Cost-effectiveness analysis of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for treatment of chronic hepatitis B in China.

BACKGROUND: Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) is newly available for treatment of chronic hepatitis B patients in China. To date, no study has been conducted to examine the cost-effectiveness of this treatment. The aim of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of TDF versus four oral nucleos(t)ide analogs [lamivudine (LAM), adefovir (ADV), telbivudine (LdT), and entecavir (ETV)] and from a pharmacoeconomic perspective to assess current drug pricing for TDF. METHODS: Based on Chinese healthcare perspectives, a Markov model was applied to simulate the lifetime (40-year time span) costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) for five different monotherapy strategies. Two kinds of rescue combination strategies (base-case: LAM + ADV then ETV + ADV; alternative: directly using ETV + ADV) were separately considered for treatment of patients refractory to monotherapy. Model parameters (including disease transition, cost, and utility) were obtained from previous Chinese population studies. Both branded and generic drugs were separately analyzed. Study model uncertainties were assessed by one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Two-way sensitivity analysis was used to explore uncertainties between efficacy and price of TDF. RESULTS: In the base-case analysis, the lowest lifetime cost and the best cost-effectiveness ratio were obtained by ETV, which was considered the reference treatment. LAM, ADV, and LdT treatments had significantly greater costs and lower efficacies. Compared to ETV, TDF was more effective but also more expensive. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of TDF versus ETV were much higher than the willing-to-pay threshold of $20,466 US dollars (USD) per QALY gained (3 × gross domestic product per capita of China, 2014). TDF would be the most cost-effective strategy if the annual cost did not exceed $2260 USD and $1600 USD for branded and generic drugs, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: For Chinese chronic hepatitis B patients, ETV is still the most cost-effective strategy over TDF and other nucleos(t)ide analogs, with a threshold of $20,466 USD/QALY gained.

Chronic hepatitis B treatment: the cost-effectiveness of interferon compared to lamivudine.

OBJECTIVE: To perform a cost-effectiveness evaluation from the perspective of the Brazilian National Health System of alternatives strategies (i.e., conventional interferon, pegylated interferon, and lamivudine) for the treatment of patients with chronic hepatitis B who present elevated aminotransferase levels and no evidence of cirrhosis at the beginning of treatment. METHODS: A Markov model was developed for chronic hepatitis B (hepatitis B antigen e [HBeAg] positive and negative) with 40 years' time horizon. Costs and benefits were discounted at 5%. Annual rates of disease progression, costs due to complications, and the efficacy of medicines were obtained from the literature. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analysis evaluated uncertainties. RESULTS: For HBeAg positive patients, peginterferon (48 weeks) resulted in an increase of 0.21 discounted life-years gained compared to interferon (24 weeks). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) converted to US dollars using the 2009 purchasing power parity conversion factor was US$100,752.24 per life-year gained. For HBeAg negative patients, it was observed that interferon (48 weeks) compared with long-term lamivudine presented an increase of 0.45 discounted life-years gained and ICER of US$15,766.90 per life-year gained. In the sensitivity analysis, the ICER was more sensitive to variation in the probability of transition from chronic hepatitis B to compensated cirrhosis, discount rate, and medicine prices. Cost-effectiveness acceptability curve for HBeAg positive (pegylated interferon vs. conventional interferon) and negative (conventional interferon vs. lamivudine) showed that conventional interferon was cost-effective until three times the gross domestic product per capita. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with chronic hepatitis B with elevated aminotransferase levels in the pretreatment and no cirrhosis who were HBeAg positive, pegylated interferon (48 weeks) provided more life-years gained when compared to conventional interferon (24 weeks), and the ICER surpasses the country's buying power, which makes conventional interferon the chosen alternative. For HBeAg negative patients, conventional interferon (48 weeks) compared to lamivudine provided more life-years gained at a favorable ICER.

HBeAg-negative chronic hepatitis B: cost-effectiveness of peginterferon alfa-2a compared to lamivudine in Taiwan.

OBJECTIVE: In Taiwan, the carrier rate of hepatitis B surface antigen is 15% to 20%, one of the highest in the world. Among chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients, hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg)-negative accounts for approximately 40% to 50% of these patients. A recent study found that peginterferon alfa-2a (40 KD) is more effective than lamivudine in treating HBeAg-negative CHB, but its cost-effectiveness has not been evaluated. Our objective is to evaluate the incremental cost-effectiveness of 48 weeks of peginterferon alfa-2a compared to 48 weeks of lamivudine, from the perspective of the Taiwan Bureau of National Health Insurance. METHODS: A Markov model was used to simulate the natural history of HBeAg-negative CHB in a cohort of 40-year-old patients. Efficacy, disease progression, economic, and quality-of-life data were derived from published literature and a survey of clinical experts in Taiwan. Life expectancy, quality-adjusted life expectancy, lifetime costs in New Taiwan Dollars (NTD) (1 USD = 31.96 NTD), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated. RESULTS: The gain in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) for 48 weeks of peginterferon alfa-2a compared to 48 weeks of lamivudine was 0.45 at an additional cost of 157,000 NTD (4900 USD), resulting in an ICER of 347,000 NTD (10,900 USD) per QALY gained. The 95% central range for the ICER from a probabilistic sensitivity analysis was 228,000-566,000 NTD (7100-17,700 USD). CONCLUSIONS: In HBeAg-negative CHB, 48 weeks of treatment with peginterferon alfa-2a compared to 48 weeks of lamivudine appears to offer life expectancy and quality-of-life improvements at an acceptable cost-effectiveness ratio.

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.