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

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

Early Predictors of Anemia in Patients With Hepatitis C Genotype 1 Treated With Peginterferon Alfa-2a (40KD) Plus Ribavirin

Adherence to ribavirin is one factor that is critically important in the treatment of hepatitis C virus infection. However, ribavirin can be associated with clinically significant hemolytic anemia resulting in dose modifications in up to one-quarter of patients. Currently, baseline predictors of considerable anemia are not sufficiently discriminating for routine therapeutic intervention. The objective of this analysis was to elucidate baseline and on-treatment factors predictive of a considerable hemoglobin drop at week 4

Daclatasvir in combination with asunaprevir and beclabuvir for hepatitis C virus genotype 1 infection with compensated cirrhosis

Importance Effective and well-tolerated, interferon-free regimens are needed for treatment of patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection and cirrhosis. Objective All-oral therapy with daclatasvir (nonstructural protein 5A [NS5A] inhibitor), asunaprevir (NS3 protease inhibitor), and beclabuvir (nonnucleoside NS5B inhibitor), with or without ribavirin, was evaluated in patients with HCV genotype 1 infection and compensated cirrhosis. Design, Setting, and Participants The UNITY-2 study was conducted between December 2013 and October 2014 at 49 outpatient sites in the United States, Canada, France, and Australia. Patients were treated for 12 weeks, with 24 weeks of follow-up after completion of treatment. Adult patients with cirrhosis were enrolled in 2 cohorts: HCV treatment-naive or HCV treatment-experienced. Statistical analyses were based on historical controls; there were no internal controls. Interventions All patients received twice-daily treatment with the fixed-dose combination of daclatasvir (30 mg), asunaprevir (200 mg), and beclabuvir (75 mg). In addition, patients within each cohort were stratified according to HCV genotype 1 subtype (1a or 1b) and randomly assigned (1:1) to receive double-blinded weight-based ribavirin (1000-1200 mg/d) or matching placebo. Main Outcomes and Measures Sustained virologic response at posttreatment week 12 (SVR12). Results One hundred twelve patients in the treatment-naive group and 90 patients in the treatment-experienced group were treated and included in the analysis. Enrolled patients were 88% white with a median age of 58 years (treatment-naive group) or 60 years (treatment-experienced group); 74% had genotype 1a infection. SVR12 rates were 98% (97.5% CI, 88.9%-100%) for patients in the treatment-naive group and 93% (97.5% CI, 85.0%-100.0%) for those in the treatment-experienced group when ribavirin was included in the regimen. With the fixed-dose combination alone, response rates were 93% (97.5% CI, 85.4%-100.0%) for patients in the treatment-naive group and 87% (97.5% CI, 75.3%-98.0%) for those in the treatment-experienced group. Three serious adverse events were considered to be treatment related and there were 4 adverse event–related discontinuations. Treatment-emergent grade 3 or 4 alanine aminotransferase elevations were observed in 4 patients, of which 1 had concomitant total bilirubin elevation. Conclusions and Relevance In this open-label uncontrolled study, patients with chronic HCV genotype 1 infection and cirrhosis who received a 12-week oral fixed-dose regimen of daclatasvir, asunaprevir, and beclabuvir, with or without ribavirin, achieved high rates of SVR12

Sofosbuvir and Velpatasvir for HCV Genotype 2 and 3 Infection

BACKGROUND: In phase 2 trials, treatment with the combination of the nucleotide polymerase inhibitor sofosbuvir and the NS5A inhibitor velpatasvir resulted in high rates of sustained virologic response in patients chronically infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 2 or 3. METHODS: We conducted two randomized, phase 3, open-label studies involving patients who had received previous treatment for HCV genotype 2 or 3 and those who had not received such treatment, including patients with compensated cirrhosis. In one trial, patients with HCV genotype 2 were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive sofosbuvir-velpatasvir, in a once-daily, fixed-dose combination tablet (134 patients), or sofosbuvir plus weight-based ribavirin (132 patients) for 12 weeks. In a second trial, patients with HCV genotype 3 were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive sofosbuvir-velpatasvir for 12 weeks (277 patients) or sofosbuvir-ribavirin for 24 weeks (275 patients). The primary end point for the two trials was a sustained virologic response at 12 weeks after the end of therapy. RESULTS: Among patients with HCV genotype 2, the rate of sustained virologic response in the sofosbuvir-velpatasvir group was 99% (95% confidence interval [CI], 96 to 100), which was superior to the rate of 94% (95% CI, 88 to 97) in the sofosbuvir-ribavirin group (P=0.02). Among patients with HCV genotype 3, the rate of sustained virologic response in the sofosbuvir-velpatasvir group was 95% (95% CI, 92 to 98), which was superior to the rate of 80% (95% CI, 75 to 85) in the sofosbuvir-ribavirin group (P CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with HCV genotype 2 or 3 with or without previous treatment, including those with compensated cirrhosis, 12 weeks of treatment with sofosbuvir-velpatasvir resulted in rates of sustained virologic response that were superior to those with standard treatment with sofosbuvir-ribavirin. (Funded by Gilead Sciences; ASTRAL-2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02220998; and ASTRAL-3, NCT02201953.)

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

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