New protease inhibitors for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

Liu S, Cipriano LE, Holodniy M, Owens DK, Goldhaber-Fiebert JD. New protease inhibitors for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Annals of internal medicine. 2012 Feb 21; 156(4):279-90.

Related HSR&D Project(s)

• IIR 12-059 – Cost-effective Uses of New Hepatitis C Treatments and their VA Budgetary Impact

Dimensions for VA is a web-based tool available to VA staff that enables detailed searches of published research and research projects.

If you have VA-Intranet access, click here for more information vaww.hsrd.research.va.gov/dimensions/

VA staff not currently on the VA network can access Dimensions by registering for an account using their VA email address.    Search Dimensions for VA for this citation
* Don't have VA-internal network access or a VA email address? Try searching the free-to-the-public version of Dimensions

Search for Abstract from PubMed

---

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Chronic hepatitis C virus is difficult to treat and affects approximately 3 million Americans. Protease inhibitors increase the effectiveness of standard therapy, but they are costly. A genetic assay may identify patients most likely to benefit from this treatment advance. OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost-effectiveness of new protease inhibitors and an interleukin (IL)-28B genotyping assay for treating chronic hepatitis C virus. DESIGN: Decision-analytic Markov model. DATA SOURCES: Published literature and expert opinion. TARGET POPULATION: Treatment-naive patients with chronic, genotype 1 hepatitis C virus monoinfection. TIME HORIZON: Lifetime. PERSPECTIVE: Societal. INTERVENTION: Strategies are defined by the use of IL-28B genotyping and type of treatment (standard therapy [pegylated interferon with ribavirin]; triple therapy [standard therapy and a protease inhibitor]). Interleukin-28B-guided triple therapy stratifies patients with CC genotypes to standard therapy and those with non-CC types to triple therapy. OUTCOME MEASURES: Discounted costs (in 2010 U.S. dollars) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs); incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS: For patients with mild and advanced fibrosis, universal triple therapy reduced the lifetime risk for hepatocellular carcinoma by 38% and 28%, respectively, and increased quality-adjusted life expectancy by 3% and 8%, respectively, compared with standard therapy. Gains from IL-28B-guided triple therapy were smaller. If the protease inhibitor costs $1100 per week, universal triple therapy costs $102,600 per QALY (mild fibrosis) or $51,500 per QALY (advanced fibrosis) compared with IL-28B-guided triple therapy and $70,100 per QALY (mild fibrosis) and $36,300 per QALY (advanced fibrosis) compared with standard therapy. RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS: Results were sensitive to the cost of protease inhibitors and treatment adherence rates. LIMITATION: Data on the long-term comparative effectiveness of the new protease inhibitors are lacking. CONCLUSION: Both universal triple therapy and IL-28B-guided triple therapy are cost-effective when the least-expensive protease inhibitor are used for patients with advanced fibrosis. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Stanford University.