scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness of Universal Hepatitis C Virus Screening of Pregnant Women in the United States

2019 ◽  
Vol 69 (11) ◽  
pp. 1888-1895 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antoine Chaillon ◽  
Elizabeth B Rand ◽  
Nancy Reau ◽  
Natasha K Martin
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Hepatitis C Virus ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Hepatitis C ◽  
Pregnant Women ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
The United States ◽  
Lifetime Horizon ◽  
Hcv Screening ◽  
The Cost

Abstract Background Hepatitis C virus’ (HCV) chronic prevalence among pregnant women in the United States doubled nationally from 2009–2014 (~0.7%), yet many cases remain undiagnosed. Screening pregnant women is not recommended by the Society of Maternal-Fetal Medicine or the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, despite new American Association For the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD)/Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) guidelines recommending screening for this group. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of HCV screening for pregnant women in the United States. Methods An HCV natural history Markov model was used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of universal HCV screening of pregnant women, followed by treatment after pregnancy, compared to background risk-based screening from a health-care payer perspective. We assumed a HCV chronic prevalence of 0.73% among pregnant women, based on national data. We assumed no Medicaid reimbursement restrictions by fibrosis stage at baseline, but explored differing restrictions in sensitivity analyses. We assessed costs (in US dollars) and health outcomes (in quality-adjusted life-years [QALYs]) over a lifetime horizon, using new HCV drug costs of $25 000/treatment. We assessed mean incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) under a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50 000/QALY gained. We additionally evaluated the potential population impact. Results Universal antenatal screening was cost-effective in all treatment eligibility scenarios (mean ICER <$3000/QALY gained). Screening remained cost-effective at a prevalence of 0.07%, which is the lowest estimated prevalence in the United States (in Hawaii). Screening the ~5.04 million pregnant women in 2018 could result in the detection and treatment of 33 000 women, based on current fibrosis restrictions. Conclusions Universal screening for HCV among pregnant women in the United States is cost-effective and should be recommended nationally.

scholarly journals Cost-Effectiveness of Antenatal Rescreening Among Pregnant Women for Hepatitis C in the United States

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antoine Chaillon ◽  
Adriane Wynn ◽  
Tatyana Kushner ◽  
Nancy Reau ◽  
Natasha K Martin
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Hepatitis C ◽  
Pregnant Women ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
The United States ◽  
Screening Guidelines ◽  
Hcv Screening ◽  
The Cost

Abstract To inform proposed changes in U.S. HCV screening guidelines, we assessed the cost-effectiveness of HCV antenatal rescreening for women without evidence of HCV during a prior pregnancy, using a previously published model. Universal HCV rescreening among pregnant women was cost-effective (ICER $6,000/QALY) and should be recommended nationally.

scholarly journals The Cost-Effectiveness of Hepatitis C Virus Screening Strategies among Recently Arrived Migrants in the Netherlands

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (17) ◽  
pp. 6091
Author(s):  
Mohamed N.M.T. Al Khayat ◽  
Job F.H. Eijsink ◽  
Maarten J. Postma ◽  
Jan C. Wilschut ◽  
Marinus van Hulst
Keyword(s):  
Hepatitis C Virus ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Hepatitis C ◽  
The Netherlands ◽  
Budget Impact ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Screening Strategies ◽  
Hcv Screening ◽  
The Cost

Objective: We aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of hepatitis C virus (HCV) screening strategies among recently arrived migrants in the Netherlands. Methods: A Markov model was used to estimate the health effects and costs of HCV screening from the healthcare perspective. A cohort of 50,000 recently arrived migrants was used. In this cohort, three HCV screening strategies were evaluated: (i) no screening, (ii) screening of migrants from HCV-endemic countries and (iii) screening of all migrants. Results: Strategy (ii) screening of migrants from HCV-endemic countries compared to strategy (i) no screening, yielded an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of €971 per quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained. Strategy (iii) screening of all migrants compared with strategy (ii) screening of migrants from HCV-endemic countries yielded an ICER of €1005 per QALY gained. The budget impact of strategy (ii) screening of migrants from HCV-endemic countries and strategy (iii) screening of all migrants was €13,752,039 and €20,786,683, respectively. Conclusion: HCV screening is cost-effective. However, the budget impact may have a strong influence on decision making.

OP44 Cost-Effectiveness Of Hepatitis C Virus Screening In Swiss Prisons Using Rapid Tests

2017 ◽  
Vol 33 (S1) ◽  
pp. 20-21
Author(s):  
François Girardin ◽  
Natalie Hearmon ◽  
Erika Castro ◽  
Francesco Negro ◽  
Rodolphe Perard ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatitis C Virus ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Hepatitis C ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Expert Opinion ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Screening Programs ◽  
Hcv Screening ◽  
The Cost

INTRODUCTION:This study explored the cost-effectiveness of expanding Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) screening and subsequent treatment in Swiss custodial settings, given the availability of rapid antibody saliva tests (Oraquick®) and dried blood spot tests (semi-quantitative viremia and viral genotype), and recent therapeutic advances which have higher cure rates and shorter treatment courses (1).METHODS:A comprehensive strategy offering screening to all detainees was compared to the current setup of screening high-risk individuals (for example, from endemic countries, active or former injecting drug users). A decision tree simulated the diagnosis pathway, and results from a Markov model were included to predict treatment effects and natural progression over a lifetime time-horizon. Input data were derived from clinical studies, literature reviews, custodial health services and expert opinion (2). The net monetary benefit (NMB) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of comprehensive compared to current screening were calculated. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to explore parameter uncertainty and whether variations informed by expert opinion changed the cost-effectiveness of comprehensive screening.RESULTS:At a willingness-to-pay threshold of CHF100,000 (USD99,500) per Quality-Adjusted Life-Year (QALY), comprehensive screening had an 83 percent probability of being cost-effective, with a corresponding NMB of CHF33,451,972 (USD33,284,712) and ICER of CHF7,168/QALY (USD7,132/QALY). Results were most sensitive to the QALYs gained from the treatment model (both treatment and no treatment arms), respective HCV prevalence in the current and comprehensive screening populations, treatment initiation rates, and screening offer acceptance rates. Compared to the current practice of screening high-risk individuals, comprehensive screening is likely to be cost-effective due to the increase in testing rates, which were conservatively estimated in this study. Furthermore, comprehensive HCV screening of prisoners may prove more cost-effective in countries where prisoners are not routinely screened.CONCLUSIONS:Comprehensive screening programs could be considered in prison units with a large proportion of high-risk individuals and where detainees are incarcerated for enough time to complete a treatment course during their sentence.

scholarly journals The Cost-Effectiveness of Epilepsy Surgery and Surgical Evaluation in the United States

Neurosurgery ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 66 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shehryar R Sheikh ◽  
Michael P Steinmetz ◽  
Michael W Kattan ◽  
Mendel Singer ◽  
Belinda Udeh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Monte Carlo ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Epilepsy Surgery ◽  
Medical Management ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
The United States ◽  
Effective Strategies ◽  
Surgical Evaluation ◽  
The Cost

Abstract INTRODUCTION Surgery is an effective treatment for many pharmacoresistant temporal lobe epilepsy patients, but incurs considerable cost. It is unknown whether surgery and surgical evaluation are cost-effective strategies in the United States. We aim to evaluate whether 1) surgery is cost-effective for patients who have been deemed surgical candidates when compared to continued medical management, 2) surgical evaluation is cost-effective for patients who have drug-resistant temporal epilepsy and may or may not ultimately be deemed surgical candidates METHODS We use a Monte Carlo simulation method to assess the cost-effectiveness of surgery and surgical evaluation over a lifetime horizon. Patients transition between two health states (‘seizure free’ and ‘having seizures’) as part of a Markov process, based on literature estimates. We adopt both healthcare and societal perspectives, including direct healthcare costs and indirect costs such as lost earnings by patients and care providers. We estimate variability of model predictions using probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses. RESULTS 1) Epilepsy surgery is cost effective in surgically eligible patients by virtue of being cost saving and more effective than medical management in the long run, with 95% of 10 000 Monte Carlo simulations favoring surgery. From a societal perspective, surgery becomes cost effective within 3 yr. At 5 yr, surgery has an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $31,600, which is significantly below the societal willingness-to-pay (∼ $100,000/quality-adjusted life years (QALY)) and comparable to hip/knee arthroplasty. 2) Surgical evaluation is cost-effective in pharmacoresistant patients even if the probability of being deemed a surgical candidate is low (5%-10%). Even if the probability of surgical eligibility is only 10%, surgical referral has an ICER of $96,000/QALY, which is below societal willingness-to-pay. CONCLUSION Epilepsy surgery and surgical evaluation are both cost-effective strategies in the United States. Pharmacoresistant temporal lobe epilepsy patients should be referred for surgical evaluation without hesitation on cost-effectiveness grounds.

PREVENTION COULD BE LESS COST-EFFECTIVE THAN CURE: THE CASE OF HEPATITIS C SCREENING POLICIES IN FRANCE

2003 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 632-645 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sandrine Loubière ◽  
Michel Rotily ◽  
Jean-Paul Moatti
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Hepatitis C ◽  
General Population ◽  
Intravenous Drug User ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Screening Strategy ◽  
Additional Cost ◽  
Alternative Strategies ◽  
Hcv Screening ◽  
The Cost

Objectives: To access the cost-effectiveness of French recommendations for hepatitis C virus (HCV) screening and the extent to which earlier identification of carriers may or not improve the cost-effectiveness of therapeutic strategies.Methods: Cost-effectiveness analysis were performed using decision-tree analysis and a Markov model. Four alternative strategies were compared: no screening and no treatment; initiation of HCV treatment after the diagnosis of cirrhosis; and two alternative strategies refer to the current French policies of HCV testing, i.e., two enzyme immunoblot assay (EIA) tests in series, or a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) analysis after the first positive EIA test. Costs were computed from the viewpoint of the health care system. The analysis has been applied to populations particularly at risk of infection, as well as the general population.Results: The “wait and treat cirrhosis” strategy was more cost-effective in the general population and in transfusion recipients. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of this strategy compared with baseline strategy was 3,476 of euros and €15,300 in respective cohorts. Considering the HCV screening strategy, the additional cost would be of €4,933 and €240,250 per additional year of life saved, respectively. In the intravenous drug user (IDU) population, the “two EIA” screening strategy was the more cost-effective alternative, with an additional cost of €3,825 per additional year of life saved.Conclusions: HCV screening would be discarded for transfusion recipients but should be encouraged for IDUs and also for the general population, in which the additional cost of screening is an order of magnitude more acceptable.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document