Hui-Fang Hung1, Hsiu-Hsi Chen. 1. Hsin-Chu General Hospital, Department of Health, Executive Yuan, Taipei, Taiwan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: As neonates born to mothers with positive hepatitis B e antigen may not be completely protected by hepatitis B vaccination, prophylactic lamivudine use in mothers with high viraemia has been proposed. However, the overall effectiveness and the balance between cost and benefit for such a prophylactic strategy have rarely been addressed. OBJECTIVE: Using a review of recent literature, we aimed to assess the cost effectiveness, from the Taiwanese societal perspective, of administering prophylactic lamivudine to mothers to reduce vertical transmission of hepatitis B virus and its long-term sequelae in neonates. METHODS: A meta-analysis of three randomized controlled trials was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of lamivudine versus placebo. A Markov decision model was constructed in which in both treatment arms infants received active and passive immunoprophylaxis. An economic evaluation was performed to calculate costs, acute infections averted, and QALYs gained. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted and a cost-effectiveness acceptability curve drawn. All these analyses were from the societal perspective. Costs ($US) were valued in year 2008 prices. RESULT: Supplemental lamivudine use gained an additional 0.0024 QALYs and averted 0.23 acute infections per birth compared with the routine active-passive immunization without lamivudine. The cost-effectiveness analysis suggested that the use of additional prophylactic lamivudine dominated the routine strategy. The acceptability curve suggested that the probability of being cost effective under the willingness-to-pay threshold of $US20,000 was 94%. CONCLUSION: This analysis suggests that supplemental use of lamivudine in mothers with high hepatitis B viraemia is effective in reducing vertical transmission and may be cost effective, from a Taiwanese societal perspective, compared with the routine active-passive immunization without lamivudine.
BACKGROUND: As neonates born to mothers with positive hepatitis B e antigen may not be completely protected by hepatitis B vaccination, prophylactic lamivudine use in mothers with high viraemia has been proposed. However, the overall effectiveness and the balance between cost and benefit for such a prophylactic strategy have rarely been addressed. OBJECTIVE: Using a review of recent literature, we aimed to assess the cost effectiveness, from the Taiwanese societal perspective, of administering prophylactic lamivudine to mothers to reduce vertical transmission of hepatitis B virus and its long-term sequelae in neonates. METHODS: A meta-analysis of three randomized controlled trials was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of lamivudine versus placebo. A Markov decision model was constructed in which in both treatment arms infants received active and passive immunoprophylaxis. An economic evaluation was performed to calculate costs, acute infections averted, and QALYs gained. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted and a cost-effectiveness acceptability curve drawn. All these analyses were from the societal perspective. Costs ($US) were valued in year 2008 prices. RESULT: Supplemental lamivudine use gained an additional 0.0024 QALYs and averted 0.23 acute infections per birth compared with the routine active-passive immunization without lamivudine. The cost-effectiveness analysis suggested that the use of additional prophylactic lamivudine dominated the routine strategy. The acceptability curve suggested that the probability of being cost effective under the willingness-to-pay threshold of $US20,000 was 94%. CONCLUSION: This analysis suggests that supplemental use of lamivudine in mothers with high hepatitis B viraemia is effective in reducing vertical transmission and may be cost effective, from a Taiwanese societal perspective, compared with the routine active-passive immunization without lamivudine.
Authors: Fasiha Kanwal; Ian M Gralnek; Paul Martin; Gareth S Dulai; Mary Farid; Brennan M R Spiegel Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2005-05-17 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: R del Canho; P M Grosheide; J A Mazel; R A Heijtink; W C Hop; L J Gerards; G C de Gast; W P Fetter; J Zwijneberg; S W Schalm Journal: Vaccine Date: 1997-10 Impact factor: 3.641
Authors: C L Lai; R N Chien; N W Leung; T T Chang; R Guan; D I Tai; K Y Ng; P C Wu; J C Dent; J Barber; S L Stephenson; D F Gray Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1998-07-09 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: M van Zonneveld; A B van Nunen; H G M Niesters; R A de Man; S W Schalm; H L A Janssen Journal: J Viral Hepat Date: 2003-07 Impact factor: 3.728