William W L Wong1, Aysegul Erman1, Jordan J Feld1, Murray Krahn1. 1. Affiliations: School of Pharmacy (Wong), University of Waterloo, Kitchener, Ont.; Toronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment Collaborative (Wong, Erman, Krahn), Leslie Dan Faculty of Pharmacy and Toronto Centre for Liver Disease (Feld), University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ont.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Because most hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections are asymptomatic and often unrecognized, screening for hepatitis C has been proposed as a plausible public health strategy. We examined the health and economic consequences of a selective one-time hepatitis C screening program for specific populations in the context of current treatment patterns. METHODS: We used a state-transition model to evaluate 2 general strategies: no screening, and screen and treat with direct-acting antiviral agents. We examined these strategies for 4 different target populations (scenarios): 1) asymptomatic people not at high risk for HCV infection, 2) immigrant populations with high prevalence, 3) a birth cohort of people aged 25-64 years and 4) a birth cohort of people aged 45-64 years of age. We obtained model data from the published literature and expert opinions. We used a payer perspective, a lifetime time horizon and a 5% discount rate. RESULTS: Screening would prevent 49.7%, 57.4%, 64.1% and 49.6% of HCV-related deaths over the lifetime of the cohort for scenarios 1, 2, 3 and 4, respectively. Screening would produce incremental-cost-effectiveness ratios between $31 468/quality-adjusted life-year and $50 490/quality-adjusted life-year. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses indicated that the chance that screening would be cost-effective at $50 000 willingness-to-pay threshold was 39.5%, 63.2%, 58.4% and 58.1% for scenarios 1, 2, 3 and 4, respectively. INTERPRETATION: Our analyses suggest that a one-time hepatitis C screening and treatment program in Canada is likely to be cost-effective for scenarios 2, 3 and 4. The screening programs we have evaluated would identify asymptomatic people with chronic HCV infection and would enable medical treatment to be offered if needed before the development of advanced liver disease. Copyright 2017, Joule Inc. or its licensors.
BACKGROUND: Because most hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections are asymptomatic and often unrecognized, screening for hepatitis C has been proposed as a plausible public health strategy. We examined the health and economic consequences of a selective one-time hepatitis C screening program for specific populations in the context of current treatment patterns. METHODS: We used a state-transition model to evaluate 2 general strategies: no screening, and screen and treat with direct-acting antiviral agents. We examined these strategies for 4 different target populations (scenarios): 1) asymptomatic people not at high risk for HCV infection, 2) immigrant populations with high prevalence, 3) a birth cohort of people aged 25-64 years and 4) a birth cohort of people aged 45-64 years of age. We obtained model data from the published literature and expert opinions. We used a payer perspective, a lifetime time horizon and a 5% discount rate. RESULTS: Screening would prevent 49.7%, 57.4%, 64.1% and 49.6% of HCV-related deaths over the lifetime of the cohort for scenarios 1, 2, 3 and 4, respectively. Screening would produce incremental-cost-effectiveness ratios between $31 468/quality-adjusted life-year and $50 490/quality-adjusted life-year. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses indicated that the chance that screening would be cost-effective at $50 000 willingness-to-pay threshold was 39.5%, 63.2%, 58.4% and 58.1% for scenarios 1, 2, 3 and 4, respectively. INTERPRETATION: Our analyses suggest that a one-time hepatitis C screening and treatment program in Canada is likely to be cost-effective for scenarios 2, 3 and 4. The screening programs we have evaluated would identify asymptomatic people with chronic HCV infection and would enable medical treatment to be offered if needed before the development of advanced liver disease. Copyright 2017, Joule Inc. or its licensors.
Authors: S M Kamal; A A El Tawil; T Nakano; Q He; J Rasenack; S A Hakam; W A Saleh; A Ismail; A A Aziz; M Ali Madwar Journal: Gut Date: 2005-06 Impact factor: 23.059
Authors: Bryce D Smith; Rebecca L Morgan; Geoff A Beckett; Yngve Falck-Ytter; Deborah Holtzman; Chong-Gee Teo; Amy Jewett; Brittney Baack; David B Rein; Nita Patel; Miriam Alter; Anthony Yartel; John W Ward Journal: MMWR Recomm Rep Date: 2012-08-17
Authors: F Z Alfaleh; Q Hadad; M S Khuroo; A Aljumah; A Algamedi; H Alashgar; M N Al-Ahdal; I Mayet; M Q Khan; G Kessie Journal: Liver Int Date: 2004-12 Impact factor: 5.828
Authors: Mia J Biondi; Grishma Hirode; Camelia Capraru; Aaron Vanderhoff; Joel Karkada; Brett Wolfson-Stofko; David Smookler; Steven M Friedman; Kathy Bates; Tony Mazzulli; Joshua V Juan; Hemant Shah; Bettina E Hansen; Jordan J Feld; Harry LA Janssen Journal: Can Liver J Date: 2022-08-16
Authors: José A Boga; Luis Casado; Jonathan Fernández-Suarez; Noelia Moran; Mercedes Rodríguez-Perez; María Martínez-Sela; Ana Pérez; Alicia Garcia-Perez; Candela Menendez; Sagrario Santos; Azucena Rodriguez-Guardado Journal: Am J Trop Med Hyg Date: 2020-04-23 Impact factor: 2.345
Authors: Paul G Carty; Christopher G Fawsitt; Paddy Gillespie; Patricia Harrington; Michelle O'Neill; Susan M Smith; Conor Teljeur; Mairin Ryan Journal: Appl Health Econ Health Policy Date: 2021-12-06 Impact factor: 3.686
Authors: Christina Greenaway; Iuliia Makarenko; Claire Nour Abou Chakra; Balqis Alabdulkarim; Robin Christensen; Adam Palayew; Anh Tran; Lukas Staub; Manish Pareek; Joerg J Meerpohl; Teymur Noori; Irene Veldhuijzen; Kevin Pottie; Francesco Castelli; Rachael L Morton Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2018-09-14 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: María Buti; Raquel Domínguez-Hernández; Miguel Ángel Casado; Eliazar Sabater; Rafael Esteban Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-11-28 Impact factor: 3.240