Inserm UMR 1137, IAME, F-75018 Paris, France; Université Paris Diderot, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Paris, France.
Service de maladies Infectieuses et tropicales, Hôpital Bichat Claude Bernard, Paris, France.
Hepatology. 2015 Jul;62(1):31-9. doi: 10.1002/hep.27691. Epub 2015 Feb 27.
In resource-constrained countries where the prevalence of hepatitis C virus (HCV) disease is usually high, it is important to know which population should be treated first in order to increase treatment effectiveness. The aim was to estimate the effectiveness of different HCV treatment eligibility scenarios in three different countries. Using a Markov model, we estimated the number of life-years saved (LYS) with different treatment eligibility scenarios according to fibrosis stage (F1-F4 or F3-4), compared to base case (F2-F4), at a constant treatment rate, of patients between 18 and 60 years of age, at stages F0/F1 to F4, without liver complications or coinfections, chronically infected by HCV, and treated with pegylated interferon (IFN)/ribavirin or more-efficacious therapies (i.e. IFN free). We conducted the analysis in Egypt (prevalence = 14.7%; 45,000 patients treated/year), Thailand (prevalence = 2.2%; 1,000 patients treated/year), and Côte d'Ivoire (prevalence = 3%; 150 patients treated/year). In Egypt, treating F1 patients in addition to ≥F2 patients (SE1 vs. SE0) decreased LYS by 3.9%. Focusing treatment only on F3-F4 patients increased LYS by 6.7% (SE2 vs. SE0). In Thailand and Côte d'Ivoire, focusing treatment only on F3-F4 patients increased LYS by 15.3% and 11.0%, respectively, compared to treating patients ≥F2 (ST0 and SC0, respectively). Treatment only for patients at stages F3-F4 with IFN-free therapies would increase LYS by 16.7% versus SE0 in Egypt, 22.0% versus ST0 in Thailand, and 13.1% versus SC0 in Côte d'Ivoire. In this study, we did not take into account the yearly new infections and the impact of treatment on HCV transmission.
Our model-based analysis demonstrates that prioritizing treatment in F3-F4 patients in resource-constrained countries is the most effective scenario in terms of LYS, regardless of treatment considered.
旨在评估三种不同国家不同 HCV 治疗条件下的人群对治疗效果的影响。
采用马尔可夫模型,对不同纤维化分期(F1-F4 或 F3-4),与基础案例(F2-F4)相比,在固定治疗率下,18-60 岁无肝并发症或合并感染、慢性 HCV 感染且接受聚乙二醇干扰素(IFN)/利巴韦林或更有效的治疗(即无 IFN)的患者,F0/F1 至 F4 期患者的生命年获益(LYS)进行了估计。
在埃及(流行率=14.7%;每年治疗 45000 例患者)、泰国(流行率=2.2%;每年治疗 1000 例患者)和科特迪瓦(流行率=3%;每年治疗 150 例患者)进行了分析。在埃及,除了≥F2 患者之外,治疗 F1 患者(SE1 与 SE0)降低 LYS 3.9%。只针对 F3-F4 患者进行治疗(SE2 与 SE0)增加 LYS 6.7%。在泰国和科特迪瓦,只针对 F3-F4 患者进行治疗(ST0 和 SC0)与治疗≥F2 患者(分别为 ST0 和 SC0)相比,增加 LYS 15.3%和 11.0%。与 SE0 相比,仅对 F3-F4 患者采用无 IFN 治疗方案进行治疗,在埃及可增加 LYS 16.7%,在泰国增加 22.0%,在科特迪瓦增加 13.1%。
本基于模型的分析表明,在资源有限的国家,针对 F3-F4 患者进行治疗,从 LYS 角度来看,是最有效的方案,无论采用何种治疗方案均如此。