scholarly journals A cost-minimization analysis of a preventive testing strategy for relatives of patients with BRCA mutated ovarian cancer

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Eugenio Di Brino ◽  
Matteo Ruggeri ◽  
Stefania Boccia ◽  
Nicoletta Cerana ◽  
Domenica Lorusso ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Cost Minimization ◽  
Brca2 Mutation ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Testing Strategy ◽  
Brca Testing ◽  
Italian National Health Service ◽  
Brca1 Brca2 ◽  
The Cost

Purpose: This study aims to estimate the cost-minimization strategy of a preventive testing strategy destined to relatives of patients with BRCA mutated cancer versus a no test strategy in Italia. Methods: A BRCA testing pathway was designed by a panel of experts based on the MSTM Excel (2010) tool; the analysis was carried out considering the perspective of the Italian National Health Service. Two alternatives were considered: 1) preventive BRCA testing for relatives of patients affected by ovarian cancer carrying a BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation; 2) no test. Cost and effectiveness data, derived from literature and published sources validated by a Board of experts, were discounted using a discount factor equal to 3%. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed. Results: Considering an average cost of therapy for breast and ovarian cancer major of €90,000.00 per case, the economic impact related to the preventive testing strategy are equal to –€17,814,767.25. The sensitivity analysis confirms these results in the totality of the simulations performed. Conclusions: Preventive genetic testing in relatives of patients affected by ovarian cancer is cost-effective and represents a sustainable cost for the National Healthcare System in Italia, also in the light of its reference values.

scholarly journals Costs and efficacy ofolanzapine and risperidone in schizophrenia

2007 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 53-60
Author(s):  
Vittorio Mapelli
Keyword(s):  
Cost Minimization ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Psychiatric Disease ◽  
Global Functioning ◽  
Differential Effectiveness ◽  
Health Authorities ◽  
First Choice ◽  
Italian National Health Service ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Effectiveness Studies

Introduction: schizophrenia is a serious and long lasting psychiatric disease. The new “atypical” antipsychotic drugs, introduced in the 90s, have substantially improved the effectiveness of medical treatments, compared to previous neuroleptic drugs. Nowadays they tend to be used as first choice drugs. The ddd cost of atypicals may differ by 20% and health authorities may have an incentive to deliver the less costly drug, especially if they are generic. However the various drugs show differential effectiveness rates and a rational choice should consider both cost and effectiveness.
Objective: the purpose of this analysis is to review the existing evidence on cost-effectiveness studies of olanzapine and risperidone, the two most prescribed drugs in Italy. Six published studies were identified, but attention was focused on two articles that reported consistent and methodologically sound results.
Results: most reviewed studies are cost-minimization analyses, since effectiveness indicators show no significant statistical difference between the two drugs, and are inconclusive since the results depend on the evaluation setting. However one observational retrospective study showed a significant severity reduction over 12 months for patients treated with olanzapine (-2.46 on HoNOS scale; p<0.05), compared to a smaller non significant reduction of the risperidone group (-0.57). Despite the higher drug cost, the average total cost per reduced severity score was lower for olanzapine than for risperidone patients (€ 4,554 vs. € 10,897). The only medical and related health care costs for risperidone patients were higher than total costs for olanzapine patients. Another study comparing cohorts of patients with similar starting severity showed a significant severity reduction and global functioning increase over 12 months for olanzapine but no significant increase for risperidone patients (-0.35, p<0.01 on CGI scale; +3.66, p <0.05 on GAF scale, compared respectively to -0.27, p<0.05 and +2.00 n.s.). Again average cost per reduced severity/increased functioning score was higher for risperidone than olanzapine patients (€ 4,568 vs. € 4,170 for CGI and € 2,284 vs. € 1,139 for GAF scales respectively).
Conclusion: the use of olanzapine in the treatment of schizophrenia is the most cost-effective alternative for the SSN (Italian National health service), as it minimizes the cost per score of severity reduction or functioning increase. Even if the price of risperidone were to be reduced by 50% (becoming a generic), total 12 months treatment costs would exceed those of olanzapine in its highest ddd (30 mg).


scholarly journals The cost-effectiveness of bevacizumab for the treatment of advanced ovarian cancer in Canada

2016 ◽  
Vol 23 (5) ◽  
pp. 461 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Duong ◽  
E. Wright ◽  
I. Martin-Nunez ◽  
L. Yin ◽  
P. Ghatage ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Stage Iii ◽  
Standard Chemotherapy ◽  
Risk Of Progression ◽  
The Cost

Background The overall survival (os) analysis of the icon7 trial demonstrated that frontline ovarian cancer patients with a high risk of progression (stage iii suboptimally debulked, and stage iii or iv with unresectable disease) benefited from the addition of bevacizumab to standard chemotherapy compared with standard chemotherapy alone. The objective of the present study was to investigate the cost-effectiveness, from a Canadian publicly funded perspective, of adding bevacizumab to frontline treatment of ovarian cancer at high risk of progression.Methods An area-under-the-curve, Markov-structured model was used to estimate the cost-effectiveness of the treatments. Long-term progression-free survival (pfs) and os were extracted from the icon7 trial (subgroup at high risk of relapse) and extrapolated by parametric time-to-event functions over a time horizon of 10 years. Canadian pfs health state utility values were obtained from the EQ-5D (EuroQoL Group, Rotterdam, Netherlands) questionnaires in the icon7 high-risk patient population. Canadian post-progression utility values were consistent with those for other gynecologic cancers. Cost inputs were informed by public sources. An annual 5% efficacy and cost discount rate was applied. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis and one-way sensitivity analyses were conducted.Results Ovarian cancer patients at high risk of progression receiving bevacizumab plus standard chemotherapy experienced a mean incremental quality-adjusted life year (qaly) gain of 0.374 years. At an additional cost of $35,901.54, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (icer) for the addition of bevacizumab to standard chemotherapy, relative to standard chemotherapy alone, was $95,942 per qaly.Conclusions No formal health technology assessment willingness-to-pay threshold exists in Canada. However, at a threshold of $100,000 per qaly, bevacizumab in addition to chemotherapy is a cost-effective alternative for ovarian cancer patients who are at high risk of progression (stage iii suboptimally debulked, and stage iii or iv with unresectable disease). Using the $100,000 per qaly threshold in a probabilistic sensitivity analysis, it was determined that, compared with standard chemotherapy, the addition of bevacizumab to chemotherapy is cost-effective in 56% of tested scenarios.

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness of pembrolizumab for treatment of platinum-resistant recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma in China: an economic analysis based on a randomised, open-label, phase III trial

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (12) ◽  
pp. e038867 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wenxiu Xin ◽  
Haiying Ding ◽  
Qilu Fang ◽  
Xiaowei Zheng ◽  
Yinghui Tong ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Squamous Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Head And Neck ◽  
Squamous Cell ◽  
Probabilistic Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Platinum Resistant ◽  
The Cost

BackgroundPembrolizumab was recently demonstrated to have survival benefit in patients with recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (r/mHNSCC). However, the cost-effectiveness of pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy in China remains uncertain.ObjectiveThis analysis aimed to describe the cost-effectiveness of pembrolizumab versus standard-of-care (SOC) therapy in r/mHNSCC in China.DesignA Markov model consisting of three health states (stable, progressive and dead) was developed to compare the cost and effectiveness of pembrolizumab with SOC in platinum-resistant r/mHNSCC. Model inputs for transition probabilities and toxicity were collected from the KEYNOTE-040 trial, while health utilities were estimated from a literature review. Cost data were acquired for the payer’s perspective in China. Costs and outcomes were discounted at an annual rate of 3.0%. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to test the uncertainties surrounding model parameters.Outcome measuresThe primary outcome was incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), which were calculated as the cost per quality-adjusted life years (QALYs).ResultsThe total mean cost of pembrolizumab and SOC was US$45 861 and US$41 950, respectively. As for effectiveness, pembrolizumab yielded 0.31 QALYs compared with 0.25 QALYs for SOC therapy. The ICER for pembrolizumab versus SOC was US$65 186/QALY, which was higher than the willingness-to-pay threshold (WTP) of US$28 130/QALY in China. The univariate sensitivity analysis indicated that utility values for progressive state, probability from stable to progressive in the SOC group, as well as cost of pembrolizumab were the three most influential variables on ICER. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated that standard therapy was more likely to be cost-effective compared with pembrolizumab at a WTP value of US$28 130/QALY. Results were robust across both univariate analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis.ConclusionsPembrolizumab is not likely to be a cost-effective strategy compared with SOC therapy in patients with platinum-resistant r/mHNSCC in China.Trial registration numberNCT02252042; Post-results.

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness of TAS-102 plus bevacizumab versus TAS-102 monotherapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kiyoaki Sugiura ◽  
Yuki Seo ◽  
Takayuki Takahashi ◽  
Hideyuki Tokura ◽  
Yasuhiro Ito ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Combination Therapy ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Model Parameters ◽  
Combination Regimen ◽  
The Cost

Abstract Background TAS-102 plus bevacizumab is an anticipated combination regimen for patients who have metastatic colorectal cancer. However, evidence supporting its use for this indication is limited. We compared the cost-effectiveness of TAS-102 plus bevacizumab combination therapy with TAS-102 monotherapy for patients with chemorefractory metastatic colorectal cancer. Method Markov decision modeling using treatment costs, disease-free survival, and overall survival was performed to examine the cost-effectiveness of TAS-102 plus bevacizumab combination therapy and TAS-102 monotherapy. The Japanese health care payer’s perspective was adopted. The outcomes were modeled on the basis of published literature. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) between the two treatment regimens was the primary outcome. Sensitivity analysis was performed and the effect of uncertainty on the model parameters were investigated. Results TAS-102 plus bevacizumab had an ICER of $21,534 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained compared with TAS-102 monotherapy. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated that TAS-102 monotherapy was more cost-effective than TAS-102 and bevacizumab combination therapy at a willingness-to-pay of under $50,000 per QALY gained. Conclusions TAS-102 and bevacizumab combination therapy is a cost-effective option for patients who have metastatic colorectal cancer in the Japanese health care system.

scholarly journals Addition of Flucytosine to Fluconazole for the Treatment of Cryptococcal Meningitis in Africa: A Multicountry Cost-effectiveness Analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 70 (1) ◽  
pp. 26-29 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tinevimbo Shiri ◽  
Angela Loyse ◽  
Lawrence Mwenge ◽  
Tao Chen ◽  
Shabir Lakhi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cryptococcal Meningitis ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Immunodeficiency Virus ◽  
The Mean ◽  
The Cost ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Costing Analysis ◽  
Very High

Abstract Background Mortality from cryptococcal meningitis remains very high in Africa. In the Advancing Cryptococcal Meningitis Treatment for Africa (ACTA) trial, 2 weeks of fluconazole (FLU) plus flucytosine (5FC) was as effective and less costly than 2 weeks of amphotericin-based regimens. However, many African settings treat with FLU monotherapy, and the cost-effectiveness of adding 5FC to FLU is uncertain. Methods The effectiveness and costs of FLU+5FC were taken from ACTA, which included a costing analysis at the Zambian site. The effectiveness of FLU was derived from cohorts of consecutively enrolled patients, managed in respects other than drug therapy, as were participants in ACTA. FLU costs were derived from costs of FLU+5FC in ACTA, by subtracting 5FC drug and monitoring costs. The cost-effectiveness of FLU+5FC vs FLU alone was measured as the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). A probabilistic sensitivity analysis assessed uncertainties and a bivariate deterministic sensitivity analysis examined the impact of varying mortality and 5FC drug costs on the ICER. Results The mean costs per patient were US $847 (95% confidence interval [CI] $776–927) for FLU+5FC, and US $628 (95% CI $557–709) for FLU. The 10-week mortality rate was 35.1% (95% CI 28.9–41.7%) with FLU+5FC and 53.8% (95% CI 43.1–64.1%) with FLU. At the current 5FC price of US $1.30 per 500 mg tablet, the ICER of 5FC+FLU versus FLU alone was US $65 (95% CI $28–208) per life-year saved. Reducing the 5FC cost to between US $0.80 and US $0.40 per 500 mg resulted in an ICER between US $44 and US $28 per life-year saved. Conclusions The addition of 5FC to FLU is cost-effective for cryptococcal meningitis treatment in Africa and, if made available widely, could substantially reduce mortality rates among human immunodeficiency virus–infected persons in Africa.

scholarly journals Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Biopharmaceuticals for Treating Rheumatoid Arthritis: Infliximab, Adalimumab, and Etanercept

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-12
Author(s):  
Ahmad Gholami ◽  
Jassem Azizpoor ◽  
Elham Aflaki ◽  
Mehdi Rezaee ◽  
Khosro Keshavarz
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
The Other ◽  
Cost Data ◽  
Fars Province ◽  
Study Results ◽  
The Mean ◽  
The Cost

Introduction. Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic progressive inflammatory disease that causes joint destruction. The condition imposes a significant economic burden on patients and societies. The present study is aimed at evaluating the cost-effectiveness of Infliximab, Adalimumab, and Etanercept in treating rheumatoid arthritis in Iran. Methods. This is a cost-effectiveness study of economic evaluation in which the Markov model was used. The study was carried out on 154 patients with rheumatoid arthritis in Fars province taking Infliximab, Adalimumab, and Etanercept. The patients were selected through sampling. In this study, the cost data were collected from a community perspective, and the outcomes were the mean reductions in DAS-28 and QALY. The cost data collection form and the EQ-5D questionnaire were also used to collect the required data. The results were presented in the form of an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, and the sensitivity analysis was used to measure the robustness of the study results. The TreeAge Pro and Excel softwares were used to analyze the collected data. Results. The results showed that the mean costs and the QALY rates in the Infliximab, Adalimumab, and Etanercept arms were $ 79,518.33 and 12.34, $ 91,695.59 and 13.25, and $ 87,440.92 and 11.79, respectively. The one-way sensitivity analysis confirmed the robustness of the results. In addition, the results of the probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) indicated that on the cost-effectiveness acceptability curve, Infliximab was in the acceptance area and below the threshold in 77% of simulations. The scatter plot was in the mentioned area in 81% and 91% of simulations compared with Adalimumab and Etanercept, respectively, implying lower costs and higher effectiveness than the other two alternatives. Therefore, the strategy was more cost-effective. Conclusion. According to the results of this study, Infliximab was more cost-effective than the other two medications. Therefore, it is recommended that physicians use this medication as the priority in treating rheumatoid arthritis. It is also suggested that health policymakers consider the present study results in preparing treatment guidelines for RA.

Is Banning Texturized Implants to Prevent Breast Implant-Associated Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma a Rational Decision? A Meta-Analysis and Cost-Effectiveness Study

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (7) ◽  
pp. 721-731 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefan V Danilla ◽  
Rocio P Jara ◽  
Felipe Miranda ◽  
Francisco Bencina ◽  
Marcela Aguirre ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Breast Implant ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Large Cell ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Large Cell Lymphoma ◽  
The Cost

Abstract Background Breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) is an emergent disease that threatens patients with texturized breast implants. Major concerns about the safety of these implants are leading to global changes to restrict the utilization of this product. The principal alternative is to perform breast augmentation utilizing smooth implants, given the lack of association with BIA-ALCL. The implications and costs of this intervention are unknown. Objectives The authors of this study determined the cost-effectiveness of smooth implants compared with texturized implants for breast augmentation surgery. Methods A tree decision model was utilized to analyze the cost-effectiveness. Model input parameters were derived from published sources. The capsular contracture (CC) rate was calculated from a meta-analysis. Effectiveness measures were life years, avoided BIA-ALCL, avoided deaths, and avoided reoperations. A sensitivity analysis was performed to test the robustness of the model. Results For avoided BIA-ALCL, the incremental cost was $18,562,003 for smooth implants over texturized implants. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was negative for life years, and avoided death and avoided reoperations were negative. The sensitivity analysis revealed that to avoid 1 case of BIA-ALCL, the utilization of smooth implants would be cost-effective for a risk of developing BIA-ALCL equal to or greater than 1:196, and there is a probability of CC with smooth implants equal to or less than 0.096. Conclusions The utilization of smooth implants to prevent BIA-ALCL is not cost-effective. Banning texturized implants to prevent BIA-ALCL may involve additional consequences, which should be considered in light of higher CC rates and more reoperations associated with smooth implants than with texturized implants.

Cost effectiveness of in vitro fertilisation and preimplantation genetic testing to prevent transmission of BRCA1/2 mutations

2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 434-445 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph H Lipton ◽  
Mahdi Zargar ◽  
Ellen Warner ◽  
Ellen E Greenblatt ◽  
Esther Lee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Genetic Testing ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Brca Mutation ◽  
Brca2 Mutation ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
In Vitro Fertilisation ◽  
Brca1 And Brca2 ◽  
Preimplantation Genetic Testing ◽  
The Cost

Abstract STUDY QUESTION Is it cost-effective to use in vitro fertilisation and preimplantation genetic testing of monogenic defects (IVT/PGT-M) to prevent transmission of BRCA1/2 mutations to second-generation new births in comparison with naturally conceived births? SUMMARY ANSWER In this cost-effectiveness analysis, we found that IVF/PGT-M is cost-effective for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers if using a willingness to pay of $50 000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY Carriers of a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation have a significantly increased risk of several types of cancer throughout their lifetime. The cost of risk reduction, screening and treatment of cancer in this population is high. In addition, there is a 50% chance of passing on this genetic mutation to each child. One option to avoid transmission of an inherited deleterious gene to one’s offspring involves in vitro fertilisation with preimplantation genetic testing. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION We implemented a state transition model comparing the healthcare impact of a cohort of healthy children born after IVF/PGT-M, who have a population risk of developing cancer, to a cohort of naturally conceived live-births, half of whom are carriers of the BRCA mutation. Transition probabilities are based on published sources, a lifetime horizon and a perspective of a provincial Ministry of Health in Canada. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS The target population is the second-generation new births who have at least one parent with a known BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE At a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50 000 per QALY, IVF/PGT-M is a cost-effective intervention for carriers of either BRCA mutation. For BRCA1, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for IVF/PGT-M is $14 242/QALY. For BRCA2, the ICER of intervention is $12 893/QALY. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis results show that IVF/PGT-M has a 98.4 and 97.3% chance of being cost-effective for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers, respectively, at the $50 000/QALY threshold. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION Our model did not include the short-term negative effect of IVF/PGT-M on the woman’s quality of life; in addition, our model did not consider any ethical issues related to post-implantation genetic testing. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS In countries in which the healthcare of a large segment of the population is covered by a single payer system such as the government, it would be cost-effective for that payer to cover the cost of IVF/PGT-M for couples in which one member has a BRCA mutation, in order to avoid the future costs and disutility of managing offspring with an inherited BRCA mutation. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) Dr Wong’s research program was supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC), the Canadian Liver Foundation and an Ontario Ministry of Research, Innovation and Science Early Researcher Award. All authors declared no conflict of interests.

scholarly journals Cost–utility of sofosbuvir/velpatasvir versus other direct-acting antivirals for chronic hepatitis C genotype 1b infection in China

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (8) ◽  
pp. e035224
Author(s):  
Haoya Yun ◽  
Guoqiang Zhao ◽  
Xiaojie Sun ◽  
Lizheng Shi
Keyword(s):  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Hepatitis C ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Direct Acting Antivirals ◽  
Lifetime Horizon ◽  
System Perspective ◽  
Direct Acting ◽  
The Cost ◽  
The Impact

ObjectiveThis study aimed to estimate the cost–utility of sofosbuvir/velpatasvir (SOF/VEL) compared with other direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) in Chinese patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV).DesignA Markov model was developed to estimate the disease progression of patients with HCV over a lifetime horizon from the healthcare system perspective. Efficacy, clinical inputs and utilities were derived from the published literature. Drug costs were from the market price survey, and health costs for Markov health states were sourced from a Chinese study. Costs and utilities were discounted at an annual rate of 5%. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to test the impact of input parameters on the results.InterventionsSOF/VEL was compared with sofosbuvir+ribavirin (SR), sofosbuvir+dasabuvir (SD), daclatasvir+asunaprevir (DCV/ASV), ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir+dasabuvir (3D) and elbasvir/grazoprevir (EBR/GZR).Primary and secondary outcomesCosts, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and incremental cost–utility ratios (ICURs).ResultsSOF/VEL was economically dominant over SR and SD. However, 3D was economically dominant compared with SOF/VEL. Compared with DCV/ASV, SOF/VEL was cost-effective with the ICUR of US$1522 per QALY. Compared with EBR/GZR, it was not cost-effective with the ICUR of US$369 627 per QALY. One-way sensitivity analysis demonstrated that reducing the cost of SOF/VEL to the lower value of CI resulted in dominance over EBR/GZR and 3D. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated that 3D was cost-effective in 100% of iterations in patients with genotype (GT) 1b and SOF/VEL was not cost-effective.ConclusionsCompared with other oral DAA agents, SOF/VEL treatment was not the most cost-effectiveness option for patients with chronic HCV GT1b in China. Lower the price of SOF/VEL will make it cost-effective while simplifying treatment and achieving the goal of HCV elimination.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document