European journal of gastroenterology & hepatology · 2016
The cost-effectiveness of daclatasvir-based regimens for the treatment of hepatitis C virus genotypes 1 and 4 in the UK.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
McEwan Phil, Bennett Hayley, Ward Thomas, Webster Samantha, Gordon Jason, Kalsekar Anupama, Yuan Yong, Brenner Michael
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the cost-effectiveness of daclatasvir in combination with other medicinal products for the treatment of patients with hepatitis C virus genotypes 1 and 4 and advanced liver disease in the UK.
METHODS: A published and validated Markov model designed to simulate the natural history of chronic hepatitis C was used to compare daclatasvir with relevant treatment options for patients with hepatitis C virus genotypes 1 and 4 and a METAVIR score of F3-F4. Patients were defined according to their treatment status; that is, naive, experienced or interferon ineligible/intolerant. Data inputs for the analysis were derived from published sources, UK-specific where possible. A lifetime horizon was used, with costs and benefits discounted at 3.5%.
RESULTS: Daclatasvir-based regimens are estimated to be cost-effective versus no treatment and established standard-of-care regimens, including telaprevir in combination with pegylated interferon-α+ribavirin (PR), boceprevir in combination with PR and PR alone (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio range: £3715-£15,408). The cost-effectiveness of daclatasvir-based regimens versus emerging regimens (sofosbuvir or simeprevir based) is less consistent, but was dominant or cost-effective (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio range: £1394-£28,393) in all except two scenarios.
CONCLUSION: Daclatasvir-based regimens are expected to be highly cost-effective for the majority patients with advanced disease versus relevant comparator regimens, including newer direct-acting antiviral regimens.
METHODS: A published and validated Markov model designed to simulate the natural history of chronic hepatitis C was used to compare daclatasvir with relevant treatment options for patients with hepatitis C virus genotypes 1 and 4 and a METAVIR score of F3-F4. Patients were defined according to their treatment status; that is, naive, experienced or interferon ineligible/intolerant. Data inputs for the analysis were derived from published sources, UK-specific where possible. A lifetime horizon was used, with costs and benefits discounted at 3.5%.
RESULTS: Daclatasvir-based regimens are estimated to be cost-effective versus no treatment and established standard-of-care regimens, including telaprevir in combination with pegylated interferon-α+ribavirin (PR), boceprevir in combination with PR and PR alone (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio range: £3715-£15,408). The cost-effectiveness of daclatasvir-based regimens versus emerging regimens (sofosbuvir or simeprevir based) is less consistent, but was dominant or cost-effective (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio range: £1394-£28,393) in all except two scenarios.
CONCLUSION: Daclatasvir-based regimens are expected to be highly cost-effective for the majority patients with advanced disease versus relevant comparator regimens, including newer direct-acting antiviral regimens.