic at Cipto Mangunkusumo Hospital, Jakarta. HCV/HIV co-infected patients who started sofosbuvir and daclatasvir from government free DAA program in 2017-2019. WHOQoL-HIV BREF and RAND SF-36 questionnaires were recorded at baseline and post-treatment week 12.

RESULTS

145 patients with mean age of 37.8 years (SD = 4.2) were included in the analysis. Most of patients were male (89%), previous IVDU (89%), active smoker (50.4%) and non-cirrhosis (80%). SVR12 was achieved in 95.5% of patients. Sofosbuvir and daclatasvir treatments showed positive impacts on 2 domains and 2 other items of WHOQoL-HIV BREF and 2 domains and 1 item of SF-36. Predicting factors of significant increase in each domain/item were: male and normal body mass index (BMI) for level of independence (RR 4.01,95% CI 1.09-14.74 and 4.80,95% CI 1.79-12.81); higher HCV-RNA for overall perception of QoL (RR 0.42,95% CI 0.18-0.94); non-smoking status for overall perception of health (RR 0.32,95% CI 0.15-0.66); male and fibrosis stage 0-1 for general health (RR 6.21,95% CI 1.69-22.88 and 2.86,95% CI 1.16-7.00); and the use of NNRTI-based ART (RR 5.23, 95% CI 1.16-23.65). Spiritual/personal belief decline was predicted by non-smoking status (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.23-0.95). Treatment success was not associated with any changes of HR-QoL domain/item.

CONCLUSIONS

HCV/HIV co-infected patients were successfully treated with sofosbuvir and daclatasvir and experienced improvement of HRQoL 12 weeks after treatment completion.

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

BACKGROUND

Many people who inject drugs in the United States have chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV). On-site treatment in opiate agonist treatment (OAT) programs addresses HCV treatment barriers, but few evidence-based models exist.

METHODS

We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of HCV treatment models for OAT patients using data from a randomized trial conducted in Bronx, New York. We used a decision analytic model to compare self-administered individual treatment (SIT), group treatment (GT), directly observed therapy (DOT), and no intervention for a simulated cohort with the same demographic characteristics of trial participants. We projected long-term outcomes using an established model of HCV disease progression and treatment (hepatitis C cost-effectiveness model: HEP-CE). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) are reported in 2016 US$/quality-adjusted life years (QALY), discounted 3% annually, from the healthcare sector and societal perspectives.

RESULTS

For those assigned to SIT, we projected 89% would ever achieve a sustained viral response (SVR), with 7.21 QALYs and a $245 500 lifetime cost, compared to 22% achieving SVR, with 5.49 QALYs and a $161 300 lifetime cost, with no intervention. GT was more efficient than SIT, resulting in 0.33 additional QALYs and a $14 100 lower lifetime cost per person, with an ICER of $34 300/QALY, compared to no intervention. DOT was slightly more effective and costly than GT, with an ICER > $100 000/QALY, compared to GT. In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, GT and DOT were preferred in 91% of simulations at a threshold of <$100 000/QALY; conclusions were similar from the societal perspective.

CONCLUSIONS

All models were associated with high rates of achieving SVR, compared to standard care. GT and DOT treatment models should be considered as cost-effective alternatives to SIT.

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Health Utilities in Patients With Chronic Hepatitis C

BACKGROUND

Chronic hepatitis C (CHC) is among the most burdensome infectious diseases in the world. Health utilities are a valuable tool for quantifying this burden and conducting cost-utility analysis.

OBJECTIVE

Our study summarizes the available data on utilities in CHC patients. This will facilitate analyses of CHC treatment and elimination strategies.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for studies measuring utilities in CHC patients. Utilities were pooled by health state and utility instrument using meta-analysis. A further analysis used meta-regression to adjust for the effects of clinical status and methodological variation.

RESULTS

Fifty-one clinical studies comprising 15 053 patients were included. Based on the meta-regression, patients' utilities were lower for more severe health states (predicted mean EuroQol-5D-3L utility for mild/moderate CHC: 0.751; compensated cirrhosis: 0.671; hepatocellular carcinoma: 0.662; decompensated cirrhosis: 0.602). Patients receiving interferon-based treatment had lower utilities than those on interferon-free treatment (0.647 vs 0.733). Patients who achieved sustained virologic response (0.786) had higher utilities than those with mild to moderate CHC. Utilities were substantially higher for patients in experimental studies compared to observational studies (coefficient: +0.074, P < .05). The time tradeoff instrument was associated with the highest utilities, and the Health Utilities Index 3 was associated with the lowest utilities.

CONCLUSION

Chronic hepatitis C is associated with a significant impairment in global health status, as measured by health utility instruments. Impairment is greater in advanced disease. Experimental study designs yield higher utilities-an effect not previously documented. Curative therapy can alleviate the burden of CHC, although further research is needed in certain areas, such as the long-term impacts of treatment on utilities.

Quality of life and quality-adjusted life years of chronic schistosomiasis mansoni patients in Brazil in 2015

Background

Measures of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) have been used to express the impact of neglected diseases and to generate indicators for health economic assessments. Schistosomiasis mansoni is a neglected disease with various clinical manifestations, including severe repercussions, caused by parasitic worms. Here we describe the quality of life of chronic schistosomiasis mansoni patients and estimate the quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) associated with chronic schistosomiasis mansoni in Brazil in 2015.

Methods

A HRQoL study was carried out using the three-level European Quality of Life 5-Dimensions (EQ-5D-3L) questionnaire in 147 chronic schistosomiasis mansoni patients at an outpatient monitoring facility of an endemic state for schistosomiasis.

Results

Losses in HRQoL were observed in all five dimensions of the EQ-5D-3L. Patients >60 y and 40-49 y of age reported the highest frequencies of problems. The average utility index was 0.71, and the median index was significantly lower among female patients and patients with comorbidities (0.68; p<0.05) compared with the entire sample. Approximately 26.7 QALYs were estimated for the study population and 31.2 QALYs for the chronic schistosomiasis mansoni patients in Brazil.

Conclusions

The advanced forms of schistosomiasis mansoni, even during treatment, contribute to important health losses in the population dealing with the disease.

French Patients with Hepatitis C Treated with Direct-Acting Antiviral Combinations: The Effect on Patient-Reported Outcomes

BACKGROUND

In addition to high efficacy, new anti-hepatitis C virus (HCV) regimens improve patient-reported outcomes (PROs), which must be considered by policymakers in different countries when deciding upon treatment coverage.

OBJECTIVE

To assess PROs of French patients with HCV treated with different antiviral regimens.

METHODS

French patients with HCV from 11 clinical trials were included. PROs were measured before, during, and after treatment (Short Form-36 version 2, Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue, Chronic Liver Disease Questionnaire-HCV, and Work Productivity and Activity Index: Specific Health Problem).

RESULTS

A total of 931 subjects (age 54 ± 10 years, 60.3% males, 55% employed, 33.5% cirrhotic, 50% treatment-naive, and 45.6% genotype 1) were treated with a combination of interferon, ribavirin, and sofosbuvir (IFN + RBV + SOF) (N = 11; excluded from comparisons), SOF/RBV ± ledipasvir (LDV) (N = 202), IFN/RBV-free (LDV/SOF, SOF/velpatasvir, or SOF/velpatasvir/voxilaprevir) (N = 594), or placebo (N = 124). The sustained virologic response 12 (SVR-12) rates were 87.1% for IFN-free RBV-containing regimens, 97.6% for IFN/RBV-free regimens, and 0% for placebo. Baseline PRO scores were not different across the treatment groups (all P > 0.10). At the end of treatment, patients treated with IFN-free SOF/RBV ± LDV experienced moderate declines in their PRO scores (up to -7.9% of a PRO range size; P < 0.05), and placebo-treated group did not have significant changes in their PROs (P > 0.05). In contrast, the IFN/RBV-free group experienced significant on-treatment improvement in most PROs (up to +7.9%; P < 0.05). Despite those on-treatment differences, most PROs improved with SVR-12 and SVR-24 regardless of the regimen. In comparison with matched controls from the United States treated with the same regimens, French subjects had lower baseline PROs but similar or greater post-SVR PRO improvements.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of IFN- and RBV-free regimens leads to significant PRO improvement during treatment and after SVR in French patients with HCV.

Health state utility values measured using the EuroQol 5-dimensions questionnaire in adults with chronic hepatitis C: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Chronic hepatitis C infection and its treatment can considerably affect patients' health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL). This study aimed to identify and summarise the current evidence base for health state utility values (HSUVs) in patients with chronic hepatitis C infection, generated using the EuroQol 5-dimensions (EQ-5D) questionnaire.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library and EconLit were searched from database inception through 31 August 2017. Eligible studies reported HSUVs elicited using the EQ-5D questionnaire in adults with chronic hepatitis C infection. Study quality and risk of bias were assessed.

RESULTS

Of 1480 records identified, 26 studies were included. The most commonly defined health states described different stages of chronic hepatitis C infection and specific liver-related disease states, including METAVIR score, compensated and decompensated cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma and liver transplantation. Patients with higher METAVIR scores tended to have lower EQ-5D scores compared to patients with lower METAVIR scores. Patients that achieved sustained virologic responses tended to have higher EQ-5D scores compared to those that did not. A meta-analysis conducted on three studies confirmed that patients with decompensated cirrhosis have significantly lower HSUVs than patients with compensated cirrhosis [mean difference - 0.11 (95% CI - 0.19 to - 0.04)], implying worse HRQoL. However, there was not sufficient evidence to compare how different treatments for chronic hepatitis C infection affect EQ-5D scores.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides a summary of EQ-5D HSUVs for patients with chronic hepatitis C infection, and demonstrates that clinically important disease stages associated with treatment decisions are associated with differences in HRQoL.

Cost-effectiveness of hepatitis C screening and treatment linkage intervention in US methadone maintenance treatment programs

BACKGROUND

We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of a hepatitis C (HCV) screening and active linkage to care intervention in US methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) patients using data from a randomized trial conducted in New York City and San Francisco.

METHODS

We used a decision analytic model to compare 1) no intervention; 2) HCV screening and education (control); and 3) HCV screening, education, and care coordination (active linkage intervention). We also explored an alternative strategy wherein HCV/HIV co-infected participants linked elsewhere. Trial data include population characteristics (67% male, mean age 48, 58% HCV infected) and linkage rates. Data from published sources include treatment efficacy and HCV re-infection risk. We projected quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and lifetime medical costs using an established model of HCV (HEP-CE). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) are in 2015 US$/QALY discounted 3% annually.

RESULTS

The control strategy resulted in a projected 35% linking to care within 6 months and 31% achieving sustained virologic response (SVR). The intervention resulted in 60% linking and 54% achieving SVR with an ICER of $24,600/QALY compared to no intervention from the healthcare sector perspective and was a more efficient use of resources than the control strategy. The intervention had an ICER of $76,500/QALY compared to the alternative strategy. From a societal perspective, the intervention had a net monetary benefit of $511,000-$975,600.

CONCLUSIONS

HCV care coordination interventions that include screening, education and active linkage to care in MMT settings are likely cost-effective at a conventional $100,000/QALY threshold for both HCV mono-infected and HIV co-infected patients.

Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Treatment of Chronic Hepatitis C Virus Infection With Sofosbuvir and Velpatasvir, With or Without Voxilaprevir

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Chronic infection with hepatitis C virus (HCV) has many hepatic and extrahepatic manifestations, measured by patient-reported outcomes (PROs). We measured changes in PROs during HCV treatment with recently developed pangenotypic regimens and from a sustained virologic response 12 weeks after treatment ended (SVR12).

METHODS

We collected PRO data from 2 multi-center, blinded, international phase 3 trials of sofosbuvir, velpatasvir, and voxilaprevir, from 748 patients previously treated with direct-acting antivirals for chronic infection with HCV of any genotype (59% HCV genotype 1, 43% with compensated cirrhosis) (POLARIS-1 and POLARIS-4). The combination of sofosbuvir, velpatasvir, and voxilaprevir was given to 445 patients, the combination of sofosbuvir and velpatasvir to 151 patients, and placebo to 152 patients. Patients completed the SF-36, FACIT-F, CLDQ-HCV, and WPAI:SHP questionnaires at baseline, during treatment, and during the follow-up period.

RESULTS

There was no difference in baseline clinical or demographic features or PRO scores among the groups (all P > .05). The group that received the combination of sofosbuvir, velpatasvir, and voxilaprevir had more gastrointestinal symptoms than the groups that received sofosbuvir and velpatasvir or placebo (P = .0001). An SVR12 was achieved by 90.1% of patients who received sofosbuvir and velpatasvir vs 96.9% of patients who received sofosbuvir, velpatasvir, and voxilaprevir (P = .0008). After 12 weeks of treatment, some PRO scores improved in both treatment groups (by 2.5 or by 9.1 points, on a 0-100 scale; P < .05) but not in the placebo group. All increases in PRO scores were sustained or increased after treatment ended (an increase of up to 11.1 points at 12 weeks after treatment and an increase of up to 16.6 points at 24 weeks after treatment ended) (P < .05 for all but 2 PROs). There were no differences in PROs between the sofosbuvir and velpatasvir group vs the sofosbuvir, velpatasvir, and voxilaprevir group (all P > .05). In multivariate analysis, after adjustment for clinical and demographic factors and baseline PRO scores, receiving treatment was associated with higher PROs scores than receiving placebo (beta as high as 5.1) (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

In an analysis of data from 2 phase 3 clinical trials of patients with chronic HCV infection of any genotype, we found the combination of sofosbuvir, velpatasvir, with or without voxilaprevir, to increase PRO scores compared with placebo. These findings indicate the comprehensive benefit of these regimens during treatment and after SVR.

Cost-Effectiveness of One-Time Hepatitis C Screening Strategies Among Adolescents and Young Adults in Primary Care Settings

Background

High hepatitis C virus (HCV) rates have been reported in young people who inject drugs (PWID). We evaluated the clinical benefit and cost-effectiveness of testing among youth seen in communities with a high overall number of reported HCV cases.

Methods

We developed a decision analytic model to project quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), costs (2016 US$), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of 9 strategies for 1-time testing among 15- to 30-year-olds seen at urban community health centers. Strategies differed in 3 ways: targeted vs routine testing, rapid finger stick vs standard venipuncture, and ordered by physician vs by counselor/tester using standing orders. We performed deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) to evaluate uncertainty.

Results

Compared to targeted risk-based testing (current standard of care), routine testing increased the lifetime medical cost by $80 and discounted QALYs by 0.0013 per person. Across all strategies, rapid testing provided higher QALYs at a lower cost per QALY gained and was always preferred. Counselor-initiated routine rapid testing was associated with an ICER of $71000/QALY gained. Results were sensitive to offer and result receipt rates. Counselor-initiated routine rapid testing was cost-effective (ICER <$100000/QALY) unless the prevalence of PWID was <0.59%, HCV prevalence among PWID was <16%, reinfection rate was >26 cases per 100 person-years, or reflex confirmatory testing followed all reactive venipuncture diagnostics. In PSA, routine rapid testing was the optimal strategy in 90% of simulations.

Conclusions

Routine rapid HCV testing among 15- to 30-year-olds may be cost-effective when the prevalence of PWID is >0.59%.

Before or After Transplantation? A Review of the Cost Effectiveness of Treating Waitlisted Patients With Hepatitis C

All patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections can and should be treated. Though highly effective direct-acting antiviral therapies are costly, the price of a cure is a 1-time investment that is outweighed by future benefits. For clinicians caring for patients requiring liver transplant, the key question relates to the timing of treatment: before or after liver transplantation? On 1 hand, treating HCV often improves our patients' model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score, decreasing costs, and potentially improving longevity by reducing our patients' risk of death and transplantation. On the other hand, there is a concern that the cured patient with decompensated cirrhosis will find themselves in "MELD purgatory" with nonprogressive liver disease but a poor quality of life. At the same time, some patients, such as those with hepatocellular carcinoma, will require liver transplant irrespective of their MELD meaning that pretransplant therapy cannot reduce costs in such settings. These important tradeoffs are often difficult reconcile for clinicians who care for patients awaiting liver transplant. Fortunately, guidance for navigating these competing concerns can be obtained from cost-effectiveness analyses. Herein, we review the available data on this approach to HCV therapy before or after liver transplant.

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

BACKGROUND

Ledipasvir (LDV)/sofosbuvir (SOF) has demonstrated high efficacy, safety, and tolerability in hepatitis C virus (HCV)-infected patients. There is limited data, however, regarding the optimal timing of therapy in the context of possible liver transplantation (LT).

METHODS

We compared the cost-effectiveness of 12 weeks of HCV therapy before or after LT or nontreatment using a decision analytical microsimulation state-transition model for a simulated cohort of 10 000 patients with HCV Genotype 1 or 4 with Child B or C cirrhosis. All model parameters regarding the efficacy of therapy, adverse events and the effect of therapy on changes in model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) scores were derived from the SOLAR-1 and 2 trials. The simulations were repeated with 10 000 samples from the parameter distributions. The primary outcome was cost (2014 US dollars) per quality adjusted life year.

RESULTS

Treatment before LT yielded more quality-adjusted life year for less money than treatment after LT or nontreatment. Treatment before LT was cost-effective in 100% of samples at a willingness-to-pay threshold of US $100 000 in the base-case and when the analysis was restricted to Child B alone, Child C, or MELD > 15. Treatment before transplant was not cost-effective when MELD was 6-10. In sensitivity analyses, the MELD after which treatment before transplant was cost-effective was 13 and the maximum cost of LDV/SOF therapy at which treatment before LT is cost-effective is US $177 381.

CONCLUSIONS

From a societal perspective, HCV therapy using LDV/SOF with ribavirin before LT is the most cost-effective strategy for patients with decompensated cirrhosis and MELD score greater than 13.

Sofosbuvir and Velpatasvir Combination Improves Patient-reported Outcomes for Patients With HCV Infection, Without or With Compensated or Decompensated Cirrhosis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The combination of sofosbuvir and velpatasvir is used to treat patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection of different genotypes. We compared the effects of this treatment regimen, with and without ribavirin, on outcomes reported by patients (patient-reported outcomes [PROs]) with HCV infection, with or without cirrhosis.

METHODS

We performed a post hoc analysis of data collected from phase 3 clinical trials (ASTRAL-1, -2, -3, and -4) of 1701 patients infected with HCV of different genotypes treated with sofosbuvir and velpatasvir with ribavirin for 12 weeks (n = 87), sofosbuvir with ribavirin for 12 or 24 weeks (n = 401), and ribavirin-free sofosbuvir and velpatasvir for 12 or 24 weeks (n = 1213). In all trials, participants completed 4 PRO questionnaires (while blinded to their HCV RNA levels): the Short Form-36, the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue, the Chronic Liver Disease Questionnaire-HCV Version, and the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment: Specific Health Problem, at multiple time points. We compared baseline PROs and changes in PROs following treatment in patients without cirrhosis (n = 1112), with compensated cirrhosis (n = 338), and with decompensated cirrhosis (n = 251).

RESULTS

Baseline PRO scores were as much as 33.5% lower in patients with decompensated cirrhosis than in patients without cirrhosis (P < .05). Following treatment with ribavirin-containing regimens, changes in PRO scores were similar among patients with compensated and decompensated cirrhosis (all P > .01). Treatment with these regimens increased some PRO scores by as much as 11.8% from baseline (P < .05) and reduced others, by as much as 7.1% (P < .05). Despite this, by 12 weeks after cessation of treatment with ribavirin-containing regimens, all PRO decrements resolved; PRO scores increased by as much as 14.2%, and as much as 17.1% at 24 weeks after treatment, regardless of cirrhosis status (all P > .01 between cirrhosis groups). In contrast, treatment with ribavirin-free sofosbuvir and velpatasvir increased PRO scores for patients with compensated cirrhosis, and even more so in patients with decompensated cirrhosis starting at treatment Week 4; no statistically significant decrement was observed at any time point (all 1-sided P values > .05). In multivariate analysis, compensated cirrhosis was associated with a 2.3% to 5.0% greater increase in PRO scores following treatment with sofosbuvir and velpatasvir (P < .05); decompensated cirrhosis was associated with a 5.5%-9.1% greater increase (P < .002). Clinicaltrials.gov number, NCT02201940, NCT02220998, NCT02201953, NCT02201901.

CONCLUSIONS

In an analysis of data from 4 phase 3 clinical trials, we found that patients with HCV infection (especially those with decompensated cirrhosis) have significant increases in their PRO scores during treatment with sofosbuvir and velpatasvir and after achieving a sustained virologic response.

Health utilities using SF-6D scores in Japanese patients with chronic hepatitis C treated with sofosbuvir-based regimens in clinical trials

Background

Health utilities are preference-based measures for health states which are typically used in economic analyses to estimate quality-adjusted life years. Our aim is to report the standard SF-6D health utility scores in Japanese patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) during treatment with different regimens.

Methods

Japanese patients were enrolled in clinical trials of sofosbuvir (SOF) used in combination with or without ledipasvir (LDV) and/or ribavirin (RBV). The SF-6D health utility scores were calculated at multiple time points from the SF-36 instrument.

Results

Four hundred ninety-four patients with HCV (genotype 1 and 2) were enrolled: 19% with cirrhosis, 48% with a prior history of anti-HCV treatment. Of those, 153 received SOF + RBV, 170 received LDV/SOF + RBV, 171 received LDV/SOF for 12 weeks; the SVR rates were: 97, 98 and 100%, respectively. Patients treated with the three regimens had similar SF-6D scores before treatment (p = 0.87): 76.1 ± 11.5. During treatment with RBV containing regimen, patients experienced a decrement in their health utility scores to 74.3 ± 12.5 by the end of treatment (p = 0.03), while patients treated with RBV-free LDV/SOF had their SF-6D scores improved to 79.2 ± 12.8 after 12 weeks of treatment (p = 0.0004). At post-treatment week 12, in patients who achieved SVR-12, the SF-6D scores were similar between the treatment regimens (p = 0.36), and an average improvement of +1.4 points from baseline (p = 0.01) was noted. In multivariate analysis, the use of RBV was independently associated with lower utility score during treatment (beta = 4.7 ± 1.6, p < 0.0001).

Conclusion

Health utilities are lower in Japanese HCV patients and tend to improve after clearance of infection.

The impact of antiviral therapy for hepatitis C on the quality of life: a perspective

Instruments to assess the impact of hepatitis C virus infection on health and measurements of reported outcomes in patients (health-related quality of life [HRQOL]) are not frequently used to assign priority for treatment. Several systematic reviews have been performed that provide a comprehensive analysis to help understand patient reported outcomes (PROs) with direct acting antiviral treatment. Clinical trials with direct acting antivirals (DAAs) provide an important opportunity to assess PROs without interferon or ribavirin. Significant improvement in quality of life parameters have been noted with DAA therapy. The results show improvement in HRQOL indices when interferon-free and particularly interferon and ribavirin-free treatments are compared to interferon and ribavirin treatment. Improvements in HRQOL indices are an encouraging aspect of the cure of chronic hepatitis C. It is unclear whether these measurable HRQOL improvements can be translated into a net benefit improvement in work productivity and a social dimension that is significant enough to convince payers of the added value of early and more widespread treatment.

Cost Effectiveness and Cost Containment in the Era of Interferon-Free Therapies to Treat Hepatitis C Virus Genotype 1

Background

Interferon-free regimens to treat hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 1 are effective but costly. At this time, payers in the United States use strategies to control costs including (1) limiting treatment to those with advanced disease and (2) negotiating price discounts in exchange for exclusivity.

Methods

We used Monte Carlo simulation to investigate budgetary impact and cost effectiveness of these treatment policies and to identify strategies that balance access with cost control. Outcomes included nondiscounted 5-year payer cost per 10000 HCV-infected patients and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios.

Results

We found that the budgetary impact of HCV treatment is high, with 5-year undiscounted costs of $1.0 billion to 2.3 billion per 10000 HCV-infected patients depending on regimen choices. Among noncirrhotic patients, using the least costly interferon-free regimen leads to the lowest payer costs with negligible difference in clinical outcomes, even when the lower cost regimen is less convenient and/or effective. Among cirrhotic patients, more effective but costly regimens remain cost effective. Controlling costs by restricting treatment to those with fibrosis stage 2 or greater disease was cost ineffective for any patient type compared with treating all patients.

Conclusions

Treatment strategies using interferon-free therapies to treat all HCV-infected persons are cost effective, but short-term cost is high. Among noncirrhotic patients, using the least costly interferon-free regimen, even if it is not single tablet or once daily, is the cost-control strategy that results in best outcomes. Restricting treatment to patients with more advanced disease often results in worse outcomes than treating all patients, and it is not preferred.

Assessment of health utilities and quality of life in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease

Background

Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is one of the most common causes of chronic liver disease associated with increased liver-related mortality. Additionally, NAFLD could potentially impair health-related quality of life. Although an approved treatment for NAFLD does not exist, a number of new drugs for treatment of NAFLD are being developed. As the efficacy and safety of these regimens are being established, their cost-effectiveness, which requires the use of quality of life metrics and health utility scores to quality-adjusted outcomes, must also be assessed. The aim of this study was to report quality of life and health utilities in patients with NAFLD with and without cirrhosis for future use.

Methods

Patients with NAFLD were seen in an outpatient clinic setting. Each patient had extensive clinical data and completed the Short Form-36 (SF-36 V.1) questionnaire. The SF-6D health utility scores were calculated.

Results

There were 89 patients with the spectrum of NAFLD completed the SF-36 questionnaire: 59 with non-cirrhotic NAFLD and 30 with cirrhosis. Patients with NAFLD had significantly lower quality of life and health utility scores than the general population (all p<0.0001). Furthermore, patients with cirrhosis had lower quality of life and utility scores than non-cirrhotic NAFLD patients: SF-6D 0.660±0.107 in non-cirrhotic NAFLD vs 0.551±0.138 in cirrhotic NAFLD (p=0.0003).

Conclusions

Health utilities and quality of life scores are impaired in patients with cirrhotic NAFLD. These values should be used in cost-effectiveness analysis of the upcoming treatment regimens for advanced NAFLD.

Patient-reported outcomes with sofosbuvir and velpatasvir with or without ribavirin for hepatitis C virus-related decompensated cirrhosis: an exploratory analysis from the randomised, open-label ASTRAL-4 phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment regimens with direct-acting antivirals have not been extensively studied in patients with decompensated cirrhosis. We assessed patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients with decompensated cirrhosis given a fixed-dose combination of sofosbuvir and velpatasvir with and without ribavirin.

METHODS

This study was an exploratory analysis of data collected in a randomised, open-label phase 3 trial (ASTRAL-4) in which patients with HCV-related decompensated cirrhosis were randomly assigned to an all-oral fixed-dose combination of sofosbuvir (400 mg) and velpatasvir (100 mg) once daily for 12 weeks, sofosbuvir and velpatasvir plus oral ribavirin (weight-based 1000 mg or 1200 mg) for 12 weeks, or sofosbuvir and velpatasvir for 24 weeks. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with any HCV genotype and decompensated cirrhosis at screening. PROs were collected for the intention-to-treat population using four questionnaires, Short Form (36) Health Survey version 2 (SF-36v2), the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F), the Chronic Liver Disease Questionnaire-HCV Version (CLDQ-HCV), and the Work Productivity Activity Index:HCV (WPAI), which were given prospectively to patients before, during, and after treatment. The ASTRAL-4 study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02201901.

FINDINGS

Patients were enrolled at 47 hepatology outpatient practices in the USA from Aug 19, 2014, to Dec 19, 2014. 267 patients with HCV-related decompensated cirrhosis were included. In patients given sofosbuvir and velpatasvir for 12 weeks (n=90), clinically significant improvements in PROs started 4 weeks after treatment initiation (+4·4 to +7·5 points on a 0-100 scale at treatment week 4). By the end of treatment, mean improvements in PROs of +5·3 to +16·0 points were noted in all PROs except for role emotional, mental component summary, and social wellbeing scores and work productivity metrics by WPAI:HCV. Similar end-of-treatment improvements (+3·8 to +17·0 points) were observed in patients given sofosbuvir and velpatasvir for 24 weeks (n=90). In patients given sofosbuvir and velpatasvir plus ribavirin (n=87), PRO scores decreased within 4 weeks of treatment (-3·6 to -6·9 points), although scores returned to the baseline levels by the end of treatment. After treatment cessation, significant improvements in all PROs were similar between the treatment groups (all p>0·01) and, by post-treatment week 24, improvements were between +4·9 and +21·2 points. In multivariate analysis, predictors of PRO impairment were treatment naivety, anxiety, use of anxiolytics, use of antidepressants, use of opioids, ribavirin use, the presence of ascites, encephalopathy, insomnia, and depression.

INTERPRETATION

A clinically significant early (within 4 weeks) and sustained improvement in PROs was observed in patients with HCV-related decompensated cirrhosis who were given sofosbuvir and velpatasvir without ribavirin. A similar regimen with ribavirin resulted in a temporary decrease in PROs, which completely resolved after 8 weeks of treatment. Accompanied by high efficacy, the favourable effect of treatment on PROs improves patients' experience in this difficult-to-treat population with HCV.

FUNDING

Gilead Sciences.

Cost-Effectiveness of Genotype 1 Chronic Hepatitis C Virus Treatments in Patients Coinfected with Human Immunodeficiency Virus in the United States

INTRODUCTION

New treatments for chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) are highly effective in patients coinfected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). This study estimated the cost-effectiveness of treatments for genotype 1 (GT1) HCV in HIV-coinfected patients.

METHODS

A Markov model based on HCV natural history was used. The base-case analysis included both treatment-naïve and -experienced patients. Alternatives were ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir, dasabuvir with or without ribavirin (3D ± R) for 12 or 24 weeks, sofosbuvir plus peginterferon and R (SOF + PR) for 12 weeks, SOF + R for 24 weeks, and no treatment (NT). A subgroup analysis restricted to treatment-naïve, non-cirrhotic patients compared 3D ± R for 12 weeks to SOF plus ledipasvir (LDV) for 12 weeks and NT. Transition probabilities, utilities, and costs were obtained from the published literature. Outcomes were measured over a lifetime horizon and included rates of compensated cirrhosis, decompensated cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma and liver-related death, total costs, life-years, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).

RESULTS

In the base-case, SOF + R was dominated by both SOF + PR and 3D ± R. Compared to SOF + PR, 3D ± R had an ICER of $45,581. The lifetime rates of liver morbidity and mortality were lower among those treated with 3D ± R compared to SOF + PR, SOF + R, or NT. In the subgroup analysis, 3D ± R was cost-effective compared to NT at a threshold of $50,000 per QALY (ICER $27,496). SOF/LDV had an ICER of $104,489 per QALY gained compared to 3D ± R.

CONCLUSION

In the GT1 HCV population coinfected with HIV, 3D ± R was cost-effective compared to NT, SOF + R, and SOF + PR. In the treatment-naïve sub-population, 3D ± R was cost-effective compared to NT and SOF/LDV.

Patient-Reported Outcomes of Elderly Adults with Chronic Hepatitis C Treated with Interferon- and Ribavirin-Free Regimens

The purpose of the study was to assess the effect of different treatment regimens for chronic hepatitis C on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of individuals aged 65 and older with chronic hepatitis C. PRO data from eight multinational multicenter Phase 2 and 3 clinical trials were included. Of 3,120 participants in these clinical trials, 229 were aged 65 and older (67.8 ± 3.2, 57% male, 75% treatment-naïve, 22% cirrhotic), and 90 of those received ledipasvir plus sofosbuvir (LDV + SOF), 119 received SOF plus ribavirin (SOF + RBV), and 20 received pegylated IFN, SOF, and RBV (IFN + SOF + RBV). Participants aged 65 and older had slightly more pretreatment PRO impairment in their physical functioning than younger individuals (-3.1% on a normalized 0-100% PRO scale, P < .001). Despite this, these participants experienced significant PRO improvement during treatment with IFN-free RBV-free regimens (up to +8.0%, P < .001), similar to improvements in younger participants. In contrast, participants aged 65 and older experienced substantial decline in PROs while receiving IFN- or RBV-containing regimens (up to -18.9% in IFN + SOF + RBV, -10.4% in IFN-free SOF+RBV, P < .001), and some were greater than in the younger group. Nevertheless, after achieving sustained viral clearance at Posttreatment Week 12, PROs in participants aged 65 and older improved regardless of the regimen (up to +10.4%, P < .001). In multivariate analysis of the cohort aged 65 and older, the use of IFN and RBV was consistently associated with PRO impairment during treatment. The use of an IFN- and RBV-free anti-HCV regimen in older adults with hepatitis C results in significant improvement of PROs.

A model-based meta-analysis of sofosbuvir-based treatments in chronic hepatitis C patients

The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy of sofosbuvir-based treatments in patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection using a model-based meta-analysis (MBMA). A bibliographic search was performed to identify clinical trials involving sofosbuvir as a unique direct-acting antiviral (DAA) agent or together with daclatasvir, ledipasvir or simeprevir for the treatment of diagnosed HCV infection. The time course of the virological response (VR) was modelled to estimate the effect of treatment and the influence of population characteristics on the longitudinal efficacy profile. The model was validated and simulations of 10 different treatment schedules were performed. Data from 19 clinical trials were included in the analysis. According to the developed model, therapy with sofosbuvir+ledipasvir is the most effective therapy in all scenarios, but it does not differ greatly in terms of sustained VR with respect to other combinations of DAA treatments. In conclusion, this MBMA generates knowledge regarding hypothetical head-to-head trials that have not been conducted previously. Therapies with sofosbuvir+ledipasvir are probably the most effective sofosbuvir-based treatments.

The impact of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir on patient-reported outcomes in cirrhotic patients with chronic hepatitis C: the SIRIUS study

BACKGROUND

Interferon- and ribavirin (RBV)-free regimens can improve patient-reported outcomes (PROs) during treatment.

AIM

To compare PROs during treatment with ledipasvir and sofosbuvir (LDV/SOF) to placebo and to LDV/SOF + RBV.

METHODS

Treatment-experienced CH-C genotype 1 patients with compensated cirrhosis (N = 154) were randomized to receive 24 weeks of LDV/SOF or 12 weeks of placebo followed by 12 weeks of LDV/SOF + RBV (the SIRIUS clinical trial). While blinded to their HCV RNA level and study treatment, patients completed PRO questionnaires (SF-36, FACIT-F, CLDQ-HCV, WPAI:SHP) at baseline, during and post-treatment.

RESULTS

Baseline PRO scores were similar between the two study arms. Patients receiving LDV/SOF showed improvement in a number of PROs (predominantly related to mental health) starting as early as 4 weeks after treatment initiation; no PRO decrement from baseline were noted, and no PRO scores were inferior to placebo (all P > 0.05). In the second 12 weeks, patients who were receiving LDV/SOF continued to improve PROs (up to +9.2% from a 100% maximum possible score, P < 0.05), while patients receiving LDV/SOF + RBV had less gains or no improvement in their PRO scores. However, regardless of the regimen, patients who successfully cleared the virus (N = 149) had significant improvement in all aspects of PROs (up to +12.2% by post-treatment week 12, up to +16.9% by week 24).

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment-experienced cirrhotic patients experience a notable improvement of their PROs during treatment with LDV/SOF. Furthermore, achieving SVR-12 is associated with significant PRO improvement, which further improves at post-treatment week 24 in this difficult to treat group of patients with chronic hepatitis C.

Improvement of health-related quality of life and work productivity in chronic hepatitis C patients with early and advanced fibrosis treated with ledipasvir and sofosbuvir

BACKGROUND & AIMS

New interferon-free anti-HCV regimens are highly efficacious with a favorable safety profile. We assessed health-related quality of life (HRQL) and work productivity in patients with different stages of hepatic fibrosis treated with sofosbuvir+ledipasvir.

METHODS

Four questionnaires [Chronic Liver Disease Questionnaire-HCV (CLDQ-HCV), Short Form-36 (SF-36), Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F), Work Productivity and Activity Index:Specific Health Problem (WPAI:SHP)] were administered at baseline, during, and after treatment with sofosbuvir+ledipasvir+ribavirin or sofosbuvir+ledipasvir (ION-1,2,3 clinical trials). Metavir fibrosis stage was determined from pre-treatment liver biopsies.

RESULTS

There were 1005 patients included (stage F0: n=94; F1: n=311; F2: n=301; F3: n=197; F4: n=102). At baseline, patients with more advanced fibrosis had more HRQL impairments, predominantly related to physical functioning (stage 0 vs. stage 4 by up to 0.126 on a normalized 0-1 scale p<0.0001). During and post-treatment, HRQL remained lower in patients with advanced fibrosis. After achieving sustained virologic response, significant improvements from baseline in most HRQL domains were observed regardless of fibrosis stage (by 0.024-0.103 on a 0-1 scale; all p>0.05 across fibrosis stages). In multivariate analysis, advanced fibrosis was independently associated with impairment of HRQL and work productivity (beta up to -0.056 in comparison with none-to-mild fibrosis, p<0.05). However, improvement of HRQL and work productivity after viral clearance was not related to the stage of fibrosis (all p>0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Although advanced hepatic fibrosis is associated with HRQL and work productivity impairment, viral eradication with sofosbuvir+ledipasvir leads to HRQL improvement regardless of fibrosis stage. HCV patients with early fibrosis experience similar improvement of patient reported outcomes as those with advanced fibrosis.

The patient's journey with chronic hepatitis C from interferon plus ribavirin to interferon- and ribavirin-free regimens: a study of health-related quality of life

BACKGROUND

Interferon and ribavirin negatively impact health-related quality of life (HRQL) during treatment.

AIM

To compare the impact of interferon and/or ribavirin-containing regimens on HRQL to interferon- and ribavirin-free regimens.

METHODS

HRQL data from nine multinational phase 3 clinical trials of sofosbuvir (SOF)-based regimens with and without ledipasvir (LDV), pegylated interferon (IFN) or ribavirin (RBV) were used. The Short Form-36 (SF-36) HRQL questionnaire was administered to subjects prospectively at baseline, during treatment, and 12 and 24 weeks after treatment cessation.

RESULTS

A total of 3460 CH-C with SF-36 data were included (52.2 ± 10.3 years, 62.6% male, 73.6% treatment-naïve, 15.0% cirrhotic, 68.2% HCV genotype 1 and 20.1% genotype 3). Compared to baseline HRQL, at the end of treatment, severe HRQL decrements were noted in IFN + RBV ± SOF regimens (on average, -3.8 to -24.3 on a 0-100 scale for different HRQL domains), while moderate decrements were noted in SOF + RBV ± LDV (-2.8 to -8.6). In contrast, in SOF/LDV without RBV, HRQL improvements were noted during treatment (+2.3 to +5.2). By 12 weeks post-treatment, HRQL returned to baseline in IFN + RBV ± SOF (P > 0.05) and improved in all IFN-free arms (+2.6 to +7.8). In multivariate analysis, a lower end of treatment HRQL was associated with IFN + RBV + SOF and a higher end of treatment HRQL was associated with SOF/LDV. By post-treatment-12, SOF/LDV was additionally associated with higher mental health scores. These improvements in HRQL scores were maintained 24 weeks post-treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Removing interferon and ribavirin has led to substantial improvement of health-related quality of life during treatment. This may result in better patient experience and higher adherence to treatment regimen.

Treatment with ledipasvir and sofosbuvir improves patient-reported outcomes: Results from the ION-1, -2, and -3 clinical trials

Treatment with interferon (IFN) and ribavirin (RBV) significantly impairs quality of life and other patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Patient experience with IFN- and RBV-free anti-HCV (hepatitis C virus) regimens has not been reported. We assessed PROs in patients treated with ledipasvir and sofosbuvir (LDV/SOF) with and without RBV. Four different PRO questionnaires were administered at baseline, during, and post-treatment in HCV genotype 1 patients treated with LDV/SOF±RBV (ION-1, -2, and -3). A total of 1,952 patients were enrolled to be treated for 8 (N = 431), 12 (N = 867), or 24 weeks (N = 654) with LDV/SOF (N = 1,080) or LDV/SOF+RBV (N = 872). Baseline demographics and psychiatric disorders were similar between treatment groups (all P > 0.05). Patients receiving LDV/SOF regimens showed significant improvement of PRO scores during treatment (up to +7.4%, +7.0%, and +6.7% on a normalized 0%-100% scale in the 8-, 12-, and 24-week-long treatment groups, respectively (all P < 0.0001). These PRO improvements coincided with early viral suppression after 2 weeks of treatment and maximized by the end of treatment. On the other hand, during treatment with LDV/SOF+RBV, PRO scores declined (up to -5.5% regardless of treatment duration; P < 0.0001). Receiving RBV was an independent predictor of PRO impairment in multivariate analysis (beta up to -5.9%; P < 0.0001). Patients who achieved sustained virological response at 12 weeks showed significant improvement of their PROs post-treatment (up to +8.3%; P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

IFN- and RBV-free regimens with LDV/SOF result in early HCV suppression with simultaneous improvement in PROs that continued throughout the duration of treatment and post-treatment.

The cost-effectiveness of sofosbuvir-based regimens for treatment of hepatitis C virus genotype 2 or 3 infection

BACKGROUND

Chronic infection with hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 2 or 3 can be treated with sofosbuvir without interferon. Because sofosbuvir is costly, its benefits should be compared with the additional resources used.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the cost-effectiveness of sofosbuvir-based treatments for HCV genotype 2 or 3 infection in the United States.

DESIGN

Monte Carlo simulation, including deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.

DATA SOURCES

Randomized trials, observational cohorts, and national health care spending surveys.

TARGET POPULATION

8 patient types defined by HCV genotype (2 vs. 3), treatment history (naive vs. experienced), and cirrhosis status (noncirrhotic vs. cirrhotic).

TIME HORIZON

Lifetime.

PERSPECTIVE

Payer.

INTERVENTION

Sofosbuvir-based therapies, pegylated interferon-ribavirin, and no therapy.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Discounted quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs).

RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS

The ICER of sofosbuvir-based treatment was less than $100,000 per QALY in cirrhotic patients (genotype 2 or 3 and treatment-naive or treatment-experienced) and in treatment-experienced noncirrhotic patients but was greater than $200,000 per QALY in treatment-naive noncirrhotic patients.

RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS

The ICER of sofosbuvir-based therapy for treatment-naive noncirrhotic patients with genotype 2 or 3 infection was less than $100,000 per QALY when the cost of sofosbuvir was reduced by approximately 40% and 60%, respectively. In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, cost-effectiveness conclusions were robust to uncertainty in treatment efficacy.

LIMITATION

The analysis did not consider possible benefits of preventing HCV transmission.

CONCLUSION

Sofosbuvir provides good value for money for treatment-experienced patients with HCV genotype 2 or 3 infection and those with cirrhosis. At their current cost, sofosbuvir-based regimens for treatment-naive noncirrhotic patients exceed willingness-to-pay thresholds commonly cited in the United States.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

National Institute on Drug Abuse and National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

Current status and emerging challenges in the treatment of hepatitis C virus genotypes 4 to 6

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotypes 4, 5 and 6 are mainly present in Africa, the Middle East and Asia and they have been less extensively studied with respect to epidemiology, natural disease history and therapeutic endpoints. Response rates to a 48-wk combined peginterferon/ribavirin treatment range to 40%-69% for HCV 4, 55%-60% for HCV 5 and 60%-90% for HCV 6. Response-guided schedules are recommended to optimize the outcomes of peginterferon/ribavirin treatment in HCV 4 and, in form of preliminary data, for HCV 6, but no data are yet available to support such an individualization of therapy for HCV 5. Recently, the direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) with pan-genotypic activities simeprevir, sofosbuvir and daclatasvir have been recommended in triple regimens with peginterferon/ribavirin for the treatment of HCV genotypes 4 to 6 infections. In the future, DAA-based interferon-free therapies are awaited to drastically improve treatment outcomes in HCV. However, efforts to improve treatment outcomes with peginterferon/ribavirin should continue, as the HCV 4-6 infected population is mainly based in resource-limited settings with restricted access to the costly DAAs.

Systematic review: patient-reported outcomes in chronic hepatitis C--the impact of liver disease and new treatment regimens

BACKGROUND

Treatment for chronic hepatitis C (CH-C) is rapidly changing and moving away from an interferon and ribavirin-based therapy to interferon-free ribavirin-free all oral regimens. These regimens are simpler and shorter to administer with very high efficacy rates and better side effect profiles. As advances in the treatment of CH-C occur, it is imperative to capture both clinical outcomes (efficacy and safety) as well as patient-reported outcomes (PROs). In fact, PROs assesses and quantifies the impact of these regimens on patient experience. PROs assess patients' health-related quality of life (HRQOL) especially in the realms of fatigue and neuropsychiatric issues such as depression which can affect treatment adherence and work productivity.

AIM

To review the literature related to PRO's in HCV patients and summarise the impact of CH-C and its treatment on PROs.

METHODS

Databases Ovid MEDLINE and PubMed were searched from 1990 to October 2014 using a combination of MEsh, thesaurus terms and relevant text words: hepatitis C, CH-C, treatment, quality of life, health-related quality of life, fatigue, work productivity, adherence, patient-reported outcomes, direct acting anti-viral agents and second generation direct acting anti-viral agents. Each manuscript was assessed for pertinence to the issue of PROs in CH-C as well as the quality of study design and publications.

RESULTS

From the literature, it is evident that CH-C patients have baseline PRO impairment. Furthermore, treatment with interferon with or without ribavirin and first generation DAAs causes additional PRO burden which can negatively impact treatment adherence and indirectly, treatment efficacy and work productivity. The new treatment regimens with interferon- and ribavirin-free regimens not only have very high efficacy, but also result in the improvement of PRO scores as early as 2 weeks into treatment as well as possibly better adherence to treatment regimens.

CONCLUSIONS

CH-C and its treatment have been associated with patient-reported outcome impairment. The new IF-free and RBV-free regimens are associated with high efficacy and substantial improvement of patient-reported outcomes in clinical trial setting. Although very encouraging, more data are needed to assess patient-reported outcomes, adherence and work productivity of CH-C patients in the real world setting of clinical practice.