Saab S, Brezina M, Gitnick G, Martin P, Yee H F
Departments of Medicine and Physiology, Division of Digestive Diseases, University of California at Los Angeles, USA.
Am J Kidney Dis. 2001 Jul;38(1):91-7. doi: 10.1053/ajkd.2001.25199.
Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is common in patients undergoing chronic hemodialysis, with an estimated yearly incidence of 0.2% and prevalence between 8% and 10%. Although a screening strategy based on alanine aminotransferase (ALT) values is currently recommended, this strategy has not been evaluated for cost-effectiveness compared with other potential screening strategies. A comparison therefore was made using a decision-analysis model of a simulated cohort of 5,000 hemodialysis patients followed up for 5 years. Using direct medical costs, three strategies were evaluated, including: (1) ALT values with confirmatory testing (biochemical), (2) serial enzyme-linked immunosorbent and strip immunoblot assay testing (serological), and (3) polymerase chain reaction (viral). Under baseline assumptions, the per-patient cost of screening hemodialysis patients for HCV was $378 for biochemical-based testing, $195 for serological-based testing, and $696 for viral-based testing. Our model was robust when varying the costs of testing, as well as the incidence and prevalence of HCV infection. Results of sensitivity analysis by varying costs, HCV incidence, and HCV prevalence indicated that serological-based screening was less costly than biochemical testing. Biochemical testing was in turn less costly than viral-based screening. Serological-based testing was also more effective in the diagnosis of de novo HCV infection, with a likelihood ratio of 85, in contrast to the likelihood ratio of 44 with biochemical-based testing using viral-based screening as the gold standard. A serological-based screening strategy is less costly and more effective than biochemical-based screening in the diagnosis of de novo HCV infection. Serological-based screening should be considered for HCV screening in hemodialysis populations.
丙型肝炎病毒(HCV)感染在接受慢性血液透析的患者中很常见,估计年发病率为0.2%,患病率在8%至10%之间。尽管目前推荐基于丙氨酸氨基转移酶(ALT)值的筛查策略,但与其他潜在筛查策略相比,该策略的成本效益尚未得到评估。因此,使用一个对5000名血液透析患者进行5年随访的模拟队列决策分析模型进行了比较。使用直接医疗成本,评估了三种策略,包括:(1)ALT值结合确证检测(生化检测),(2)系列酶联免疫吸附和条带免疫印迹检测(血清学检测),以及(3)聚合酶链反应(病毒检测)。在基线假设下,对血液透析患者进行HCV筛查的人均成本,基于生化检测为378美元,基于血清学检测为195美元,基于病毒检测为696美元。当改变检测成本以及HCV感染的发病率和患病率时,我们的模型具有稳健性。通过改变成本、HCV发病率和HCV患病率进行敏感性分析的结果表明,基于血清学的筛查成本低于生化检测。生化检测的成本又低于基于病毒的筛查。以病毒检测为金标准时,基于血清学的检测在诊断新发HCV感染方面也更有效,似然比为85,而基于生化检测的似然比为44。在诊断新发HCV感染方面,基于血清学的筛查策略比基于生化的筛查成本更低且更有效。对于血液透析人群的HCV筛查,应考虑采用基于血清学的筛查。