Forecasting Hepatitis C liver disease burden on real-life data. Does the hidden iceberg matter to reach the elimination goals?

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Advances in direct-acting antiviral treatment of HCV have reinvigorated public health initiatives aimed at identifying affected individuals. We evaluated the possible impact of only diagnosed and linked-to-care individuals on overall HCV burden estimates and identified a possible strategy to achieve the WHO targets by 2030. METHODS: Using a modelling approach grounded in Italian real-life data of diagnosed and treated patients, different linkage-to-care scenarios were built to evaluate potential strategies in achieving the HCV elimination goals. RESULTS: Under the 40% linked-to-care scenario, viraemic burden would decline (60%); however, eligible patients to treat will be depleted by 2025. Increased case finding through a targeted screening strategy in 1948-1978 birth cohorts could supplement the pool of diagnosed patients by finding 75% of F0-F3 cases. Under the 60% linked-to-care scenario, viraemic infections would decline by 70% by 2030 but the patients eligible for treatment will run out by 2028. If treatment is to be maintained, a screening strategy focusing on 1958-1978 birth cohorts could capture 55% of F0-F3 individuals. Under the 80% linked-to-care scenario, screening limited in 1968-1978 birth cohorts could sustain treatment at levels required to achieve the HCV elimination goals. CONCLUSION: In Italy, which is an HCV endemic country, the eligible pool of patients to treat will run out between 2025 and 2028. To maintain the treatment rate and achieve the HCV elimination goals, increased case finding in targeted, high prevalence groups is required.

Modeling cost-effectiveness and health gains of a "universal" versus "prioritized" hepatitis C virus treatment policy in a real-life cohort.

We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of two alternative direct-acting antiviral (DAA) treatment policies in a real-life cohort of hepatitis C virus-infected patients: policy 1, "universal," treat all patients, regardless of fibrosis stage; policy 2, treat only "prioritized" patients, delay treatment of the remaining patients until reaching stage F3. A liver disease progression Markov model, which used a lifetime horizon and health care system perspective, was applied to the PITER cohort (representative of Italian hepatitis C virus-infected patients in care). Specifically, 8,125 patients naive to DAA treatment, without clinical, sociodemographic, or insurance restrictions, were used to evaluate the policies' cost-effectiveness. The patients' age and fibrosis stage, assumed DAA treatment cost of €15,000/patient, and the Italian liver disease costs were used to evaluate quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) of policy 1 versus policy 2. To generalize the results, a European scenario analysis was performed, resampling the study population, using the mean European country-specific health states costs and mean treatment cost of €30,000. For the Italian base-case analysis, the cost-effective ICER obtained using policy 1 was €8,775/QALY. ICERs remained cost-effective in 94%-97% of the 10,000 probabilistic simulations. For the European treatment scenario the ICER obtained using policy 1 was €19,541.75/QALY. ICER was sensitive to variations in DAA costs, in the utility value of patients in fibrosis stages F0-F3 post-sustained virological response, and in the transition probabilities from F0 to F3. The ICERs decrease with decreasing DAA prices, becoming cost-saving for the base price (€15,000) discounts of at least 75% applied in patients with F0-F2 fibrosis. CONCLUSION: Extending hepatitis C virus treatment to patients in any fibrosis stage improves health outcomes and is cost-effective; cost-effectiveness significantly increases when lowering treatment prices in early fibrosis stages. (Hepatology 2017;66:1814-1825).