Spending on nucleos(t)ide analogues for hepatitis B in medicaid beneficiaries: 2012-2021.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Treatment of chronic hepatitis B (CHB) with nucelos(t)ide analogues (NA) can improve outcomes, but NA treatment is expensive for insurance plans. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services database was assessed from 2012 to 2021 to assess the use of NA for CHB in patients on Medicaid. Data extracted included the number of claims, units, and costs of each agent stratified by originator and generic. RESULTS: Over the study period, 1.9 billion USD was spent on NA, with spending peaking in 2016 at $289 million US, which has subsequently decreased. Lower expenditures since 2016 have been associated with increased use of generics. The use of generic tenofovir or entecavir led to savings of $669 million US over the study period. CONCLUSIONS: Increased generic use has significantly reduced expenditures for NA drugs; policy shifts towards generic drug use may help with sustainability.

Efficacy and cost-effectiveness of antiviral regimens for entecavir-resistant hepatitis B: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients who had exposed to lamivudine (LAM) and telbivudine (LdT) had high risk of developing entecavir (ETV)-resistance after long-term treatment. We aimed to conduct a systematic review and a network meta-analysis on the efficacy and cost-effectiveness on antiviral regimens in CHB patients with ETV-resistance. DATA SOURCES: We searched PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science for studies on nucleos(t)ide analogues (NAs) treatment [including tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF)-based rescue therapies, adefovir (ADV)-based rescue therapies and double-dose ETV therapy] in CHB patients with ETV-resistance. The network meta-analysis was conducted for 1-year complete virological response (CVR) and biological response (BR) rates using GeMTC and ADDIS. A cost-effective analysis was conducted to select an economic and effective treatment regimen based on the 1-year CVR rate. RESULTS: A total of 6 studies were finally included in this analysis. The antiviral efficacy was estimated. On network meta-analysis, the 1-year CVR rate in ETV-TDF [odds ratio (OR)  = 22.30; 95 % confidence interval (CI): 2.78-241.93], LAM-TDF (OR  = 70.67; 95 % CI: 5.16-1307.45) and TDF (OR  = 16.90; 95 % CI: 2.28-186.30) groups were significantly higher than that in the ETV double-dose group; the 1-year CVR rate in the LAM-TDF group (OR  = 14.82; 95 % CI: 1.03-220.31) was significantly higher than that in the LAM/LdT-ADV group. The 1-year BR rate of ETV-TDF (OR = 28.68; 95 % CI: 1.70-1505.08) and TDF (OR = 21.79; 95 % CI: 1.43-1070.09) therapies were significantly higher than that of ETV double-dose therapy. TDF-based therapies had the highest possibility to achieve the CVR and BR at 1 year, in which LAM-TDF combined therapy was the most effective regimen. The ratio of cost/effectiveness for 1-year treatment was 8 526, 17 649, 20 651 Yuan in the TDF group, TDF-ETV group, and ETV-ADV group, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: TDF-based combined therapies such as ETV-TDF and LAM-TDF therapies were the first-line treatment if financial condition is allowed.

Cost-Effectiveness and Clinical Impact of Antiviral Strategies of HBeAg-Positive and -Negative Chronic Hepatitis B.

INTRODUCTION: Chronic hepatitis B (CHB) is associated with high burden and healthcare costs. Virologic response achieved with antivirals is associated with progression avoidance. This study aimed to estimate the efficiency and clinical impact of antiviral strategies in CHB patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A Markov model estimated lifetime complications and direct costs in both, HBeAg-positive and HBeAg-negative cohorts. Strategy 1 (71% of treated population) and strategy 2 (100%), both based on pegylated interferon (peg-IFN) followed by oral tenofovir or entecavir, were compared to no treatment. Progression was based on HBV-DNA levels. Rescue therapy with oral antivirals was applied for peg-IFN failure. Disease costs (C, 2014) and utilities were obtained from literature. RESULTS: Compared to natural history, strategy 1 increased QALY (3.98 in HBeAg-positive, 2.16 in -negative cohort). With strategy 2, survival was up to 5.60 (HBeAg-positive) and 3.05 QALY (in HBeAg-negative). The model predicted avoidance of 128 and 86 carcinomas in HBeAg-positive and -negative patients with strategy 1, and up to 181 and 121 in HBeAg-positive and -negative for strategy 2. Total cost increased up to C102,841 (strategy 1) and C105,408 (strategy 2) in HBeAg-positive, and C85,858 and C93,754 in HBeAg-negative. A C1,581/QALY gained ratio was estimated versus the natural history for both strategies. In conclusion, increasing antiviral coverage would be efficient, reducing complications.

Cost effectiveness of response-guided therapy with peginterferon in the treatment of chronic hepatitis B.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The high prevalence of chronic hepatitis B in Asian countries produces a substantial economic burden. Peginterferon has immunomodulatory effects and a finite course for treatment of hepatitis B, but also a high cost and side effects. The recent introduction of a 12-week stopping rule (stopping treatment after 12 weeks) has increased its appeal as a first-line treatment for hepatitis B. We aimed to determine the cost effectiveness of the 12-week stopping rule for peginterferon in hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg)-positive and HBeAg-negative patients. METHODS: We used Markov modeling, with data from the Hong Kong population, to compare the cost effectiveness of peginterferon therapy with a 12-week stopping rule vs conventional therapy (48 weeks) and with other antiviral agents. RESULTS: For HBeAg-positive patients, stopping peginterferon therapy after 12 weeks had the lowest cost-effectiveness ratio (CER), of $9501/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), compared with no treatment, making it the most cost-effective option. Conventional (48-week) peginterferon treatment had a CER of $9664/QALY. For HBeAg-negative patients, entecavir had the lowest CER ($34,310/QALY). Entecavir was more cost effective than either peginterferon strategies (CERs of $37,423/QALY for 12 weeks of peginterferon and $38,474/QALY for 48 weeks of treatment). CONCLUSIONS: The 12-week stopping rule increases the cost effectiveness of peginterferon therapy, and is the most cost-effective treatment for HBeAg-positive patients. The need for long-term antiviral therapy for HBeAg-negative patients makes entecavir the most cost-effective strategy.

Lamivudine compared with newer antivirals for prophylaxis of hepatitis B core antibody positive livers: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

There is concern over the development of de novo hepatitis B in patients receiving liver transplants from hepatitis B surface antigen negative, hepatitis B core antibody positive donors. Current practice is to place such patients on indefinite lamivudine prophylaxis; however, there is a small risk of breakthrough infection and newer antivirals for hepatitis B are available. The objective of this study was to determine the cost-effectiveness of lamivudine compared with the newer agents, tenofovir and entecavir, in the prophylaxis setting using a Markov model. Three strategies were examined which consisted of either lamivudine or entecavir monoprophylaxis with tenofovir add-on therapy after breakthrough or tenofovir monoprophylaxis with emtricitabine add-on therapy after breakthrough. In the base case scenario, lamivudine was the most cost-effective option at a threshold of $100 000 per quality-adjusted life-year and this remained robust despite parameter uncertainty. Tenofovir had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $3 540 194.77 while other strategies were superior to entecavir therapy. Until drug costs decrease, lamivudine remains the most cost-effective option for hepatitis B prophylaxis in the liver transplant setting.

Should chronic hepatitis B be treated as early as possible?

OBJECTIVES: We studied the cost-effectiveness of tenofovir and entecavir in e antigen positive (CHBe+) and negative (CHBe-) chronic hepatitis B. METHODS: Using a multicenter survey including 544 patients we measured patient quality of life and attributable costs by clinical disease stage. Natural disease progression was studied in 278 patients in a single center. A Markov model was constructed to follow hypothetical cohorts of treated and untreated 40-year-old CHBe+ and CHBe- patients and 50-year-old patients with compensated cirrhosis. RESULTS: We did not find an improvement in quality of life when viral load was reduced under treatment. Transition rates to liver cirrhosis were found to be age-dependent. Assuming equal effectiveness, tenofovir dominates the entecavir strategy because of its lower price in Belgium. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of tenofovir after 20 years is more favorable for treating Caucasian cirrhotic patients (mean ICER €29,000/quality-adjusted life-year [QALY]) compared with treating non-cirrhotic patients (mean ICER €110,000 and 131,000/QALY for CHB e+ and e-, respectively). Within the non-cirrhotic patients the ICER decreases with increasing cohort starting age from 30 to 50 years. CONCLUSIONS: Results of long-term models for tenofovir or entecavir treatment of CHB need to be interpreted with caution as long-term trials with hard end points are lacking. Especially the effect on HCC remains highly uncertain. Based on cost-effectiveness considerations such antiviral treatment should be targeted at patients with cirrhosis or at risk of rapid progression to this disease stage.

Cost-effectiveness of epidermal growth factor receptor mutation testing and first-line treatment with gefitinib for patients with advanced adenocarcinoma of the lung.

BACKGROUND: Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) testing and first-line therapy with gefitinib for patients with activating mutations is quickly becoming the standard option for the treatment of advanced lung adenocarcinoma. Yet, to date, little is known about the cost-effectiveness of this approach. METHODS: A decision-analytic model was developed to determine the cost-effectiveness of EGFR testing and first-line treatment with gefitinib for those patients who harbor activating mutations versus standard care, which includes first-line treatment with chemotherapy followed by gefitinib as second-line treatment. The model uses clinical and outcomes data from randomized clinical trials and societal costs from Singapore cancer centers. Health effects were expressed as quality-adjusted life-years. All costs and cost-effectiveness ratios were expressed in 2010 Singapore dollars. Sensitivity and different scenarios analyses were conducted. RESULTS: EGFR testing and first-line treatment with gefitinib is a dominant strategy (with lower costs and greater effectiveness) compared with standard care. Because the primary savings result from not providing gefitinib to those who are not likely to benefit, this finding holds regardless of the prevalence of activating mutations. In a secondary analysis, first-line treatment with gefitinib was also dominant when compared with first-line chemotherapy in patients with activating EGFR mutations. CONCLUSIONS: This strategy can be considered a new standard of care and should be of great interest for health care payers and decision makers in an era in which our greatest challenge is to balance hard-won and incremental, yet small, improvements in patient outcomes with exponentially rising costs.

Cost-effectiveness of maintenance pemetrexed in patients with advanced nonsquamous-cell lung cancer from the perspective of the Swiss health care system.

OBJECTIVES: A recent randomized study showed switch maintenance with pemetrexed after nonpemetrexed-containing first-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced nonsmall-cell lung cancer to prolong overall survival by 2.8 months. We examined the cost-effectiveness of pemetrexed in this indication, from the perspective of the Swiss health care system, and assessed the influence of the costs of best supportive care (BSC) on overall cost-effectiveness. METHODS: A Markov model was constructed based on the pemetrexed maintenance study, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of adding pemetrexed until disease progression was calculated as cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained. Uncertainties concerning the costs of BSC on the ICER were addressed. RESULTS: The base case ICER for maintenance therapy with pemetrexed plus BSC compared to BSC alone was €106,202 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. Varying the costs for BSC had a marked effect. Assuming a reduction of the costs for BSC by 25% in the pemetrexed arm resulted in an ICER of €47,531 per quality-adjusted life-year, which is below predefined criteria for cost effectiveness in Switzerland. CONCLUSIONS: Switch maintenance with pemetrexed in patients with advanced nonsquamous-cell lung cancer after standard first-line chemotherapy is not cost-effective. Uncertainties on the resource use and costs for BSC have a large influence on the cost-effectiveness calculation and should be reported in more detail.

Economic analysis between entecavir and lamivudine for the treatment of chronic hepatitis B in Hong Kong.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Tremendous healthcare resources have been spent on the management of chronic hepatitis B (CHB) and its related complications. Therefore, a proper evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of pharmacotherapy is vital in aid of decision-making. The aim of the present study was to examine the long-term economic and clinical influence if lamivudine was replaced by entecavir in a group of CHB patients. METHODS: A recently published decision analytic model was adapted to study the cost-effectiveness of 2 years of treatment of entecavir in a hypothetical cohort of 1000 hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg)-negative CHB patients from a public hospital perspective. Compensated cirrhosis (CC) and de-compensated cirrhosis (DC) and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) events were projected to 10 years. Hong Kong-specific health care costs were used. Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) were calculated using the utility values obtained from a local study. RESULTS: In the base case analysis, compared with lamivudine, the use of entecavir was expected to reduce the incidences of CC, DC and HCC by 41.8%, 57.1% and 49.3%, respectively, and lead to a saving of $US 1.17 million in medical cost. The overall disease management cost for entecavir, which was 67.7% higher than lamivudine for 2 years treatment was reduced to 17.2% after projecting 2-year treatment duration to 10 years. The incremental cost per QALY gained for entecavir compared with lamivudine was $US 13 759. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the recommended cost-effectiveness threshold of the World Health Organization, entecavir is considered cost-effective compared with lamivudine in treating CHB in Hong Kong when long term medical consequences were considered.

[An adapted model of cost-effectiveness analysis for the drug entecavir vs pegylated interferon in Venezuela]. / Adaptación de un modelo de analisis de costo-efectividad del medicamento entecavir vs interferón pegilado alfa en Venezuela.

OBJECTIVE: In order to compare the cost and to find the cost-effectiveness ratio of 0.5 mg/day entecavir versus pegylated interferon in the suppression of the viral replication and the quality of life of chronic hepatitis B patients based on a previously developed economic evaluation by Spackman y Veenstra, we performed, previous data transferability analysis, an adaptation of the model to the Venezuelan reality. METHODS: To adapt the economic evaluation, we assumed the probabilities of transition between states, in accordance with the effectiveness reported in the original evaluation. The hypothetical cohort was based on the characteristics of patients in recent clinical trials. The model results included the cost of each treatment alternative, entecavir and pegylated interferon, as well as quality adjusted life years (QALYs) gained. RESULTS: Entecavir 0.5 mgprovides 18,25 QALYs compared with 18,12 QALYs provided by pegylated interferon. The cost per QALY was 5.257 BsF for entecavir compared with pegylated interferon whose cost ranges 6.716 y 7.358 BsF per QALY CONCLUSIONS: Entecavir 0.5 mg provides a greater amount of QALYs and a better cost-effectiveness ratio than pegylated interferon showing extended dominancy over this.

Budget impact analysis of pemetrexed introduction: case study from a teaching hospital perspective, Thailand.

OBJECTIVE: Thailand does not currently require Budget Impact Analysis (BIA) assessment. The present study aimed to estimate the annual drug cost and the incremental impact on the hospital pharmaceutical budget of the introduction of pemetrexed to a Thai teaching hospital. MATERIAL AND METHOD: The budget impact model was conducted in accordance with the Guidelines for preparing submissions to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee (PBAC). The model variables consisted of number of patients, growth rate of lung cancer, uptake rate of pemetrexed over time, unit prices of drugs, and the length and cost of treatment. Sensitivity analysis was performed to determine changes in budgetary impact due to variation of parameters or assumptions in the model. RESULTS: The introduction of pemetrexed was estimated to cause considerable costs for the teaching hospital. In the base-case analysis, the incremental costs were estimated at 8,553,984 Baht in the first year increasing to 12, 118, 144 Baht, 17,820,800 Baht and 17,820,800 Baht in the following years. The 4-year net budgetary impact was 20,154,480 Baht or approximately 127,560 Baht per patient. Sensitivity analyses found that number of treatment cycles andproportion of patients assumed to be treated with pemetrexed were the two most important influencing factors in the model. CONCLUSION: New costly innovative interventions should be evaluated using the BIA model to determine whether they are affordable. The Thai government should consider requiring the BIA study as one of the requirements for drug submission to assist in the determination of listing and subsidizing decision for medicines.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of pemetrexed versus docetaxel in the second-line treatment of non-small cell lung cancer in Spain: results for the non-squamous histology population.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to conduct a cost-effectiveness evaluation of pemetrexed compared to docetaxel in the treatment of advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) for patients with predominantly non-squamous histology in the Spanish healthcare setting. METHODS: A Markov model was designed consisting of stable, responsive, progressive disease and death states. Patients could also experience adverse events as long as they received chemotherapy. Clinical inputs were based on an analysis of a phase III clinical trial that identified a statistically significant improvement in overall survival for non-squamous patients treated with pemetrexed compared with docetaxel. Costs were collected from the Spanish healthcare perspective. RESULTS: Outcomes of the model included total costs, total quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), total life years gained (LYG) and total progression-free survival (PFS). Mean survival was 1.03 years for the pemetrexed arm and 0.89 years in the docetaxel arm; QALYs were 0.52 compared to 0.42. Per-patient lifetime costs were 34677 euros and 32343 euros, respectively. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were 23967 euros per QALY gained and 17225 euros per LYG. CONCLUSIONS: Pemetrexed as a second-line treatment option for patients with a predominantly non-squamous histology in NSCLC is a cost-effective alternative to docetaxel according to the 30000 euros /QALY threshold commonly accepted in Spain.

Cost-utility analysis of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate in the treatment of chronic hepatitis B.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) in the treatment of chronic hepatitis B (CHB) versus alternative nucleos(t)ides from a UK National Health Service (NHS) perspective. METHODS: A Markov model was used to calculate costs and benefits of nucleos(t)ide strategies in hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg)-positive and HBeAg-negative patients with hepatitis B virus mono-infection and compensated liver disease. The model included 18 disease states representing CHB progression. Quality-of-life data and costs for severe disease states were based on published studies, while monitoring costs for other disease states were based on expert opinion. Transition probabilities for movements between states were based on a meta-analysis, clinical trials, and natural history studies. RESULTS: First-line TDF generated the highest net benefits of all 211 nucleos(t)ide strategies evaluated at a threshold of £ 20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. First-line TDF cost £ 19,084/QALY gained compared with giving lamivudine (LAM) first-line and switching to TDF when LAM resistance occurs. First-line TDF was also more effective and less costly than first-line entecavir (ETV), and showed extended dominance over first-line adefovir and strategies reserving adefovir, ETV, or combination therapy until after LAM resistance develops. For patients who have developed LAM resistance, TDF was also the most cost-effective treatment, generating greater net benefits than any other second-line strategy. CONCLUSIONS: First-line TDF is the most cost-effective treatment for patients with CHB at a £ 20,000 to £ 30,000/QALY ceiling ratio, costing £ 19,084/QALY gained compared with the next best alternative.

Cost-effectiveness of nucleoside analog therapy for hepatitis B in China: a Markov analysis.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate the economic consequences of nucleoside analog therapy for hepatitis B treatment in China. METHODS: A cost-utility analysis of treatments for HBeAg-positive and HBeAg-negative chronic hepatitis B (CHB) was conducted using a Markov model, in which patients' yearly transitions between different health states were tracked. Patients were tracked as they moved between the following health states: CHB, HBeAg seroconversion (HBeAg-positive CHB patients can have this special health state), virologic resistance, virologic response, compensated cirrhosis, decompensated cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma, liver transplantation, and death. The transition parameters were derived either from systematic reviews of the literature or from previous economic studies. Cost and utility data came from studies based on a Chinese CHB cohort. One-way sensitivity analyses as well as second-order Monte Carlo and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: The entecavir strategy yielded the most quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) for both HBeAg-positive and HBeAg-negative patients when compared with the "no treatment," the lamivudine, the adefovir, and the telbivudine strategies. The risks of complications and mortality also decreased. In the economic analysis, the "no treatment" strategy was the least effective, whereas the entecavir strategy was both the least expensive and the most cost-effective option, followed by telbivudine and lamivudine. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that the entecavir strategy would result in improved cost-effectiveness in >90% of cases at a threshold of $20,000 per QALY. In a one-way sensitivity analysis, the most influential parameters impacting the model's robustness were the utilities of the CHB and virologic response health states. CONCLUSIONS: In China, when treating both HBeAg-positive and HBeAg-negative CHB populations, entecavir is the most cost-effective option when compared with lamivudine, adefovir, and telbivudine.

Decision analysis model for hepatitis B prophylaxis one year after liver transplantation.

In patients receiving orthotopic liver transplantation, hepatitis B recurrence rates have decreased significantly with the use of various methods for prophylaxis. At present, a combination of hepatitis B immunoglobulin (HBIG) and lamivudine is the standard of care, resulting in recurrence rates of 0% to 11%. Recent data suggest that the addition of adefovir to lamivudine is successful in treating patients with recurrent hepatitis B infection. A Markov model was used to compare costs and outcomes of 2 strategies for hepatitis B prophylaxis 1 year after transplantation. The first consisted of prophylaxis with lamivudine and adefovir (strategy 1), whereas the second consisted of intramuscular HBIG and lamivudine (strategy 2) with the addition of adefovir in patients who subsequently developed hepatitis B recurrence. Patients who failed with adefovir and lamivudine were then treated with tenofovir and entecavir. 16.8% of liver transplant recipients had hepatitis B recurrence after 10 years of treatment with lamivudine and HBIG. The medical costs for strategy 1 and strategy 2 after 10 years of therapy were $151,819 and $166,246, respectively, and this resulted in cost savings of $14,427. The decision analysis model began 1 year after liver transplantation. A 1-way sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the model was most sensitive to cost changes of adefovir and HBIG injections as well as variations in the hepatitis B virus recurrence rate. The model was robust to costs of lamivudine, laboratory costs, administrative fees, and office visit fees. Our decision analysis model resulted in marked savings in costs with strategy 1 (lamivudine and adefovir), providing pharmacoeconomic support for the use of this strategy as first-line therapy in hepatitis B prophylaxis in liver transplant recipients 1 year after liver transplantation.

Economics of treatments for non-small cell lung cancer.

The purpose of this article is to review the economics of treatments for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We systematically analysed the cost effectiveness of treatments for the different stages of NSCLC, with particular emphasis on more recently approved agents. Numerous economic analyses in NSCLC have been conducted, with a variety of methods and in a number of countries. In patients with localized disease, adjuvant chemotherapy appears to have greater cost effectiveness than observation; however, there are few published data. In locally advanced disease, combined modalities (chemotherapy, surgery and/or radiotherapy) are probably cost effective, but high-quality economic analyses are lacking. In advanced NSCLC, third-generation chemotherapies used in the first-line setting can be administered with acceptable incremental cost effectiveness. In the second-line setting, new agents (docetaxel, pemetrexed and erlotinib) have acceptable cost effectiveness. The lack of cost-utility analyses for elderly patients and patients with a poor prognosis rules out firm conclusions. This review suggests that most therapies for NSCLC are cost effective when the patient has a good performance status, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio under USD 50,000 per life-year gained in the majority of cases.

How patent law reform can improve affordability and accessibility of medicines in South Africa: Four medicine case studies.

South Africa (SA) is in the process of amending its patent laws. Since its 2011 inception, Fix the Patent Laws, a coalition of 40 patient groups, has advocated for reform of SA's patent laws to improve affordability of medicines in the country. Building on two draft policies (2013, 2017) and a consultative framework (2016) for reform of SA's patent laws, Cabinet approved phase 1 of the Intellectual Property Policy of the Republic of South Africa on 23 May 2018. Fix the Patent Laws welcomed the policy, but highlighted concerns regarding the absence of important technical details, as well as the urgent need for government to develop bills, regulations and guidelines to provide technical detail and to codify and implement patent law reform in the country. In this article, we explore how reforms proposed in SA's new intellectual property policy could improve access to medicine through four medicine case studies.

Economic implications of entecavir treatment in suppressing viral replication in chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients in China from a perspective of the Chinese Social Security program.

OBJECTIVES: Of estimated 112 million persons infected with chronic hepatitis B (CHB) in China, 15% to 40% will eventually develop liver complications. Most patients do not actively seek antiviral agents for treatment due in part to lack of good understanding of the disease. Entecavir is a new therapeutic option for CHB patients and the purpose of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of entecavir treatment in China, based on projected clinical benefits from its superior viral suppression efficacy. METHODS: The analysis was based on the perspective of the Chinese Social Security program. Adjusted relative risks on the association between viral load (VL) and clinical end points (liver cirrhosis/hepatocellular carcinoma) were derived from a publication of a Taiwan CHB prospective cohort with 42,115 person-years of follow-up, and applied to patients enrolled in a randomized phase III trial in China. In this trial, hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA (by polymerase chain reaction assay) was the key efficacy end point after 48 weeks of treatment with either entecavir or lamivudine monotherapy. Entecavir and lamivudine daily prices were assumed to be Renminbi Yuan (RMB) 40 and 16.71, respectively. Life expectancy tables were based on China vital statistics. Direct medical cost and utility scores for different phases of CHB were estimated from published China specific data, and costs were adjusted to 2006 values using the Chinese Consumer Price Index. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to evaluate parameter uncertainty on event distribution and treatment failure rates beyond the trial period. RESULTS: A total of 519 subjects were enrolled in the study, comprising of 82% males, 87% HBeAg+, and a mean age of 30 years. Based on the efficacy measurement of the percentage of patients achieving HBV DNA <300 copies/ml at week 48, entecavir was superior to lamivudine (78.7% vs. 46.7%, respectively [P < 0.05]). In the base case, compared with lamivudine, 1 year of entecavir therapy gained 0.305 quality-adjusted life year (QALY) at an incremental cost of 5368 RMB, with a 3% annual discount. Compared with lamivudine, using entecavir cost an incremental 17,590 RMB per QALY gained (95% CI 6333-56,407). CONCLUSIONS: Based on the results of this study, entecavir is likely to be cost-effective in treating hepatitis B patients in China based on the World Health Organization's recommended maximum willingness to pay threshold.

Cost-effectiveness of pemetrexed plus cisplatin: malignant pleural mesothelioma treatment in UK clinical practice.

OBJECTIVES: Findings from the largest randomized phase III trial in patients with unresectable malignant pleural mesothelioma (EMPHACIS study; n = 448) were used to examine the cost-effectiveness of pemetrexed plus cisplatin therapy versus cisplatin monotherapy in patients with the disease. The cost-effectiveness of pemetrexed/cisplatin versus alternative treatments was also examined. METHODS: Two cost-effectiveness analyses were designed to model best survival outcome over time for a number of patient cohorts. First, trial-based patient-level data were utilized and resource use was costed for the study arm and comparator. A second cost-effectiveness analysis then compared the mean costs and outcomes associated with pemetrexed/cisplatin with the most commonly used (unlicensed) regimens in the United Kingdom-mitomycin-C, vinblastine, and cisplatin (MVP); vinorelbine; and active symptom control-using trial-based data and data extrapolated from a review of the literature. RESULTS: The total pemetrexed/cisplatin cost per patient varied between pound8779 and pound9020 for all cohorts studied in model 1. Average life-years gained per patient were between 0.20 and 0.28. Quality-adjusted life-years, based on mean and median survival, ranged from 0.13 to 0.31. Incremental cost per life-year gained and quality-adjusted life-year ratios, using both mean and median survival, ranged from pound20,475 to pound68,598. The second cost-effectiveness analysis resulted in ratios ranging from pound14,595 to pound32,066. CONCLUSIONS: Pemetrexed/cisplatin demonstrated acceptable cost-effectiveness when compared with cisplatin monotherapy and alternative treatments commonly used in UK clinical practice.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of entecavir versus lamivudine in the first-line treatment of Australian patients with chronic hepatitis B.

BACKGROUND: Chronic hepatitis B (CHB) virus infection is a major global healthcare problem. The recent introduction of entecavir in Australia for the treatment of CHB patients in the naive treatment setting has triggered significant optimism with regards to improved clinical outcomes for CHB patients. OBJECTIVE: To estimate, from an Australian healthcare perspective, the cost effectiveness of entecavir 0.5 mg/day versus lamivudine 100 mg/day in the treatment of CHB patients naive to nucleos(t)ide therapy. METHODS: A cost-utility analysis to project the clinical and economic outcomes associated with CHB disease and treatment was conducted by developing two decision-tree models specific to hepatitis B e antigen-positive (HBeAg+ve) and HBeAg-ve CHB patient subsets. This analysis was constructed using the Australian payer perspective of direct costs and outcomes, with indirect medical costs and lost productivity not being included. The study population comprised a hypothetical cohort of 1000 antiviral treatment-naive CHB patients who received either entecavir 0.5 mg/day or lamivudine 100 mg/day at model entry. The population of patients used in this analysis was representative of those patients likely to receive initial antiviral therapy in clinical practice in Australia. The long-term cost effectiveness of entecavir compared with lamivudine in the first-line treatment of CHB patients was expressed as an incremental cost per life-year gained (LYG) or QALY gained. RESULTS: Results revealed that the availability of entecavir 0.5 mg/day as part of the Australian hepatologist's treatment armamentarium should result in significantly lower future rates of compensated cirrhosis (CC), decompensated cirrhosis (DC), and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) events (i.e. 54 fewer cases of CC, seven fewer cases of DC, and 20 fewer cases of HCC over the model's timeframe for HBeAg+ve CHB patients, and 69 fewer cases of CC, eight fewer cases of DC and 25 fewer cases of HCC over the model's timeframe for HBeAg-ve CHB patients). Compared with lamivudine 100 mg/day, entecavir 0.5 mg/day generated an estimated incremental cost per LYG of Australian dollars ($A, year 2006 values) 5046 and an estimated incremental cost per QALY of $A5952 in the HBeAg+ve CHB patient population, an estimated incremental cost per LYG of $A7063 and an estimated incremental cost per QALY of $A8003 in the HBeAg-ve CHB patient population, and an overall estimated incremental cost per LYG of $A5853 and an estimated incremental cost per QALY of $A6772 in the general CHB population. CONCLUSION: The availability of entecavir in Australian clinical practice should make long-term suppression of hepatitis B virus replication increasingly attainable, resulting in fewer CHB sequelae, at an acceptable financial cost.