The cost-effectiveness of birth-cohort screening for hepatitis C antibody in U.S. primary care settings.

BACKGROUND: In the United States, hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is most prevalent among adults born from 1945 through 1965, and approximately 50% to 75% of infected adults are unaware of their infection. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of birth-cohort screening. DESIGN: Cost-effectiveness simulation. DATA SOURCES: National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, U.S. Census, Medicare reimbursement schedule, and published sources. TARGET POPULATION: Adults born from 1945 through 1965 with 1 or more visits to a primary care provider annually. TIME HORIZON: Lifetime. PERSPECTIVE: Societal, health care. INTERVENTION: One-time antibody test of 1945-1965 birth cohort. OUTCOME MEASURES: Numbers of cases that were identified and treated and that achieved a sustained viral response; liver disease and death from HCV; medical and productivity costs; quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs); incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS: Compared with the status quo, birth-cohort screening identified 808,580 additional cases of chronic HCV infection at a screening cost of $2874 per case identified. Assuming that birth-cohort screening was followed by pegylated interferon and ribavirin (PEG-IFN+R) for treated patients, screening increased QALYs by 348,800 and costs by $5.5 billion, for an ICER of $15,700 per QALY gained. Assuming that birth-cohort screening was followed by direct-acting antiviral plus PEG-IFN+R treatment for treated patients, screening increased QALYs by 532,200 and costs by $19.0 billion, for an ICER of $35,700 per QALY saved. RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS: The ICER of birth-cohort screening was most sensitive to sustained viral response of antiviral therapy, the cost of therapy, the discount rate, and the QALY losses assigned to disease states. LIMITATION: Empirical data on screening and direct-acting antiviral treatment in real-world clinical settings are scarce. CONCLUSION: Birth-cohort screening for HCV in primary care settings was cost-effective. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Division of Viral Hepatitis, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Models of community-based hepatitis B surface antigen screening programs in the U.S. and their estimated outcomes and costs.

OBJECTIVES: Information on the process and method of service delivery is sparse for hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) testing, and no systematic study has evaluated the relative effectiveness or cost-effectiveness of different HBsAg screening models. To address this need, we compared five specific community-based screening programs. METHODS: We funded five HBsAg screening programs to collect information on their design, costs, and outcomes of participants during a six-month observation period. We categorized programs into four types of models. For each model, we calculated the number screened, the number screened as per Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommendations, and the cost per screening. RESULTS: The models varied by cost per person screened and total number of people screened, but they did not differ meaningfully in the proportion of people screened following CDC recommendations, the proportion of those screened who tested positive, or the proportion of those who newly tested positive. CONCLUSIONS: Integrating screening into outpatient service settings is the most cost-effective method but may not reach all people needing to be screened. Future research should examine cost-effective methods that expand the reach of screening into communities in outpatient settings.

Forecasting the morbidity and mortality associated with prevalent cases of pre-cirrhotic chronic hepatitis C in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Without diagnosis and antiviral therapy, many patients with chronic hepatitis C infections will develop end-stage liver disease and die from complications. AIMS: To evaluate the future impacts of preventive interventions and treatment advances, this paper forecasts a baseline estimate of the future morbidity and mortality of prevalent hepatitis C when left untreated. METHODS: We simulated the future disease progression and death for all Americans with prevalent hepatitis C in 2005. To validate the model, we used past seroprevalence to forecast contemporary outcomes. We used the validated model to forecast future cases of end-stage liver disease, transplants, and deaths from 2010 to 2060, and we estimated credible intervals using Monte Carlo simulation. RESULTS: When programmed with past data, our model predicted current levels of hepatitis C outcomes with accuracy between ±1% and 13%. Morbidity and mortality from hepatitis C will rise from 2010 to a peak between the years 2030 and 2035. We forecasted a peak of 38,600 incident cases of end-stage liver disease; 3200 referrals for transplant; and 36,100 deaths. CONCLUSIONS: Because current rates of screening and treatment are low, future morbidity and mortality from hepatitis C are likely to increase substantially without public health interventions to increase treatment.

Prevalence of hepatitis B surface antigen among refugees entering the United States between 2006 and 2008.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) testing to identify chronic hepatitis B virus infection for foreign-born persons from countries or regions with HBsAg prevalence of >or=2%. However, limited data exist to indicate which countries meet this definition. To address this data gap, we estimated the HBsAg prevalence among refugees entering the United States between 2006 and 2008. We contacted state refugee health coordinators and asked them to report the number of refugees, country of origin, and HBsAg prevalence among refugees screened in their jurisdiction during the most recently available 12-month period prior to August 2008. We pooled data across jurisdictions and calculated the prevalence for any country with more than 30 refugees entering the United States, and where this level of data was not available by country, continents were considered. Of the 47 jurisdictions contacted, we received basic information from 31, with nine jurisdictions reporting HBsAg prevalence by country of origin applicable to 31,980 refugees (approximately 42% of refugees entering the United States during the observation period). We estimated an HBsAg prevalence of 2.8% (95% confidence interval 2.6%-3.0%) for refugees overall. Of the 37 countries with 30 or more refugees entering the United States, 25 had a prevalence of >or=2%. Prevalence was highest among refugees from Africa and Southeast Asia, and lowest among refugees from the Middle East and South/Central America. In the eight countries for which we had comparison data, six had lower HBsAg prevalence than in 1991.

Forecasting age-related macular degeneration through the year 2050: the potential impact of new treatments.

OBJECTIVE: To forecast age-related macular degeneration (AMD) and its consequences in the United States through the year 2050 with different treatment scenarios. METHODS: We simulated cases of early AMD, choroidal neovascularization (CNV), geographic atrophy (GA), and AMD-attributable visual impairment and blindness with 5 universal treatment scenarios: (1) no treatment; (2) focal laser and photodynamic therapy (PDT) for CNV; (3) vitamin prophylaxis at early-AMD incidence with focal laser/PDT for CNV; (4) no vitamin prophylaxis followed by focal laser treatment for extra and juxtafoveal CNV and anti-vascular endothelial growth factor treatment; and (5) vitamin prophylaxis at early-AMD incidence followed by CNV treatment, as in scenario 4. RESULTS: Cases of early AMD increased from 9.1 million in 2010 to 17.8 million in 2050 across all scenarios. In non-vitamin-receiving scenarios, cases of CNV and GA increased from 1.7 million in 2010 to 3.8 million in 2050 (25% lower in vitamin-receiving scenarios). Cases of visual impairment and blindness increased from 620 000 in 2010 to 1.6 million in 2050 when given no treatment and were 2.4%, 22.0%, 16.9%, and 34.5% lower in scenarios 2, 3, 4, and 5, respectively. CONCLUSION: Prevalence of AMD will increase substantially by 2050, but the use of new therapies can mitigate its effects.