Premium
Cost‐effectiveness of noninvasive liver fibrosis tests for treatment decisions in patients with chronic hepatitis B in the UK : systematic review and economic evaluation
Author(s) -
Crossan C.,
Tsochatzis E. A.,
Longworth L.,
Gurusamy K.,
Papastergiou V.,
Thalassinos E.,
Mantzoukis K.,
RodriguezPeralvarez M.,
O'Brien J.,
NoelStorr A.,
Papatheodoridis G. V.,
Davidson B.,
Burroughs A. K
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
journal of viral hepatitis
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.329
H-Index - 100
eISSN - 1365-2893
pISSN - 1352-0504
DOI - 10.1111/jvh.12469
Subject(s) - medicine , watchful waiting , liver biopsy , quality adjusted life year , cost effectiveness , fibrosis , biopsy , cancer , risk analysis (engineering) , prostate cancer
Summary We compared the cost‐effectiveness of various noninvasive tests ( NIT s) in patients with chronic hepatitis B and elevated transaminases and/or viral load who would normally undergo liver biopsy to inform treatment decisions. We searched various databases until April 2012. We conducted a systematic review and meta‐analysis to calculate the diagnostic accuracy of various NIT s using a bivariate random‐effects model. We constructed a probabilistic decision analytical model to estimate health care costs and outcomes quality‐adjusted‐life‐years ( QALY s) using data from the meta‐analysis, literature, and national UK data. We compared the cost‐effectiveness of four decision‐making strategies: testing with NIT s and treating patients with fibrosis stage ≥F2, testing with liver biopsy and treating patients with ≥F2, treat none (watchful waiting) and treat all irrespective of fibrosis. Treating all patients without prior fibrosis assessment had an incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio ( ICER ) of £28 137 per additional QALY gained for HB eAg‐negative patients. For HB eAg‐positive patients, using Fibroscan was the most cost‐effective option with an ICER of £23 345. The base case results remained robust in the majority of sensitivity analyses, but were sensitive to changes in the ≥F2 prevalence and the benefit of treatment in patients with F0–F1. For HB eAg‐negative patients, strategies excluding NIT s were the most cost‐effective: treating all patients regardless of fibrosis level if the high cost‐effectiveness threshold of £30 000 is accepted; watchful waiting if not. For HB eAg‐positive patients, using Fibroscan to identify and treat those with ≥F2 was the most cost‐effective option.