IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0026783.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cost Effectiveness of Fibrosis Assessment Prior to Treatment for Chronic Hepatitis C Patients

Author

Listed:
  • Shan Liu
  • Michaël Schwarzinger
  • Fabrice Carrat
  • Jeremy D Goldhaber-Fiebert

Abstract

Background and Aims: Chronic hepatitis C (HCV) is a liver disease affecting over 3 million Americans. Liver biopsy is the gold standard for assessing liver fibrosis and is used as a benchmark for initiating treatment, though it is expensive and carries risks of complications. FibroTest is a non-invasive biomarker assay for fibrosis, proposed as a screening alternative to biopsy. Methods: We assessed the cost-effectiveness of FibroTest and liver biopsy used alone or sequentially for six strategies followed by treatment of eligible U.S. patients: FibroTest only; FibroTest with liver biopsy for ambiguous results; FibroTest followed by biopsy to rule in; or to rule out significant fibrosis; biopsy only (recommended practice); and treatment without screening. We developed a Markov model of chronic HCV that tracks fibrosis progression. Outcomes were expressed as expected lifetime costs (2009 USD), quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER). Results: Treatment of chronic HCV without fibrosis screening is preferred for both men and women. For genotype 1 patients treated with pegylated interferon and ribavirin, the ICERs are $5,400/QALY (men) and $6,300/QALY (women) compared to FibroTest only; the ICERs increase to $27,200/QALY (men) and $30,000/QALY (women) with the addition of telaprevir. For genotypes 2 and 3, treatment is more effective and less costly than all alternatives. In clinical settings where testing is required prior to treatment, FibroTest only is more effective and less costly than liver biopsy. These results are robust to multi-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Conclusions: Early treatment of chronic HCV is superior to the other fibrosis screening strategies. In clinical settings where testing is required, FibroTest screening is a cost-effective alternative to liver biopsy.

Suggested Citation

  • Shan Liu & Michaël Schwarzinger & Fabrice Carrat & Jeremy D Goldhaber-Fiebert, 2011. "Cost Effectiveness of Fibrosis Assessment Prior to Treatment for Chronic Hepatitis C Patients," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(12), pages 1-14, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0026783
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0026783
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0026783
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0026783&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0026783?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Patrick W. Sullivan & Vahram Ghushchyan, 2006. "Preference-Based EQ-5D Index Scores for Chronic Conditions in the United States," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 26(4), pages 410-420, July.
    2. David J. McLernon & John Dillon & Peter T. Donnan, 2008. "Systematic Review: Health-State Utilities in Liver Disease: A Systematic Review," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 28(4), pages 582-592, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Anita J Brogan & Sandra E Talbird & James R Thompson & Jeffrey D Miller & Jaime Rubin & Baris Deniz, 2014. "Cost-effectiveness of Telaprevir Combination Therapy for Chronic Hepatitis C," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(3), pages 1-11, March.
    2. Shan Liu & Lauren E Cipriano & Mark Holodniy & Jeremy D Goldhaber-Fiebert, 2013. "Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Risk-Factor Guided and Birth-Cohort Screening for Chronic Hepatitis C Infection in the United States," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(3), pages 1-14, March.
    3. Ting-Yu Ho & Shan Liu & Zelda B. Zabinsky, 2019. "A Multi-Fidelity Rollout Algorithm for Dynamic Resource Allocation in Population Disease Management," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 727-755, December.
    4. Roy Lothan & Noa Gutman & Dan Yamin, 2022. "Country versus pharmaceutical company interests for hepatitis C treatment," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 25(4), pages 725-749, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mehdi Javanbakht & Jesse Fishman & Eoin Moloney & Peter Rydqvist & Amir Ansaripour, 2023. "Early Cost-Effectiveness and Price Threshold Analyses of Resmetirom: An Investigational Treatment for Management of Nonalcoholic Steatohepatitis," PharmacoEconomics - Open, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 93-110, January.
    2. Shan Liu & Lauren E Cipriano & Mark Holodniy & Jeremy D Goldhaber-Fiebert, 2013. "Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Risk-Factor Guided and Birth-Cohort Screening for Chronic Hepatitis C Infection in the United States," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(3), pages 1-14, March.
    3. Mohamed N.M.T. Al Khayat & Job F.H. Eijsink & Maarten J. Postma & Jan C. Wilschut & Marinus van Hulst, 2020. "The Cost-Effectiveness of Hepatitis C Virus Screening Strategies among Recently Arrived Migrants in the Netherlands," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(17), pages 1-13, August.
    4. Knott, R. & Lorgelly, P. & Black, N. & Hollingsworth, B., 2016. "Differential item functioning in the EQ-5D: An exploratory analysis using anchoring vignettes," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 16/14, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    5. Alejandro Arrieta & Timothy F Page & Emir Veledar & Khurram Nasir, 2017. "Economic Evaluation of PCSK9 Inhibitors in Reducing Cardiovascular Risk from Health System and Private Payer Perspectives," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(1), pages 1-14, January.
    6. Constanza L Vargas & Manuel A Espinoza & Andrés Giglio & Alejandro Soza, 2015. "Cost Effectiveness of Daclatasvir/Asunaprevir Versus Peginterferon/Ribavirin and Protease Inhibitors for the Treatment of Hepatitis c Genotype 1b Naïve Patients in Chile," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(11), pages 1-16, November.
    7. Job F. H. Eijsink & Mohamed N. M. T. Al Khayat & Cornelis Boersma & Peter G. J. Horst & Jan C. Wilschut & Maarten J. Postma, 2021. "Cost-effectiveness of hepatitis C virus screening, and subsequent monitoring or treatment among pregnant women in the Netherlands," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 22(1), pages 75-88, February.
    8. Mathieu F. Janssen & A. Simon Pickard & James W. Shaw, 2021. "General population normative data for the EQ-5D-3L in the five largest European economies," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 22(9), pages 1467-1475, December.
    9. Lisa Meckley & James Gudgeon & Jeffrey Anderson & Marc Williams & David Veenstra, 2010. "A Policy Model to Evaluate the Benefits, Risks and Costs of Warfarin Pharmacogenomic Testing," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 61-74, January.
    10. Andrew J. Palmer & Julie A. Campbell & Barbara de Graaff & Nancy Devlin & Hasnat Ahmad & Philip M Clarke & Mingsheng Chen & Lei Si, 2021. "Population norms for quality adjusted life years for the United States of America, China, the United Kingdom and Australia," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(8), pages 1950-1977, August.
    11. C. Simone Sutherland & Pollyanna Hudson & Stephen Mitchell & Noman Paracha, 2022. "Systematic Literature Review to Identify Utility Values in Patients with Spinal Muscular Atrophy (SMA) and Their Caregivers," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 40(1), pages 39-67, April.
    12. Knott, Rachel J. & Lorgelly, Paula K. & Black, Nicole & Hollingsworth, Bruce, 2017. "Differential item functioning in quality of life measurement: An analysis using anchoring vignettes," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 190(C), pages 247-255.
    13. Michael Falk Hvidberg & Louise Schouborg Brinth & Anne V Olesen & Karin D Petersen & Lars Ehlers, 2015. "The Health-Related Quality of Life for Patients with Myalgic Encephalomyelitis / Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS)," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(7), pages 1-16, July.
    14. Peasgood, T & Ward, S & Brazier, J, 2010. "A review and meta-analysis of health state utility values in breast cancer," MPRA Paper 29950, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Robinson, Lisa A. & Hammitt, James K., 2013. "Skills of the trade: valuing health risk reductions in benefit-cost analysis," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(1), pages 107-130, March.
    16. Xinrui Wu & Qian Liu & Qi Li & Zhengwen Tian & Hongzhuan Tan, 2019. "Health-Related Quality of Life and Its Determinants among Criminal Police Officers," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(8), pages 1-12, April.
    17. Ralph Crott & Andrew Briggs, 2010. "Mapping the QLQ-C30 quality of life cancer questionnaire to EQ-5D patient preferences," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 11(4), pages 427-434, August.
    18. Ali Tafazzoli & Odette S. Reifsnider & Leana Bellanca & Jack Ishak & Marc Carrasco & Pal Rakonczai & Matthew Stargardter & Stephan Linden, 2023. "A European multinational cost-effectiveness analysis of empagliflozin in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 24(9), pages 1441-1454, December.
    19. Lauren E Cipriano & Gregory S Zaric & Mark Holodniy & Eran Bendavid & Douglas K Owens & Margaret L Brandeau, 2012. "Cost Effectiveness of Screening Strategies for Early Identification of HIV and HCV Infection in Injection Drug Users," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(9), pages 1-14, September.
    20. Claudine Bommer & Judith Lupatsch & Nicole Bürki & Matthias Schwenkglenks, 2022. "Cost–utility analysis of risk-reducing strategies to prevent breast and ovarian cancer in BRCA-mutation carriers in Switzerland," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 23(5), pages 807-821, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0026783. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.