Potential conflict of interest: Dr. L'Italien owns stock and is an employee of Bristol-Myers Squibb. Dr. McEwan owns stock in Health Economics & Outcomes Research. Dr. Yuan is an employee of Bristol-Myers Squibb.
Article first published online: 27 MAY 2013
Copyright © 2013 American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases
Volume 58, Issue 1, pages 54–64, July 2013
How to Cite
McEwan, P., Ward, T., Yuan, Y., Kim, R. and L'Italien, G. (2013), The impact of timing and prioritization on the cost-effectiveness of birth cohort testing and treatment for hepatitis C virus in the United States. Hepatology, 58: 54–64. doi: 10.1002/hep.26304
This study was funded by an unrestricted grant from Bristol-Myers Squibb.
- Issue published online: 24 JUN 2013
- Article first published online: 27 MAY 2013
- Accepted manuscript online: 6 FEB 2013 07:08PM EST
- Manuscript Accepted: 17 JAN 2013
- Manuscript Received: 23 OCT 2012
Recent United States guidelines recommend one-time birth cohort testing for hepatitis C infection in persons born between 1945 and 1965; this represents a major public health policy undertaking. The purpose of this study was to assess the role of treatment timing and prioritization on predicted cost-effectiveness. The MONARCH hepatitis C lifetime simulation model was used in conjunction with a testing and treatment decision tree to estimate the cost-effectiveness of birth cohort versus risk-based testing incorporating information on age, fibrosis stage and treatment timing. The study used a 1945-1965 birth cohort and included disease progression, testing and treatment-related parameters. Scenario analysis was used to evaluate the impact of hepatitis C virus (HCV) prevalence, treatment eligibility, age, fibrosis stage and timing of treatment initiation on total costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), HCV-related complications and cost-effectiveness. The cost-effectiveness of birth cohort versus risk-based testing was $28,602. Assuming 91% of the population is tested, at least 278,000 people need to be treated for birth cohort testing to maintain cost-effectiveness. Prioritizing treatment toward those with more advanced fibrosis is associated with a decrease in total cost of $7.5 billion and 59,035 fewer HCV-related complications. Total QALYs and complications avoided are maximized when treatment initiation occurs as soon as possible after testing. Conclusion: This study confirms that birth cohort testing is, on average, cost-effective. However, this remains true only when enough tested and HCV-positive subjects are treated to generate sufficient cost offsets and QALY gains. Given the practical and financial challenges associated with implementing birth cohort testing, the greatest return on investment is obtained when eligible patients are treated immediately and those with more advanced disease are prioritized. (HEPATOLOGY 2013)