Economic impact of extended treatment with peginterferon alpha-2a and ribavirin for slow hepatitis C virologic responders

Economic evaluation of Zepatier for the management of HCV in the Italian scenario

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) is a major health issue worldwide. New generation of direct-active antiviral medications is an epoch-making turning point in the management of HCV infections.

OBJECTIVE

Conducing a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing the combination of elbasvir/grazoprevir and sofosbuvir + pegylated interferon/ribavirin for the management of all HCV patients (even those in the initial stages of fibrosis).

METHODS

A Markov model was built on the natural history of the disease to assess the efficacy of the alternatives. The outcomes are expressed in terms of quality adjusted life-years (QALYs) and result in terms of incremental cost-effectiveness ratio).

RESULTS

Elbasvir/grazoprevir implies an expenditure of €21,104,253.74 with a gain of 19,287.90 QALYs and sofosbuvir + pegylated interferon/ribavirin implies an expenditure of €31,904,410.11 with a gain of 18,855.96 QALYs. Elbasvir/grazoprevir is thus a dominant strategy.

CONCLUSION

Consideration should be given to the opportunity cost of not treating patients with a lower degree of fibrosis (F0-F2).

Cost-effectiveness analysis of Daclatasvir/Sofosbuvir for the treatment of the HCV patients failed after the first line with second generation of DAAs in Italy

BACKGROUND

Daclatasvir (DCV) combinated with Sofosbuvir (SOF) has shown good efficacy and safety profile for HCV patients. The aim was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of DCV/SOF regimen versus HCV alternative treatments for patients who failed to achieve the SVR12 after a first DAA treatment from Italian perspective (PITER cohort).

METHODS

A Markov model of HCV chronically infected patients was used to develop two scenarios: 1) DCV+ SOF versus Ledipasvir (LDV)+ SOF in Genotype (Gt)1 and Gt4; 2) DCV+ SOF versus no retreatment option in Gt1, Gt3, and Gt4. The percentage of patients who failed the first line with SOF/Simeprevir/Ribavirin (RBV) or SOF/RBV and were retreated or not according to evidences from PITER cohort, were used to populate the model. HCV resources consumption and SVR rates were quantified using PITER data. Transition probabilities and utility rates were derived from the literature. The outcomes were expressed in terms of Quality adjusted life years (QALYs). Probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) was performed considering a cost-effectiveness threshold of € 30,000/QALY.

RESULTS

In the base-case analysis, DCV+ SOF represents a cost-effectiveness therapy with ICERs lower than the threshold. The PSA showed robust results, ICERs remain below the threshold in 94% and 99% simulations in Scenario 1 and 2, respectively.

Economic Evaluation of the Hepatitis C Virus Treatment Extension to Early-Stage Fibrosis Patients: Evidence from the PITER Real-World Cohort

OBJECTIVES

To conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis of two planning strategies of the second-generation direct-acting antiviral interferon-free regimens for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C virus infection.

METHODS

A lifetime multicohort model comprised 8125 real-life patients enrolled in the PITER (Italian platform for the study of viral hepatitis) registry, implemented by the ISS (Istituto Superiore di Sanità). Two treatment planning strategies were compared: 1) policy 1-treat all patients regardless of the stage of fibrosis (F0-F4) with second-generation direct-acting antivirals and 2) policy 2-treat patients at F3/F4 stage and those who are prioritized by the scientific guidelines first, and the remaining patients when they reach the F3 stage. Clinical outcomes and costs were evaluated by using a lifetime horizon Markov model and adopting the third-party payer perspective. Health outcomes were expressed in terms of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). A sensitivity analysis was run to explore first- and second-order uncertainty and heterogeneity. An expected value of perfect information analysis was also conducted.

RESULTS

Policy 1 exhibits an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €8,775/QALY gained and remains less than €30,000/QALY in 94% of realizations produced by the Monte-Carlo simulation. Such a proportion increases to 97% when adopting a threshold of €40,000/QALY gained.

CONCLUSIONS

Moving from the urgency criterion to evidence-based escalating strategies when prioritizing the access to new anti-hepatitis C virus treatments is a good investment in health, whose affordability should be explored through context-specific budget impact analyses.

Economic Analysis and Budget Impact of Tenofovir and Entecavir in the First-Line Treatment of Hepatitis B Virus in Italy

BACKGROUND

Chronic hepatitis B is a common, progressive disease, particularly when viral replication is detected. Oral antivirals can suppress viral replication and prevent or delay the development of cirrhosis and liver-related complications. The treatments of chronic hepatitis B cannot totally cure the disease but can prevent its progression to hepatocellular carcinoma, decreasing the levels of both morbidity and mortality. To date, there are several therapies indicated by the international guidelines as first-line treatments for the management of hepatitis B; two of the most effective are those based on either tenofovir or entecavir.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of tenofovir and entecavir in the treatment of naïve patients with chronic hepatitis B. The two treatments are compared with the "no treatment" and to one another.

METHODS

The cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted using a Markov model; patients entered one of the following health states: chronic hepatitis, cirrhosis (compensated or decompensated), hepatocellular carcinoma, liver transplantation or death. The analysis was carried out from the perspective of the Italian National Health Service by considering a life-time horizon with cycles lasting 1 year and with costs and QALYs (quality-adjusted life years) discounted at a rate of 3.5%. The results of the model were analysed in terms of incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).

RESULTS

ICERs for tenofovir and entecavir emerging from the comparison versus "no treatment" were equal to €10,274.73 and €16,300.44 per QALY gained, respectively, on the life-time horizon. Tenofovir was dominant in the direct comparison with entecavir, indicating more QALYs and a lower consumption of resources. The Monte Carlo simulation demonstrated that in 97% (tenofovir) and in 85% (entecavir) of the scenarios performed, the cost per QALY fell below the threshold of €30,000/QALY. The budget impact analysis showed savings for tenofovir amounting to 33% compared to entecavir in the first year on treatment and to 31% in following years.

CONCLUSIONS

Entecavir and tenofovir are recommended for the treatment of patients with chronic Hepatitis B in the Italian Health System. In particular, tenofovir appeared to be the more cost-effective drug for the management of chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infections. These results could help decision makers and clinicians to address their decision when choosing a first-line treatment for the management of people affected by chronic HBV.

[Cost-effectiveness of hepatitis C treatment in slow virologic responders coinfected with HIV]

Recent evidence has demonstrated that slow responders may benefit from antiviral treatment in HCV/HIV coinfection. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of HCV treatment in individuals with genotype 1 coinfected with HIV, with peg-interferon in combination with ribavirin, compared to the inclusion (versus non-inclusion) of slow responders. A Markov model was developed that simulated the progression of liver disease in a hypothetical cohort of one thousand men over 40 years of age, considering the Brazilian Unified National Health System (SUS) perspective and a 30-year timeline. The extension of treatment to slow responders provided a 60% increase in the number of individuals who eliminated HCV and an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 44,171 BRL/QALY, below the acceptability threshold proposed by World Health Organization. Sensitivity analysis did not alter the results. The inclusion of HCV/ HIV-coinfected slow virologic responders in the treatment protocol is shown to be a cost-effective strategy for the SUS.

Economic assessment of an anti-HCV screening program in Italy

BACKGROUND

The progression of hepatitis C virus (HCV) disease usually occurs over a 10-year period. HCV-related complications as well as the highly debilitating effects on patients represent a significant item of expenditure for the National Health Service. Early detection of HCV infection is an excellent opportunity to improve patients' quality of life and to rationalize resource allocation.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to provide a cost-effectiveness evaluation of an anti-HCV screening program in the Italian National Health Service perspective.

METHODS

We built a Markov model made up of two arms. The ''Test Strategy'' arm involves a screening program based on the enzyme immunoassay for detection of antibodies as first-level test and the research of HCV RNA as second-level detection; patients with positive test results are treated with peg-interferon alfa in combination with ribavirine. Parameters were derived from the literature and validated through experts' opinion. Costs and benefits were discounted by 3.5%. Results were expressed as cost/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained through the screening program compared with the treatment of symptomatic patients. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed.

RESULTS

The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of the ''Test Strategy'' is €5171/QALY, definitively below the cost/QALY of other approved treatments in Italy. Model results turned out as sensitive to the age of the target population, the prevalence of HCV infection, and the time horizon adopted.

CONCLUSIONS

The anti-HCV screening program is a valid health-related investment improving patients' quality of life and survival with an acceptable expenditure increase for the National Health Service.

Assessing the cost utility of response-guided therapy in patients with chronic hepatitis C genotype 1 in the UK using the MONARCH model

BACKGROUND

European guidelines advocate the measurement of on-treatment hepatitis C virus (HCV) RNA in order to determine optimal therapy duration (response-guided therapy [RGT]) in patients with rapid virological response (RVR) or delayed virological response (DVR). Treatment response is highly dependent upon the extent of liver fibrosis yet there is little evidence quantifying the cost effectiveness of RGT particularly conditional upon fibrosis stage.

OBJECTIVE

This study describes an economic model designed to assess the costs and benefits of RGT compared with standard duration of therapy (SDT) in hepatitis C virus genotype 1 patients.

METHODS

A Markov cohort simulation model with lifetime perspective was developed to undertake a cost utility analysis of RGT in the UK. Patients entered the model at Metavir disease stages F0-F4, and progressed through these stages via age and duration of HCV infection-dependent transition probabilities. Treated patients were partitioned according to virological response and shortened or extended duration of therapy was applied following European guidelines.

RESULTS

For all patients, SDT and RGT was associated with an increase of 2.14 and 2.20 QALYs and £2,374 and £2,270 costs, respectively, compared with no treatment. Overall, RGT was a dominant scenario being associated with a lower risk of complications, increased QALYs (0.08) and cost saving (£101). RGT across fibrosis stages was either highly cost effective or dominant; in all cases RGT was associated with an increase in QALYs, driven by a reduction in complications in DVR subjects and reduced exposure to treatment disutility in RVR subjects; costs were lower in F1 and F2 fibrosis stages. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of £20,000 per QALY, overall RGT across fibrosis stages F2-F4 were associated with the highest probability of being cost effective. At this threshold, the probability of reduced/extended therapy in RVR/DVR patients being cost effective is 0.35 and 0.88, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis suggests that the treatment of HCV genotype 1 patients in fibrosis stage F2 has the greatest potential for maximizing health benefit and cost saving within an RGT protocol. Predicting those patients most likely to respond to treatments is important from both a clinical and cost perspective and the tailoring of treatment duration with the current standard of care is likely to remain a priority for payers with budgetary constraints.

Structural frameworks and key model parameters in cost-effectiveness analyses for current and future treatments of chronic hepatitis C

OBJECTIVES

Published economic evaluations have reported available treatments for chronic hepatitis C to be cost-effective as part of the current approach to disease management, but as standards of care evolve, their approach to modeling should be reconsidered. This study aimed to review structural frameworks and key model parameters as reported in current economic evaluations for treatments for chronic hepatitis C, and model the impact of variability across parameters on results.

METHODS

A systematic review of studies published from 2000 to 2011 was performed. Studies were retrieved from five electronic databases using relevant search strategies. Model structures, disease progression rates, utilities, and costs were extracted from included studies, and were qualitatively reviewed and incorporated into a cost-utility model.

RESULTS

Thirty-four studies were appropriate for data extraction. A common pathway of six disease states was identified. In some studies the early disease stages and/or the decompensated cirrhosis state were further subdivided. Large variability in values used for disease progression rates, utilities, and costs were identified. When incorporated into a model, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) varied: in the least favorable scenario, peginterferon plus ribavirin was dominated by interferon plus ribavirin; and in the most favorable scenario, peginterferon plus ribavirin dominated interferon plus ribavirin ($8,544 per quality-adjusted life year [QALY]; costs are given in 2008 US dollar amounts). Using mean values the ICER was $15,198 per QALY.

CONCLUSIONS

Current models use a simplistic structure resulting from the lack of available data reflecting patient heterogeneity. Key model parameters are currently based on a small number of studies and the variability across these values can affect the interpretation of results.

Peginterferon alfa-2a/ribavirin for 48 or 72 weeks in hepatitis C genotypes 1 and 4 patients with slow virologic response

BACKGROUND & AIMS

This randomized multicenter trial evaluated individualization of treatment duration with peginterferon alfa-2a 180 microg/wk plus ribavirin 1000/1200 mg/day in patients with chronic hepatitis C genotype 1/4 based on the rapidity of virologic response (VR).

METHODS

Patients with a rapid VR (RVR; undetectable hepatitis C virus [HCV]-RNA level (<50 IU/mL at week 4) were treated for 24 weeks, those with an early VR (EVR; no RVR but undetectable HCV-RNA level or >or=2-log(10) decrease at week 12) were randomized to 48 (group A) or 72 weeks of treatment (group B; peginterferon alfa-2a was reduced to 135 microg/wk after week 48). Patients without an EVR continued treatment until week 72 if they had undetectable HCV-RNA levels at week 24. The primary end point was relapse; sustained VR (SVR; undetectable HCV-RNA level after 24 weeks of follow-up evaluation) was a secondary end point.

RESULTS

Of 551 genotype 1/4 patients starting treatment, 289 were randomized to group A (N = 139) or group B (N = 150). The relapse rate was 33.6% in group A (95% confidence interval [CI], 24.8%-43.4%) and 18.5% in group B (95% CI, 11.9%-27.6%; P = .0115 vs group A) and the SVR rate was 51.1% (95% CI, 42.5%-59.6%) and 58.6% (95% CI, 50.3%-66.6%; P > .1), respectively. The overall SVR rate was 50.4% (278 of 551; 95% CI, 46.2%-54.7%), including 115 of 150 patients with an RVR treated for 24 weeks and 4 of 78 patients without an EVR.

CONCLUSIONS

Extending therapy with peginterferon alfa-2a/ribavirin to 72 weeks decreases the probability of relapse in patients with an EVR. If they can be maintained on extended-duration therapy, SVR rates also may improve.

Extended-therapy duration for chronic hepatitis C, genotype 1: The long and the short of it

With pegylated interferon and ribavirin, more than half of all chronically-infected hepatitis C patients can achieve a sustained virologic response; however, patients with genotype 1 infections and those with other poor prognostic factors have relatively inferior treatment response rates. Since new therapies are still years away from approval, it is incumbent upon providers to maximize the therapeutic efficacy of today’s treatment. The later the virus is undetectable in serum during treatment, the less likely it will be eradicated. Patients with a delayed or slow virologic response to therapy (at least a 2-log₁₀ decrease in baseline hepatitis C RNA yet detectable viremia at 12 wk of therapy and undetectable virus 12 wk subsequently) may, therefore, benefit from an extended therapy course beyond one of standard duration. Although higher rates of treatment discontinuation may plague this approach, 72 wk of treatment for genotype 1-infected slow-responders may improve response rates and diminish relapse rates relative to those of 48 wk. Based on data from both viral kinetic and clinical studies, therapy prolongation in slow responders may be a reasonable strategy to improve response rates in these treatment-refractory patients.