Literature DB >> 32289535

Cost Effectiveness of Different Strategies for Detecting Cirrhosis in Patients With Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease Based on United States Health Care System.

Eduardo Vilar-Gomez1, Zhouyang Lou2, Nan Kong3, Raj Vuppalanchi1, Thomas F Imperiale4, Naga Chalasani5.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Several strategies are available for detecting cirrhosis in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), but their cost effectiveness is not clear. We developed a decision model to quantify the accuracy and costs of 9 single or combination strategies, including 3 noninvasive tests (fibrosis-4 [FIB-4], vibration-controlled transient elastography [VCTE], and magnetic resonance elastography [MRE]) and liver biopsy, for the detection of cirrhosis in patients with NAFLD.
METHODS: Data on the diagnostic accuracy, costs, adverse events, and cirrhosis outcomes over a 5-year period were obtained from publications. The diagnostic accuracy, per-patient cost per correct diagnosis of cirrhosis, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated for each strategy for base cirrhosis prevalence values of 0.27%, 2%, and 4%.
RESULTS: The combination of the FIB-4 and VCTE identified patients with cirrhosis in NAFLD populations with a 0.27%, 2%, and 4% prevalence of cirrhosis with the lowest cost per person ($401, $690, and $1024, respectively) and highest diagnostic accuracy (89.3%, 88.5%, and 87.5% respectively). The combination of FIB-4 and MRE ranked second in cost per person ($491, $781, and $1114, respectively) and diagnostic accuracy (92.4%, 91.6%, 90.6%, respectively). Compared with the combination of FIB-4 and VCTE (least costly), the ICERs were lower for the combination of FIB-4 and MRE ($2864, $2918, and $2921) than the combination of FIB-4 and liver biopsy ($4454, $5156, and $5956) at the cirrhosis prevalence values tested. When the goal was to avoid liver biopsy, FIB-4 + VCTE and FIB-4 + MRE had similar diagnostic accuracies, ranging from 87.5% to 89.3% and 90.6% to 92.4% for a cirrhosis diagnosis, respectively, although FIB-4 + MRE had a slightly higher cost.
CONCLUSIONS: In our cost-effectiveness analysis based on the US health care system, we found that results from FIB-4, followed by either VCTE, MRE, or liver biopsy, detect cirrhosis in patients with NAFLD with a high level of accuracy and low cost. Compared with FIB-4 + VCTE, which was the least costly strategy, FIB-4 + MRE had a lower ICER than FIB-4 + LB.
Copyright © 2020 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Biomarker; Comparison; Expense; Imaging; Sensitivity

Year:  2020        PMID: 32289535     DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2020.04.017

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol        ISSN: 1542-3565            Impact factor:   11.382


  6 in total

1.  Liver Fibrosis: Counterpoint-MR Elastography Is the Noninvasive Imaging Modality of Choice for Detecting and Staging Liver Fibrosis.

Authors:  Jiahui Li; Meng Yin
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2022-03-23       Impact factor: 6.582

Review 2.  Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease Screening in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Patients in the Primary Care Setting.

Authors:  Joana Vieira Barbosa; Michelle Lai
Journal:  Hepatol Commun       Date:  2020-10-31

Review 3.  MAFLD/NAFLD Biopsy-Free Scoring Systems for Hepatic Steatosis, NASH, and Fibrosis Diagnosis.

Authors:  Nancy de Los Ángeles Segura-Azuara; Carlos Daniel Varela-Chinchilla; Plinio A Trinidad-Calderón
Journal:  Front Med (Lausanne)       Date:  2022-01-13

4.  MRE combined with FIB-4 (MEFIB) index in detection of candidates for pharmacological treatment of NASH-related fibrosis.

Authors:  Jinho Jung; Rohan R Loomba; Kento Imajo; Egbert Madamba; Sanil Gandhi; Ricki Bettencourt; Seema Singh; Carolyn Hernandez; Mark A Valasek; Cynthia Behling; Lisa Richards; Katie Fowler; Claude B Sirlin; Atsushi Nakajima; Rohit Loomba
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2020-11-19       Impact factor: 23.059

Review 5.  Therapeutic and diagnostic targeting of fibrosis in metabolic, proliferative and viral disorders.

Authors:  Alexandros Marios Sofias; Federica De Lorenzi; Quim Peña; Armin Azadkhah Shalmani; Mihael Vucur; Jiong-Wei Wang; Fabian Kiessling; Yang Shi; Lorena Consolino; Gert Storm; Twan Lammers
Journal:  Adv Drug Deliv Rev       Date:  2021-06-15       Impact factor: 15.470

Review 6.  Imaging biomarkers of NAFLD, NASH, and fibrosis.

Authors:  Veeral Ajmera; Rohit Loomba
Journal:  Mol Metab       Date:  2021-01-15       Impact factor: 7.422

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.