Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Risk-Factor Guided and Birth-Cohort Screening for Chronic Hepatitis C Infection in the United States

62Citations
Citations of this article
80Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background: No consensus exists on screening to detect the estimated 2 million Americans unaware of their chronic hepatitis C infections. Advisory groups differ, recommending birth-cohort screening for baby boomers, screening only high-risk individuals, or no screening. We assessed one-time risk assessment and screening to identify previously undiagnosed 40-74 year-olds given newly available hepatitis C treatments. Methods and Findings: A Markov model evaluated alternative risk-factor guided and birth-cohort screening and treatment strategies. Risk factors included drug use history, blood transfusion before 1992, and multiple sexual partners. Analyses of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey provided sex-, race-, age-, and risk-factor-specific hepatitis C prevalence and mortality rates. Nine strategies combined screening (no screening, risk-factor guided screening, or birth-cohort screening) and treatment (standard therapy-peginterferon alfa and ribavirin, Interleukin-28B-guided (IL28B) triple-therapy-standard therapy plus a protease inhibitor, or universal triple therapy). Response-guided treatment depended on HCV genotype. Outcomes include discounted lifetime costs (2010 dollars) and quality adjusted life-years (QALYs). Compared to no screening, risk-factor guided and birth-cohort screening for 50 year-olds gained 0.7 to 3.5 quality adjusted life-days and cost $168 to $568 per person. Birth-cohort screening provided more benefit per dollar than risk-factor guided screening and cost $65,749 per QALY if followed by universal triple therapy compared to screening followed by IL28B-guided triple therapy. If only 10% of screen-detected, eligible patients initiate treatment at each opportunity, birth-cohort screening with universal triple therapy costs $241,100 per QALY. Assuming treatment with triple therapy, screening all individuals aged 40-64 years costs less than $100,000 per QALY. Conclusions: The cost-effectiveness of one-time birth-cohort hepatitis C screening for 40-64 year olds is comparable to other screening programs, provided that the healthcare system has sufficient capacity to deliver prompt treatment and appropriate follow-on care to many newly screen-detected individuals. © 2013 Liu et al.

Figures

  • Figure 1. Model schematics. Small squares represent decisions. For the screening policy decision we considered the alternatives of implementing a policy of no screening, risk-factor guided screening, and birth-cohort screening. For the HCV genotype 1 treatment policy decision we considered the alternatives of standard therapy, in which patients receive pegylated interferon with ribavirin; IL-28B-guided triple therapy, in which after IL-28B genotyping patients with non-CC types receive triple therapy and patients with CC types receive standard therapy; and universal triple therapy, in which patients receive pegylated interferon with ribavirin and a protease inhibitor. In all strategies patients diagnosed with genotypes 2 and 3 receive 24 weeks of standard therapy. We considered all possible combinations of the screening policy decision and the genotype 1 treatment policy decision for a total of 9 policy alternatives. Small circles indicate chance events. Upon entering the model the cohort is stratified by true health state
  • Table 2. Base case lifetime costs, health benefits (per 100,000), and incremental costs effectiveness ratio of combined screening and treatment strategies for a cohort of individuals who are currently 50 years of age.
  • Table 3. Lifetime costs, health benefits (per 100,000), and incremental costs effectiveness ratio of combined screening and treatment strategies for various patient ages.
  • Figure 2. Cost-effectiveness analysis. (A) The graph plots the incremental discounted QALYs (y-axis) and incremental discounted lifetime costs (x-axis) for each combined screening and treatment strategy. The solid line represents the cost-effectiveness frontier, those strategies that are potentially economically efficient depending on one’s willingness-to-pay per unit of health benefit gained. (B) The bar graph shows the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of each combined screening and treatment strategy at different levels of treatment uptake at each opportunity (varied over the range 0–50%). The asterisk denotes that, at 5% uptake, birth-cohort screening followed by universal triple therapy for screen-detected, treatmenteligible individuals is dominated. For both panels, IL-28B = interleukin-28B; QALY = quality-adjusted life-year. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0058975.g002
  • Table 4. Deterministic sensitivity analysis of cohort and treatment factors.
  • Table 5. Population impact of HCV screening aged 40–64 years, total lifetime costs, health benefits, and incremental costs effectiveness ratio of combined screening and treatment strategies.
  • Figure 3. Cost-effectiveness of birth-cohort screening by age group. The graph plots the incremental discounted QALYs and incremental discounted lifetime costs for screening various birth cohorts. The analysis shown in the graph assumes that the treatment strategy used is universal triple therapy. For clarity, the graph shows only those strategies on the cost-effectiveness frontier (i.e., those that are not dominated) although all combinations of birth-cohort groups (40–44, 45–49, 50–54, 55–59, 60–64, 65–69, 70–74 years of age) were considered in the analysis. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0058975.g003

References Powered by Scopus

Diagnosis, management, and treatment of hepatitis C: An update

2732Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Boceprevir for untreated chronic HCV genotype 1 infection

2320Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Telaprevir for previously untreated chronic hepatitis C virus infection

2222Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Screening for hepatitis C virus infection in adults: U.S. preventive services task force recommendation statement

402Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cost-effectiveness and budget impact of hepatitis C virus treatment with sofosbuvir and ledipasvir in the United States

309Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Prevention of hepatitis C by screening and treatment in U.S. prisons

143Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Liu, S., Cipriano, L. E., Holodniy, M., & Goldhaber-Fiebert, J. D. (2013). Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Risk-Factor Guided and Birth-Cohort Screening for Chronic Hepatitis C Infection in the United States. PLoS ONE, 8(3). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0058975

Readers over time

‘13‘14‘15‘16‘17‘18‘19‘20‘21‘22‘23‘240481216

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 33

56%

Researcher 19

32%

Professor / Associate Prof. 7

12%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 27

66%

Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6

15%

Nursing and Health Professions 4

10%

Engineering 4

10%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0