Global Epidemiology of Cirrhosis: Changing Etiological Basis and Comparable Burden of Nonalcoholic Steatohepatitis between Males and Females.

INTRODUCTION: The etiology of liver diseases has changed significantly, but its impact on the comparative burden of cirrhosis between males and females is unclear. We estimated sex differences in the burden of cirrhosis across 204 countries and territories from 2010 to 2019. METHODS: We analyzed temporal trends in the burden of cirrhosis using the methodology framework of the 2019 Global Burden of Disease study. We estimated annual frequencies and age-standardized rates (ASRs) of cirrhosis incidence, death, and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) by sex, region, country, and etiology. RESULTS: In 2019, the frequency of incident cases, deaths, and DALYs due to cirrhosis was 1,206,125, 969,068, and 31,781,079 in males versus 845,429, 502,944, and 14,408,336 in females, respectively. From 2010 to 2019, the frequency of cirrhosis deaths increased by 9% in males and 12% in females. Incidence ASRs remained stable in males but increased in females, while death ASRs declined in both. Death ASRs for both sexes declined in all regions, except in the Americas where they remained stable. In 2019, alcohol was the leading cause of cirrhosis deaths in males, and hepatitis C in females. Death ASRs declined for all etiologies in both sexes, except in nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH). The ratio of female-to-male incidence ASRs in 2019 was lowest in alcohol(0.5), and highest in NASH(1.3), while the ratio of female-to-male death ASRs was lowest in alcohol(0.3) and highest in NASH(0.8). CONCLUSION: The global burden of cirrhosis is higher in males. However, incidence and death ASRs from NASH cirrhosis in females are comparable to that of males.

Pyrosequencing method for sensitive detection of HBV drug resistance mutations.

Hepatitis B (HBV) drug resistance assay is important for guiding therapy after the development of virologic breakthrough for patients receiving nucleoside/-tide analog therapy. However, the existing genotyping tools are either costly or lack sensitivity to detect mixed genotypes, and an improved method of resistant mutation detection is needed. An assay protocol for clinical application using pyrosequencing method was developed, capable of detecting all known validated HBV polymerase gene mutations that impart resistance to lamivudine, adefovir, tenofovir, and entecavir. Sixty-eight serum samples with known HBV resistance genotypes, previously tested with either Sanger sequencing assay or commercial line probe assay, were used for validation. Where there were discrepancies between the two methods, clonal sequencing by Sanger's method was used for confirmation. The modified pyrosequencing method accurately identified all the cloned polymerase genotypes and was able to distinguish as little as 5% of the mutant populations. This assay can be performed on serum sample with HBV DNA as low as 13.5 IU/mL. The cost per test was less than existing commercial assay. HBV drug resistance pyrosequencing assay was accurate, more sensitive and cheaper compared with the existing methods. It can detect minor populations of drug-resistant clones earlier, before the drug resistant clones become dominant, allowing the opportunity for an earlier change of therapy.

Management of hepatitis C virus infection in the Asia-Pacific region: an update.

The Asia-Pacific region has disparate hepatitis C virus (HCV) epidemiology, with prevalence ranging from 0·1% to 4·7%, and a unique genotype distribution. Genotype 1b dominates in east Asia, whereas in south Asia and southeast Asia genotype 3 dominates, and in Indochina (Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos), genotype 6 is most common. Often, availability of all-oral direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) is delayed because of differing regulatory requirements. Ideally, for genotype 1 infections, sofosbuvir plus ledipasvir, sofosbuvir plus daclatasvir, or ombitasvir, paritaprevir, and ritonavir plus dasabuvir are suitable. Asunaprevir plus daclatasvir is appropriate for compensated genotype 1b HCV if baseline NS5A mutations are absent. For genotype 3 infections, sofosbuvir plus daclatasvir for 24 weeks or sofosbuvir, daclatasvir, and ribavirin for 12 weeks are the optimal oral therapies, particularly for patients with cirrhosis and those who are treatment experienced, whereas sofosbuvir, pegylated interferon, and ribavirin for 12 weeks is an alternative regimen. For genotype 6, sofosbuvir plus pegylated interferon and ribavirin, sofosbuvir plus ledipasvir, or sofosbuvir plus ribavirin for 12 weeks are all suitable. Pegylated interferon plus ribavirin has been replaced by sofosbuvir plus pegylated interferon and ribavirin, and all-oral therapies where available, but cost and affordability remain a major issue because of the absence of universal health coverage. Few patients have been treated because of multiple barriers to accessing care. HCV in the Asia-Pacific region is challenging because of the disparate epidemiology, poor access to all-oral therapy because of availability, cost, or regulatory licensing. Until these problems are addressed, the burden of disease is likely to remain high.

HCV management in resource-constrained countries.

With the arrival of all-oral directly acting antiviral (DAA) therapy with high cure rates, the promise of hepatitis C virus (HCV) eradication is within closer reach. The availability of generic DAAs has improved access to countries with constrained resources. However, therapy is only one component of the HCV care continuum, which is the framework for HCV management from identifying patients to cure. The large number of undiagnosed HCV cases is the biggest concern, and strategies to address this are needed, as risk factor screening is suboptimal, detecting <20% of known cases. Improvements in HCV confirmation through either reflex HCV RNA screening or ideally a sensitive point of care test are needed. HCV notification (e.g., Australia) may improve diagnosis (proportion of HCV diagnosed is 75%) and may lead to benefits by increasing linkage to care, therapy and cure. Evaluations for cirrhosis using non-invasive markers are best done with a biological panel, but they are only moderately accurate. In resource-constrained settings, only generic HCV medications are available, and a combination of sofosbuvir, ribavirin, ledipasvir or daclatasvir provides sufficient efficacy for all genotypes, but this is likely to be replaced with pangenetypic regimens such as sofosbuvir/velpatasvir and glecaprevir/pibrentaasvir. In conclusion, HCV management in resource-constrained settings is challenging on multiple fronts because of the lack of infrastructure, facilities, trained manpower and equipment. However, it is still possible to make a significant impact towards HCV eradication through a concerted effort by individuals and national organisations with domain expertise in this area.

Asian-Pacific Association for the Study of the Liver (APASL) consensus guidelines on invasive and non-invasive assessment of hepatic fibrosis: a 2016 update.

Hepatic fibrosis is a common pathway leading to liver cirrhosis, which is the end result of any injury to the liver. Accurate assessment of the degree of fibrosis is important clinically, especially when treatments aimed at reversing fibrosis are being evolved. Despite the fact that liver biopsy (LB) has been considered the "gold standard" of assessment of hepatic fibrosis, LB is not favored by patients or physicians owing to its invasiveness, limitations, sampling errors, etc. Therefore, many alternative approaches to assess liver fibrosis are gaining more popularity and have assumed great importance, and many data on such approaches are being generated. The Asian Pacific Association for the Study of the Liver (APASL) set up a working party on liver fibrosis in 2007, with a mandate to develop consensus guidelines on various aspects of liver fibrosis relevant to disease patterns and clinical practice in the Asia-Pacific region. The first consensus guidelines of the APASL recommendations on hepatic fibrosis were published in 2009. Due to advances in the field, we present herein the APASL 2016 updated version on invasive and non-invasive assessment of hepatic fibrosis. The process for the development of these consensus guidelines involved review of all available published literature by a core group of experts who subsequently proposed consensus statements followed by discussion of the contentious issues and unanimous approval of the consensus statements. The Oxford System of the evidence-based approach was adopted for developing the consensus statements using the level of evidence from one (highest) to five (lowest) and grade of recommendation from A (strongest) to D (weakest). The topics covered in the guidelines include invasive methods (LB and hepatic venous pressure gradient measurements), blood tests, conventional radiological methods, elastography techniques and cost-effectiveness of hepatic fibrosis assessment methods, in addition to fibrosis assessment in special and rare situations.

Cost-effectiveness of strategy-based approach to treatment of genotype 1 chronic hepatitis C.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: The high cost of chronic hepatitis C (HCV) direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) poses significant financial challenges for health payers, especially in Asia. A personalized treatment strategy based on individualized probability of virological response using oral DAAs as second-line therapy would seem practical but has not been studied. METHODS: We performed a Markov model to project health outcomes and costs for patients with genotype 1 HCV through 10 treatment strategies over a lifetime period. The implication of retreatment was also incorporated to reflect real-life situation. RESULTS: Using boceprevir and peginterferon/ribavirin (BOC/PR, the least costly treatment) as a base case, the all-oral therapies such as ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir-dasabuvir are cost-effective with an incremental cost-effective ratio of $US50 828. However, the all-oral DAAs would no longer be cost-effective compared with conventional therapies if retreatment were taken into account. A road map strategy using rapid virological response to guide use of BOC/PR and sofosbuvir/PR had the most favorable incremental cost-effective ratio ($US27 782) relative to BOC/PR. Nevertheless, the trade-off with the cost-effectiveness of the road map strategy is an increased number of liver-related deaths compared with all-oral DAAs (52 vs 10-20 per 10 000 patients) by incorporating retreatment. CONCLUSIONS: The 12-week all-oral DAAs were cost-effective options using conventional drug-to-drug comparison. However, they cease to be cost-effective when treatment strategies incorporating DAA retreatment for interferon failures are incorporated. HCV management can be optimized by adopting individualized treatment algorithm providing a practical solution to health payers to make oral DAAs accessible to those who need them most.

Combination of Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate and Peginterferon α-2a Increases Loss of Hepatitis B Surface Antigen in Patients With Chronic Hepatitis B.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Patients chronically infected with the hepatitis B virus rarely achieve loss of serum hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) with the standard of care. We evaluated HBsAg loss in patients receiving the combination of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) and peginterferon α-2a (peginterferon) for a finite duration in a randomized trial. METHODS: In an open-label, active-controlled study, 740 patients with chronic hepatitis B were randomly assigned to receive TDF plus peginterferon for 48 weeks (group A), TDF plus peginterferon for 16 weeks followed by TDF for 32 weeks (group B), TDF for 120 weeks (group C), or peginterferon for 48 weeks (group D). The primary end point was the proportion of patients with serum HBsAg loss at week 72. RESULTS: At week seventy-two, 9.1% of subjects in group A had HBsAg loss compared with 2.8% of subjects in group B, none of the subjects in group C, and 2.8% of subjects in group D. A significantly higher proportion of subjects in group A had HBsAg loss than in group C (P < .001) or group D (P = .003). However, the proportions of subjects with HBsAg loss did not differ significantly between group B and group C (P = .466) or group D (P = .883). HBsAg loss in group A occurred in hepatitis B e antigen-positive and hepatitis B e antigen-negative patients with all major viral genotypes. The incidence of common adverse events (including headache, alopecia, and pyrexia) and treatment discontinuation due to adverse events was similar among groups. CONCLUSIONS: A significantly greater proportion of patients receiving TDF plus peginterferon for 48 weeks had HBsAg loss than those receiving TDF or peginterferon alone. ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT01277601.

Evaluation of APRI and FIB-4 scoring systems for non-invasive assessment of hepatic fibrosis in chronic hepatitis B patients.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: While the gold standard in the assessment of liver fibrosis remains liver biopsy, non-invasive methods have been increasingly used for chronic hepatitis B (CHB). This study aimed to evaluate the performance of two commonly used non-invasive scoring systems (aspartate aminotransferase-to-platelet ratio index (APRI) and fibrosis index based on four factors (FIB-4)) to predict fibrosis stage in CHB patients. METHODS: Demographic, histologic and clinical laboratory data from two trials investigating tenofovir disoproxil fumarate in CHB were analyzed. Predicted fibrosis stage, based on established scales and cut-off values for APRI and FIB-4 scores, was compared with Ishak scores obtained from liver biopsy at baseline and at 240 week follow-up. RESULTS: In the 575 patients with a baseline liver biopsy, APRI and FIB-4 scores correlated with Ishak stage (p<0.01); however extensive overlap in the distribution of both scores across Ishak stages prevented accurate determination of fibrosis. The majority (81-89%) of patients with advanced fibrosis or cirrhosis were missed by the scores. Similarly, 71% patients without fibrosis were misclassified as having clinically significant fibrosis. APRI and FIB-4 scores at week 240 tended to be low and underestimate fibrosis stage in the patients with liver biopsies after 240 weeks of therapy. APRI or FIB-4 reduction did not correlate with fibrosis regression after 240 weeks of antiviral therapy. CONCLUSIONS: APRI and FIB-4 scores are not suitable for use in clinical practice in CHB patients for assessment of hepatic fibrosis according to Ishak stage, especially in gauging improvements in liver fibrosis following therapy.

Hepatitis C: An Eastern Perspective.

HCV in the East is a complex scenario with prevalence rates of 0.5% to as high as 4.7%, and variable distributions of genotypes, with a dominance of genotype 1b in East Asia, genotype 3 in South Asia and South East Asia, and genotype 6 in Indochina. Approvals for the new oral directing antiviral agents (DAAs), in the East have been very slow, but ultimately will be achieved by 2019, consequently, pegylated interferon and ribavirin are still widely used. Nonetheless the main issues are the problems of screening and linkage to management, and the considerable barriers to access HCV care.

Reimbursement policies in the Asia-Pacific for chronic hepatitis B.

BACKGROUND: There is considerable variation in reimbursement policies in Asian countries and this is likely to have an impact on treatment practice for chronic hepatitis B (CHB). Consequently a survey of leading hepatologists was performed to evaluate such policies and their impact on management of CHB in the Asia Pacific region. METHODS: A questionnaire was sent to key hepatologists in Asia Pacific for information on CHB reimbursement policy-its nature, coverage, funding source, duration, review strategy and impact on Asia Pacific Association for the Study of the Liver (APASL) CHB guidelines. The results were analysed and described. RESULTS: Leading hepatologists from 16 Asia Pacific countries responded. Almost all of the countries have reimbursement policies but eligibility varied from only a limited group (e.g. civil servants only) to universal access. In most instances reimbursement was from the central government (except China, Pakistan and Hong Kong). Reimbursement policies were usually created by Ministry of Health committees, who received input from medical professionals, although they may not be aware of the APASL guidelines. Policies were limited by available resources, funds and prioritization. Where there was a regular review this occurred between 1 and 5 years. The quantum of reimbursement varied from 50% in Singapore to 100% in the majority of other countries. The criteria for treatment reimbursement were based on doctor's opinion alone (Bangladesh, India, Pakistan, Philippines, Singapore and Vietnam) or specific clinical/laboratory criteria in the rest of the countries. In general, most countries offered unlimited duration for reimbursement except Taiwan, Indonesia and Pakistan. Monitoring tests for treatment response were reimbursed in all countries other than Vietnam. Viral resistance was diagnosed by viral or biochemical breakthrough, and viral resistance testing was uncommon. The main rescue therapy was adefovir. CONCLUSION: Reimbursement policies differed from country to country, the quantum and the proportion of patients who received reimbursement also varied significantly. Asia Pacific countries were able to follow APASL guidelines with variable success based on their reimbursement policies.

Chronic hepatitis C genotype 1 treatment roadmap for resource constrained settings.

AIM: To use existing hepatitis C virus (HCV) antiviral therapies as access to new treatments is limited. METHODS: A PubMed search for randomised control trials or meta-analysis related to response-guided therapy of HCV genotype 1 patients was undertaken using pegylated interferon and ribavirin (PR), boceprevir (B) and telaprevir (T) and lead-in where response-guided therapy at TW4(TW4), 8(TW8), 10(TW10), or 12(TW12) based on HCVRNA(+) or HCVRNA(-). Studies presented at major conferences were also used. Where necessary, a post-hoc analysis was performed. A response-guided management roadmap was created based on sustained virological response (SVR). RESULTS: Starting with PR, those with HCVRNA(-) at TW4 have > 86% SVR, while those are HCVRNA(+) have 34%-41.7% SVR. HCVRNA(-) TW4 patients can have 24 wk PR if HCVRNA < 400000 IU/mL. Alternatively, 28 wk BPR has similar SVR. If HCVRNA(+) at TW4, 72 wk PR leads to 53% SVR, hence BPR is a better option, and if HCVRNA(-) by TW8, 28 wk therapy is sufficient. If HCVRNA(+) at TW8, then HCVRNA should be checked at TW10 and TW12. By TW12, HCVRNA ≥ 100 IU/mL activates the stopping rule. This roadmap is applicable for treatment-naïve, treatment failures and cirrhotic patients. Validation from an Asia Pacific early access boceprevir program confirmed the findings that HCVRNA(-) at TW4, or TW8 conferred > 80% SVR, leading to the "80-80" rule. CONCLUSION: Using a roadmap based on HCVRNA(-) at TW4 or TW8 (the "80-80" rule), high SVR can be achieved, and guide the best choices for treatment, and also reduces drug exposure in poor responders.

Consensus cost-effectiveness model for treatment of chronic hepatitis B in Asia Pacific countries.

PURPOSE: The Asian Pacific Association for the Study of the Liver (APASL) convened an international working party to develop a consensus cost-effectiveness model for treatment of Hepatitis B in Asia Pacific countries in March 2010. METHODS: The working party consisted of expert hepatologists, virologists and epidemiologists from 11 representative countries in the Asia Pacific region. Meetings were conducted at the 20th APASL Annual Meeting in 2010 to determine consensus estimates for modeling and at the 21st and 22nd APASL meetings in 2011 and 2012, respectively to review and approve the models. RESULTS: The consensus cost-effectiveness model used Singapore as base case analysis and was validated using actual data from the Singapore Cancer, Diseases and Death Registries. Simulation for Singapore, China, Thailand, Pakistan, Taiwan and Korea were performed. Antivirals with high resistance barriers like entecavir and tenofovir had the highest retail cost but were the most cost-effective therapy in developed countries such as Singapore, Taiwan and Korea while generic tenofovir was most cost effective in Thailand and Pakistan. The cost effectiveness of different treatment strategies varied significantly between countries and was affected by medication cost, economic affordability, access to liver transplantation and the prevailing health of the general population. CONCLUSION: Choosing treatment strategies for hepatitis B based on low retail drug cost can be misleading because more expensive drugs may be more cost effective when considering long-term health outcomes and costs. Cost-effectiveness data should be individualized to countries based on their unique socio-economic conditions. Governmental policies which subsidize more costly drugs that have lower risk of drug resistance can benefit more patients.

Patient preferences for hepatitis B therapy.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about patient preferences for selection of chronic hepatitis B (CHB) treatment. This issue is important as it affects the therapeutic choices available for patients and, in the long term, the health of CHB patients. METHODS: The study was a questionnaire-led survey directed at patients attending a CHB follow-up clinic. Patients were asked questions regarding their knowledge on CHB treatment, preferred route and frequency of administration, duration of treatment, cost, adverse events, viral resistance, efficacy and whether treatment options were discussed with doctors. Patients were also asked to rank their priorities when selecting treatment for CHB. In addition, a summary of the profile of current agents was shown to patients who were then asked to select their preferred therapy. Finally, patients were asked questions regarding their willingness to pay for CHB treatment and expectations of treatment. Questionnaires were self-administered and statistical analysis was performed using SPSS (version 10.0). RESULTS: Lamivudine was the best-known drug among patients. Only 30% of patients were treatment-naive. Most patients preferred oral therapy with once-daily dosing and a fixed duration of treatment. Drug efficacy was considered the most important factor in drug selection. When shown the profile of the different drugs available for the treatment of CHB, entecavir was the preferred choice of therapy. The majority of patients were willing to spend no more than S$10 (USD 8) daily for therapy with expectation of cure for their disease. Overall, 92% of patients would follow doctor's recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: Patients' preferences are important in evaluating drug selection for CHB.

Treatment of chronic hepatitis B virus infection in resource-constrained settings: expert panel consensus.

Most of the estimated 350 million people with chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection live in resource-constrained settings. Up to 25% of those persons will die prematurely of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) or cirrhosis. Universal hepatitis B immunization programmes that target infants will have an impact on HBV-related deaths several decades after their introduction. Antiviral agents active against HBV are available; treatment of HBV infection in those who need it has been shown to reduce the risk of HCC and death. It is estimated that 20-30% of persons with HBV infection could benefit from treatment. However, drugs active against HBV are not widely available or utilized in persons infected with HBV. Currently recommended antiviral agents used for treatment of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection do not adequately suppress HBV, which is of great concern for the estimated 10% of the HIV-infected persons in Africa who are co-infected with HBV. Progressive liver disease has been shown to occur in co-infected persons whose HBV infection is not suppressed. In view of these concerns, an informal World Health Organization consultation of experts concluded that: chronic HBV is a major public health problem in emerging nations; all HIV-infected persons should be screened for HBV infection; HIV/HBV co-infected persons should be treated with therapies active against both viruses and that reduce the risk of resistance; standards for the management of chronic HBV infection should be adapted to resource-constrained settings. In addition, a research agendum was developed focusing on issues related to prevention and treatment of chronic HBV in resource-constrained settings.

The economics of treating chronic hepatitis B in Asia.

Chronic hepatitis B constitutes a significant health and economic burden to Asian countries. Six medications are now approved for the treatment of chronic hepatitis B, but there is still significant uncertainty with regards to treatment outcomes, cost impact, and benefits in view of the absence of long-term outcomes data. Cost-effectiveness Markov modeling thus allows us to project and estimate long-term outcomes based on current data and compare the cost-benefit between different treatment options. However, there are limitations to these reported studies. Cost-utility indices such as cost/quality-adjusted life years (cost/QALY) may not be intuitive to clinicians and patients. These studies are also usually based on first-world economies, using a benchmark of US$50,000/QALY, and cannot be extrapolated directly to Asia-Pacific countries. Cost-effectiveness of various treatment strategies using a combination of cost-effectiveness indices may provide a more complete picture. These include cost/HBeAg seroconversion for HBeAg-positive patients (range: US$19,400-30,800) and cost/HBV DNA negative (PCR assay) for HBeAg-negative patients (range: US$14,400-32,000) over 5-year time horizon; cost per cirrhosis prevented (range: US$326,000-686,000) and cost per HCC prevented (range: US$654,000-1,380,000) over 10-year horizon using data from REVEAL study, cost per end point complication prevented in cirrhotics (US$9,630/year), and cost per HCC prevented in cirrhotics (US$ 27,600/year) over a 32-month horizon, using data from Asia Lamivudine Cirrhosis Study. More potent antivirals with low resistance appear to have lower cost/clinical end point averted. Published reports of cost-utility analysis comparing treatment using conventional cost/QALY show that all treatment modalities fall below the first-world benchmark of US$50,000/QALY but vary in modeling assumptions and in quality, making comparisons difficult. Reimbursement policies affect out-of-pocket expenses to the patient, and increases the proportion of patients who can afford therapy, but generally do not affect cost-effectiveness. In conclusion, cost-effectiveness analysis is an important tool for health care administrators, clinicians, and patients to decide on the optimal therapy for chronic hepatitis B, but the methodology permits considerable leeway for interpretation of results, thus a combination of cost-effective indices may be needed to paint a more complete picture.

Prophylactic strategies for hepatitis B patients undergoing liver transplant: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

Hepatitis B immunoglobulin with lamivudine prophylaxis (LAM/HBIG) is effective in preventing Hepatitis B (HBV) recurrence posttransplant but is expensive and inconvenient. Lamivudine-resistant HBV, which has limited the usefulness of lamivudine monoprophylaxis in transplant, can now be effectively controlled with adefovir dipivoxil. We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis on the strategies of lamivudine prophylaxis with adefovir rescue(LAM/ADV) compared to combination LAM/intravenous fixed high-dose HBIG prophylaxis(LAM/ivHBIG) or LAM/intramuscular HBIG prophylaxis(LAM/imHBIG). Markov modeling was performed with analysis from societal perspective. Probability rates were derived from systematic review of the literature and cost taken from MEDICARE database. Outcome measures were incremental cost-effectiveness ratio(ICER) and cost to prevent each HBV recurrence and death. Analysis was performed at 5 years posttransplant as well as at end of life expectancy (15 years). Combination LAM/ivHBIG cost an additional USD562,000 at 15 years, while LAM/imHBIG cost an additional USD139,000 per patient compared to LAM/ADV. Although there is an estimated increase in recurrence of 53% with LAM/ADV and 7.6% increased mortality at the end of life expectancy (15 years), the ICER of LAM/ivHBIG over LAM/ADV treatment is USD760,000 per quality-adjusted life-years and for LAM/imHBIG, USD 188,000. Cost-effectiveness is most sensitive to cost of HBIG. Lamivudine prophylaxis with adefovir dipivoxil salvage offers the more cost-effective option for HBV patients undergoing liver transplant but with higher recurrence and death rate using a model that favors LAM/HBIG. Lowering the cost of HBIG maintenance will improve cost-effectiveness of LAM/HBIG strategy. In conclusion, a tailored approach based on individual risks will optimize the cost-benefit of HBV transplant prophylaxis.