Feasibility, safety, efficacy and potential scaling-up of sofosbuvir-based HCV treatment in Central and West Africa: (TAC ANRS 12311 trial).

Access to Hepatis C treatment in Sub-Saharan Africa is a clinical, public health and ethical concern. The multi-country open-label trial TAC ANRS 12311 allowed assessing the feasibility, safety, efficacy of a specific care model of HCV treatment and retreatment in patients with hepatitis C in Sub Saharan Africa. Between November 2015 and March 2017, with follow-up until mid 2019, treatment-naïve patients with HCV without decompensated cirrhosis or liver cancer were recruited to receive 12 week-treatment with either sofosbuvir + ribavirin (HCV genotype 2) or sofosbuvir + ledipasvir (genotype 1 or 4) and retreatment with sofosbuvir + velpatasvir + voxilaprevir in case of virological failure. The primary outcome was sustained virological response at 12 weeks after end of treatment (SVR12). Secondary outcomes included treatment adherence, safety and SVR12 in patients who were retreated due to non-response to first-line treatment. The model of care relied on both viral load assessment and educational sessions to increase patient awareness, adherence and health literacy. The study recruited 120 participants, 36 HIV-co-infected, and 14 cirrhotic. Only one patient discontinued treatment because of return to home country. Neither death nor severe adverse event occurred. SVR12 was reached in 107 patients (89%): (90%) in genotype 1 or 2, and 88% in GT-4. All retreated patients (n = 13) reached SVR12. HCV treatment is highly acceptable, safe and effective under this model of care. Implementation research is now needed to scale up point-of-care HCV testing and SVR assessment, along with community involvement in patient education, to achieve HCV elimination in Sub-Saharan Africa.

Cost-utility analysis of four WHO-recommended sofosbuvir-based regimens for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C in sub-Saharan Africa.

BACKGROUND: Although direct-acting antivirals (DAA) have become standard care for patients with chronic hepatitis C worldwide, there is no evidence for their value for money in sub-Saharan Africa. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of four sofosbuvir-based regimens recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO) in Cameroon, Côte d'Ivoire and Senegal. METHODS: Using modelling, we simulated chronic hepatitis C progression with and without treatment in hypothetical cohorts of patients infected with the country's predominant genotypes (1, 2 and 4) and without other viral coinfections, history of liver complication or hepatocellular carcinoma. Using the status-quo 'no DAA treatment' as a comparator, we assessed four regimens: sofosbuvir-ribavirin, sofosbuvir-ledipasvir (both recommended in WHO 2016 guidelines and assessed in the TAC pilot trial conducted in Cameroon, Côte d'Ivoire and Senegal), sofosbuvir-daclatasvir and sofosbuvir-ledipasvir (two pangenotypic regimens recommended in WHO 2018 guidelines). DAA effectiveness, costs and utilities were mainly estimated using data from the TAC pilot trial. Secondary data from the literature was used to estimate disease progression probabilities with and without treatment. We considered two DAA pricing scenarios: S1) originator prices; S2) generic prices. Uncertainty was addressed using probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. RESULTS: With slightly higher effectiveness and significantly lower costs, sofosbuvir/velpatasvir was the preferred DAA regimen in S1 with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) ranging from US$526 to US$632/QALY. At the cost-effectiveness threshold (CET) of 0.5 times the 2017 country's per-capita gross domestic product (GDP), sofosbuvir/velpatasvir was only cost-effective in Senegal (probability > 95%). In S2 at generic prices, sofosbuvir/daclatasvir was the preferred regimen due to significantly lower costs. ICERs ranged from US$139 to US$216/QALY according to country i.e. a 95% probability of being cost-effective. Furthermore, this regimen was cost-effective (probability> 95%) for all CET higher than US$281/QALY, US$223/QALY and US$195/QALY in Cameroon, Côte d'Ivoire and Senegal, respectively, corresponding to 0.14 (Côte d'Ivoire and Senegal) and 0.2 (Cameroon) times the country's per-capita GDP. CONCLUSIONS: Generic sofosbuvir/daclatasvir is very cost-effective for treating chronic hepatitis C in sub-Saharan Africa. Large-scale use of generics and an increase in national and international funding for hepatitis C treatment must be priorities for the HCV elimination agenda.

Model-based cost-effectiveness estimates of testing strategies for diagnosing hepatitis C virus infection in Central and Western Africa.

BACKGROUND: Whereas 72% of hepatitis C virus (HCV)-infected people worldwide live in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), only 6% of them have been diagnosed. Innovative technologies for HCV diagnosis provide opportunities for developing testing strategies more adapted to resource-constrained settings. However, studies about their economic feasibility in LMICs are lacking. METHODS: Adopting a health sector perspective in Cameroon, Cote-d'Ivoire, and Senegal, a decision tree model was developed to compare 12 testing strategies with the following characteristics: a one-step or two-step testing sequence, HCV-RNA or HCV core antigen as confirmative biomarker, laboratory or point-of-care (POC) tests, and venous blood samples or dried blood spots (DBS). Outcomes measures were the number of true positives (TPs), cost per screened individual, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, and nationwide budget. Corresponding time horizon was immediate, and outcomes were accordingly not discounted. Detailed sensitivity analyses were conducted. FINDINGS: In the base-case, a two-step POC-based strategy including anti-HCV antibody (HCV-Ab) and HCV-RNA testing had the lowest cost, €8.18 per screened individual. Assuming a lost-to-follow-up rate after screening > 1.9%, a DBS-based laboratory HCV-RNA after HCV-Ab POC testing was the single un-dominated strategy, requiring an additional cost of €3653.56 per additional TP detected. Both strategies would require 8-25% of the annual public health expenditure of the study countries for diagnosing 30% of HCV-infected individuals. Assuming a seroprevalence > 46.9% or a cost of POC HCV-RNA < €7.32, a one-step strategy based on POC HCV-RNA dominated the two-step POC-based strategy but resulted in many more false-positive cases. CONCLUSIONS: POC HCV-Ab followed by either POC- or DBS-based HCV-RNA testing would be the most cost-effective strategies in the study countries. Without a substantial increase in funding for health or a dramatic decrease in assay prices, HCV testing would constitute an economic barrier to the implementation of HCV elimination programs in LMICs.

Long-term clinical benefits of Sofosbuvir-based direct antiviral regimens for patients with chronic hepatitis C in Central and West Africa.

BACKGROUND: In Sub-Saharan Africa, chronic hepatitis C (CHC) is a major public health issue. We estimated the long-term clinical benefits of treating CHC with sofosbuvir-based regimens in Cameroon, Côte d'Ivoire and Senegal using Markov model combining data from the literature with estimates of direct-acting antiviral (DAAs) effectiveness in West and Central Africa. METHODS: Disease progression was simulated with and without treatment in fictive cohorts of patients "diagnosed" with CHC in Cameroon (n = 3224), Côte d'Ivoire (n = 9748) and Senegal (n = 6358). Lifetime treatment benefits were assessed using (a) life-years saved (LYS); (b) life-years (LY) avoided in compensated cirrhosis (CC), decompensated cirrhosis (DC) and hepatocellular carcinoma; and (c) comparison of the proportions of patients at each disease stage with and without treatment. Probabilistic and determinist sensitivity analyses were performed to address uncertainty. RESULTS: Sofosbuvir-based treatment would save [mean, 95% confidence intervals] 3.3 (2.5; 5.7) LY per patient in Cameroon, 2.7 (2.1; 4.8) in Côte d'Ivoire and 3.6 (2.8; 6.3) in Senegal. With treatment, approximately 6% (1%) of the patients still alive in each of the study countries would be in the CC (DC) health state 11 (15) years after CHC diagnosis, vs 15% (5%) without treatment. Scenario analysis showed earlier diagnosis and treatment initiation would dramatically improve LYS and morbidity. CONCLUSION: Sofosbuvir-based treatment could significantly reduce CHC-related mortality and help control CHC-related liver disease progression in West and Central Africa. However, the goal of disease elimination necessitates a substantial decrease in DAAs prices, greater political commitment and increases in both national and external health expenditures.

Model-based cost-effectiveness estimates of testing strategies for diagnosing hepatitis C virus infection in people who use injecting drugs in Senegal.

BACKGROUND: Scaling-up the access to hepatitis C virus (HCV) diagnostics for people who use injecting drugs (PWID) is essential to reduce the HCV incidence in low and middle-income countries. METHODS: A decision tree model was developed to compare the cost-effectiveness of 12 strategies for diagnosing HCV in Senegal with a health sector perspective. Strategies included HCV-Ab screening and confirmation of viraemia (based on HCV-RNA or HCV core antigen detection) or only the latter step. Laboratory assays and decentralized tools (point-of-care (POC) tests and dried blood spot (DBS) samples) were included. The base-case assumed a 38.9% seroprevalence, as reported in the PWID population of Dakar. RESULTS: Compared to the cheapest strategy (POC HCV-Ab followed by POC HCV-RNA (S5)), one strategy remained un-dominated in the base-case: POC HCV-Ab followed by venepuncture-based laboratory HCV-RNA (S3). Above a lost to follow-up testing rate of 2.3%, combining POC HCV-Ab with HCV-RNA on DBS (S4) became more cost-effective than S3. Above this threshold, a single-step POC HCV-RNA (S12) was also found un-dominated (ICER to S5=€3,297.50). S5, S12 and S4 cost €14.21, €17.03 and €36.55/screened individual. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (€/additional true positive case) were 2,164.82 (S12 versus S5) and 3,297.50 (S4 versus S12). Whenever HCV seroprevalence reached 55.5%, S12 became more cost-effective than S5. Moreover, S4 required a budget 2 to 2.5 times higher than S5 or S12 for diagnosing 90% of HCV-infected PWID in Dakar. CONCLUSION: A two-step POC-based strategy (S5) would be the most cost-effective option among those proposed in this study for diagnosing HCV in PWID in Senegal. This study illustrates how the lack of secure financing and of data on PWID in LMICs, render difficult to identify the most sustainable strategy in those countries, as well as its implementation.

"Real life" use of raltegravir during pregnancy in France: The Coferal-IMEA048 cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Limited "real life" data on raltegravir (RAL) use during pregnancy are available. Thus, we aimed at describing effectiveness and safety of RAL-based combined antiretroviral therapy (cART) in this setting. METHODS: HIV-1-infected women receiving RAL during pregnancy between 2008 and 2014 in ten French centers were retrospectively analysed for: (1) proportion of women receiving RAL anytime during pregnancy who achieved a plasma HIV-RNA (pVL) < 50 copies/mL at delivery, and (2) description of demographics, immuno-virological parameters and safety in women and new-borns. RESULTS: We included 94 women (median age, 33 years) of which 85% originated from Sub-Saharan Africa and 16% did not have regular health insurance coverage. Sixteen women were cART-naïve (median HIV diagnosis at 30 weeks of gestation), whereas 78 were already on cART before pregnancy (40% with pVL < 50 copies/mL). RAL was initiated before pregnancy (n = 33), during the second trimester (n = 11) and the third trimester of pregnancy (n = 50). No RAL discontinuations due to adverse events were observed. Overall, at the time of delivery, pVL was < 50 copies/mL in 70% and < 400 copies/mL in 84% of women. Specifically, pVL at delivery was < 50 copies/mL in 82%, 55% and 56% of cases when RAL was started before pregnancy, during the second or third trimester of pregnancy, respectively. Median term was 38 weeks of gestation, no defect was reported and all new-borns were HIV non-infected at Month 6. CONCLUSIONS: RAL appears safe and effective in this "real-life" study. No defect and no HIV transmission was reported in new-borns.