Cost-effectiveness analysis of first-line treatment for chronic hepatitis B in China

Dai, Zonglin; Wong, Irene Ol; Xie, Chengzhi; Xu, Wenxiong; Xiang, Yu; Peng, Liang; Lau, Eric H. Y.

doi:10.1016/j.cmi.2021.06.024

Cited by 8 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Following adjustments based on the annual consumer price index (CPI), the costs of ETV and TAF became comparable. In contrast to international studies reporting TAF being 18.5%-56.4% more expensive than ETV in cost-utility analyses [22,23], the pharmaceutical cost of TAF in Taiwan is notably economical. Consequently, within the Taiwanese context, TAF presents the optimal cost-utility profile.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 64%

“…(b) Real-world medical costs for analysis: A distinctive facet of this study lies in the utilization of real-world medical costs for the analysis. By acknowledging the potential variability in outcomes from simulated cost-utility analyses of TAF for hepatitis B patients in different clinical scenarios [22,23], this study's reliance on real-world data provides a more authentic basis for evaluating the disparities in the actual costs and utility between TAF and ETV. (c) One-on-one comparison of cost-utility profiles: This study represents a pioneering effort in conducting a direct comparison of the cost-utility profiles of TAF and ETV.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Cost–Utility Analysis of Tenofovir Alafenamide and Entecavir in Chronic Hepatitis B Patients: A Markov Decision Model

Lai,

Shi,

Tsai

et al. 2024

Cancers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

From the perspective of health economics, the evaluation of drug-related cost effectiveness and clinical utility is crucial. We conducted a cost–utility analysis of two first-line drugs, tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) and entecavir (ETV), in the treatment of chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients. We performed inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) to match the independent variables between the two treatment groups. The incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) of the two treatment groups was simulated using a decision tree with the Markov annual-cycle model. A total of 54 patients treated with TAF and 98 with ETV from January 2016 to December 2020 were enrolled. The total medical cost in the TAF group was NT$76,098 less than that in the ETV group, and TAF demonstrated more effectiveness than ETV by 3.19 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). When the time horizon was set at 30 years, the ICER of the TAF group compared with the ETV group was −NT$23,878 per QALY, suggesting more cost savings for TAF. Additionally, with the application of TAF, over NT$366 million (approximately US$12 million) can be saved annually. TAF demonstrates cheaper medical costs and more favorable clinical QALYs than ETV. To balance health insurance benefits and cost effectiveness, TAF is the optimal treatment for CHB.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 64%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cost–Utility Analysis of Tenofovir Alafenamide and Entecavir in Chronic Hepatitis B Patients: A Markov Decision Model

Lai,

Shi,

Tsai

et al. 2024

Cancers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, in the prevention and treatment of CHB, cost-effectiveness analysis is one of the commonly used methods, which has advantages such as easy understanding, easy decision-making, and avoiding ethical debates about using money as a measure of the value of human life. [ 24 – 28 ] Cost-effectiveness analysis of this study showed the CER of TAF group was similar of TDF group. After treatment, the adverse reactions included Kidney injury, nausea/vomiting.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 67%

Therapeutic effectiveness analysis of tenofovir alafenamide and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate on the treatment for chronic hepatitis B

Liu,

Qiao,

Zhang

et al. 2024

Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To explore the therapeutic effectiveness of tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) on the treatment for chronic hepatitis B (CHB). Retrospectively analyzing 241 cases of chronic hepatitis B patients admitted to our hospital from January 2020 to December 2021, they were divided into a TAF group of 180 cases and a TDF group of 61 cases. The liver function, serum virus markers, clinical efficacy, adverse reactions and cost-effectiveness ratio (CER) analysis of 2 groups were compared. Two groups of patients had no statistically significant difference in the levels of alanine aminotransferase (ALT), aspartate aminotransferase (AST) and total bilirubin (TBIL) before treatment. After treatment, the levels of ALT, AST and TBIL were lower than before treatment in both groups (P < .05), but the inter-group difference was not statistically significant (P > .05). After treatment, Hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) conversion rate and Hepatitis B virus DNA (HBV-DNA) conversion rate in the 2 groups had no statistically significant difference. After treatment, the difference in total clinical cure rate between the 2 groups has no statistical significance (P > .05), adverse reactions rate of TAF group was lower than that of TDF group (P < .05). The drug cost median of TAF group was higher than that of TDF (P < .05), but Cost-effectiveness analysis showed the CER of TAF group was similar of TDF group. TAF or TDF therapy can both improve liver function and promote recovery in patients with CHB, achieving the goal of treatment. TAF have more cost but have similar CER to TDF. Moreover, TAF therapy has a higher safety profile.

show abstract

“…Immunomodulators such as pegylated interferon alpha (PEG-IFNα), are currently considered to be the most effective antiviral therapy for clinical cure 1 . However, the uncertainty of the outcomes of interferon therapy, coupled with a substantial incidence of adverse reactions during treatment, the potential for relapse even after achieving clinical cure, the long treatment period, and the high cost, may all have an impact on patients’ physiological, psychological, and social functioning 4 – 6 . Previous studies of interferon therapy for CHB patients mainly focused on therapeutic efficacy, prognosis, and predictive indicators 7 , with little attention paid to psychosocial aspects.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of interferon therapy on quality of life in patients with chronic hepatitis B

Zhang,

Wan,

Wang

et al. 2024

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Interferon therapy is the most effective treatment for achieving clinical cure in chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients. However, the treatment outcomes of interferon therapy are uncertain, multiple side effects can occur during treatment, and the treatment is expensive. Although these characteristics may affect patients’ quality of life, research examining this topic is limited. We used a cross-sectional design to examine 100 CHB patients receiving interferon, 100 receiving nucleoside/nucleotide analogues, and 87 receiving non-antiviral treatment. Characteristic information, the Hepatitis B Quality of Life Instrument, Connor Davidson Resilience Scale, and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire were used to collect information. We found that quality of life in the interferon treatment group was higher than that in the non-antiviral treatment and nucleoside/nucleotide analogue treatment groups (p < 0.05). The factors influencing quality of life were resilience, presenteeism, hair loss, and antiviral treatment (p < 0.05). Although interferon therapy has some potential side effects, the results suggested that it did not negatively affect quality of life. Overall, interferon therapy did not have a major impact on CHB patients’ daily lives and work.

show abstract

Cost-effectiveness analysis of first-line treatment for chronic hepatitis B in China

Cited by 8 publications

References 24 publications

Cost–Utility Analysis of Tenofovir Alafenamide and Entecavir in Chronic Hepatitis B Patients: A Markov Decision Model

Cost–Utility Analysis of Tenofovir Alafenamide and Entecavir in Chronic Hepatitis B Patients: A Markov Decision Model

Therapeutic effectiveness analysis of tenofovir alafenamide and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate on the treatment for chronic hepatitis B

Effect of interferon therapy on quality of life in patients with chronic hepatitis B

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About