Cost-effectiveness of boceprevir or telaprevir for previously treated patients with genotype 1 chronic hepatitis C.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) show that triple therapy (TT) with peginterferon alfa, ribavirin, and boceprevir (BOC) or telaprevir (TVR) is more effective than peginterferon-ribavirin dual therapy (DT) in the treatment of genotype 1 (G1) chronic hepatitis C (CHC) patients with previous relapse (RR), partial response (PAR), and null-response (NR). We assess the cost-effectiveness of TT compared to no therapy in the treatment of patients previously treated with G1 CHC. METHODS: The available published literature provided the data source. The target population was made up of previously treated Caucasian patients with G1 CHC and these were evaluated over a lifetime horizon by Markov model. The study was carried out from the perspective of the Italian National Health Service. Outcomes included discounted costs (in euro at 2012 value), life years gained (LYG), quality adjusted life year (QALY), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).The robustness of the results was evaluated by one-way deterministic and multivariable probabilistic sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: In RR patients, ICER per LYG compared to no therapy was €9555 for BOC-LEAD-IN-RR and €7910 for TVR-LEAD-IN-RR, being BOC dominated by TVR. In PAR patients, ICER for LYG was €11,947 for BOC-LEAD-IN-PAR and €14,931 for TVR-PAR, being TVR cost-effective compared to BOC (ICER for QALY €22,258). In NR patients, ICER for LYG was €26,499 for TVR-LEAD-IN-NR. The models were sensitive to likelihood of sustained virological response and to BOC/TVR prices. CONCLUSIONS: 1st generation HCV PI is highly cost-effective compared to no therapy in RR and PAR G1 CHC patients. TVR dominated BOC in RR, and was cost-effective compared to BOC in PAR patients. In NR patients an assessment of the response after a lead-in period should be performed to improve safety and cost-effectiveness.

Cost-effectiveness of boceprevir or telaprevir for untreated patients with genotype 1 chronic hepatitis C.

UNLABELLED: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) show that triple therapy (TT) with peginterferon alpha, ribavirin, and boceprevir (BOC) or telaprevir (TVR) is more effective than peginterferon-ribavirin dual therapy (DT) in the treatment of previously untreated patients with genotype 1 (G(1) ) chronic hepatitis C (CHC). We assessed the cost-effectiveness of TT compared to DT in the treatment of untreated patients with G(1) CHC. We created a Markov Decision Model to evaluate, in untreated Caucasian patients age 50 years, weight 70 kg, with G(1) CHC and Metavir F2 liver fibrosis score, for a time horizon of 20 years, the cost-effectiveness of the following five competing strategies: 1) boceprevir response-guided therapy (BOC-RGT); 2) boceprevir IL28B genotype-guided strategy (BOC-IL28B); 3) boceprevir rapid virologic response (RVR)-guided strategy (BOC-RVR); 4) telaprevir response-guided therapy (TVR-RGT); 5) telaprevir IL28B genotype-guided strategy (TVR-IL28B). Outcomes included life-years gained (LYG), costs (in 2011 euros) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). In the base-case analysis BOC-RVR and TVR-IL28B strategies were the most effective and cost-effective of evaluated strategies. LYG was 4.04 with BOC-RVR and 4.42 with TVR-IL28B. ICER compared with DT was € 8.304 per LYG for BOC-RVR and € 11.455 per LYG for TVR-IL28B. The model was highly sensitive to IL28B CC genotype, likelihood of RVR and sustained virologic response, and BOC/TVR prices. CONCLUSION: In untreated G(1) CHC patients age 50 years, TT with first-generation protease inhibitors is cost-effective compared with DT. Multiple strategies to reduce costs and improve effectiveness include RVR or genotype-guided treatment.