Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for the treatment of chronic hepatitis B infection

Cost-effectiveness of non-invasive methods for assessment and monitoring of liver fibrosis and cirrhosis in patients with chronic liver disease: systematic review and economic evaluation

BACKGROUND

Liver biopsy is the reference standard for diagnosing the extent of fibrosis in chronic liver disease; however, it is invasive, with the potential for serious complications. Alternatives to biopsy include non-invasive liver tests (NILTs); however, the cost-effectiveness of these needs to be established.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the diagnostic accuracy and cost-effectiveness of NILTs in patients with chronic liver disease.

DATA SOURCES

We searched various databases from 1998 to April 2012, recent conference proceedings and reference lists.

METHODS

We included studies that assessed the diagnostic accuracy of NILTs using liver biopsy as the reference standard. Diagnostic studies were assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool. Meta-analysis was conducted using the bivariate random-effects model with correlation between sensitivity and specificity (whenever possible). Decision models were used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the NILTs. Expected costs were estimated using a NHS perspective and health outcomes were measured as quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Markov models were developed to estimate long-term costs and QALYs following testing, and antiviral treatment where indicated, for chronic hepatitis B (HBV) and chronic hepatitis C (HCV). NILTs were compared with each other, sequential testing strategies, biopsy and strategies including no testing. For alcoholic liver disease (ALD), we assessed the cost-effectiveness of NILTs in the context of potentially increasing abstinence from alcohol. Owing to a lack of data and treatments specifically for fibrosis in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), the analysis was limited to an incremental cost per correct diagnosis. An analysis of NILTs to identify patients with cirrhosis for increased monitoring was also conducted.

RESULTS

Given a cost-effectiveness threshold of £20,000 per QALY, treating everyone with HCV without prior testing was cost-effective with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £9204. This was robust in most sensitivity analyses but sensitive to the extent of treatment benefit for patients with mild fibrosis. For HBV [hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg)-negative)] this strategy had an ICER of £28,137, which was cost-effective only if the upper bound of the standard UK cost-effectiveness threshold range (£30,000) is acceptable. For HBeAg-positive disease, two NILTs applied sequentially (hyaluronic acid and magnetic resonance elastography) were cost-effective at a £20,000 threshold (ICER: £19,612); however, the results were highly uncertain, with several test strategies having similar expected outcomes and costs. For patients with ALD, liver biopsy was the cost-effective strategy, with an ICER of £822.

LIMITATIONS

A substantial number of tests had only one study from which diagnostic accuracy was derived; therefore, there is a high risk of bias. Most NILTs did not have validated cut-offs for diagnosis of specific fibrosis stages. The findings of the ALD model were dependent on assuptions about abstinence rates assumptions and the modelling approach for NAFLD was hindered by the lack of evidence on clinically effective treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

Treating everyone without NILTs is cost-effective for patients with HCV, but only for HBeAg-negative if the higher cost-effectiveness threshold is appropriate. For HBeAg-positive, two NILTs applied sequentially were cost-effective but highly uncertain. Further evidence for treatment effectiveness is required for ALD and NAFLD.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42011001561.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Recent advances in prevention of hepatitis B recurrence after liver transplantation

Liver transplantation is the only effective treatment for hepatitis B virus (HBV)-related end-stage liver disease. However, without antiviral prophylaxis, the recurrence rate of hepatitis B is as high as 80%-100%, which leads to a 50% mortality rate in the first 2 years after liver transplantation. Combination therapy of hepatitis B immunoglobulin (HBIG) and lamivudine demonstrated a higher efficacy of prophylaxis and further reduced the rate of recurrence to < 10%. The strategy of HBIG combined with lamivudine has been the standard treatment in many centers. However, the high rate of lamivudine resistance and the many disadvantages of HBIG have compelled surgeons to reconsider the long-term efficacy of this strategy for the prevention of HBV reinfection. Recently, new nucleos(t)ide analogues, such as entecavir and tenofovir, have been approved as first-line monotherapies for the treatment of chronic hepatitis B infection. These antiviral medicines have replaced lamivudine as the first choice in the prevention of HBV recurrence after liver transplantation. Various therapies that are composed of entecavir, tenofovir, and lamivudine plus adefovir, with or without HBIG have been adopted in several liver transplant centers. This article reviews the recent advances in prophylaxis for the recurrence of hepatitis B after liver transplantation.

Custo-efetividade dos análogos de nucleosídeos/nucleotídeos para hepatite crônica B

OBJETIVO: Conduzir uma análise de custo-efetividade das alternativas medicamentosas com terapia de resgate na recaída por resistência viral para tratamento de pacientes com hepatite crônica B (HCB). MÉTODOS: Coorte hipotética de pacientes com HCB, HBeAg negativo, sem evidência clínica ou histológica de cirrose, DNA do VHB detectável, diagnóstico histológico da doença, HBsAg positivo no soro por mais de seis meses, elevados níveis de alanina transferase (ALT) (duas vezes maior que o limite superior da normalidade [LSN]) e média de idade de 40 anos. Modelo de Markov foi desenvolvido para a hepatite crônica B (antígeno HBeAg negativo) com horizonte temporal de 40 anos. Custos e benefícios foram descontados em 5%. As taxas anuais de progressão, custos devido a complicações e a eficácia dos medicamentos foram obtidos da literatura. As incertezas foram avaliadas por análises de sensibilidade unidirecional e probabilística. RESULTADOS: Iniciar o tratamento com entecavir resultou em 0,35 ano de vida ganho em relação à lamivudina. A razão de custo-efetividade incremental foi de R$ 16.416,08 por anos de vida ganhos. Na análise de sensibilidade a razão de custo-efetividade incremental foi mais sensível à variação na probabilidade de transição de hepatite crônica B para cirrose compensada, taxa de desconto e preço dos medicamentos (± 10%). Na análise de sensibilidade probabilística, a curva de aceitabilidade mostrou que iniciar com entecavir foi a alternativa mais custo-efetiva na comparação ao uso de lamivudina. CONCLUSÕES: A disponibilidade do entecavir é economicamente atrativa como parte do tratamento precoce para pacientes com hepatite crônica B sem coinfecção com o HIV.