Pyadushkina E V, Avxentyeva M V, Omelyanovsky V V, Khachatryan G R
Eksp Klin Gastroenterol. 2015(3):55-65.
We conducted clinical and economic analysis of the protease inhibitor simeprevir versus currently available in Russia protease inhibitors (boceprevir and telaprevir) in combination with pegylated interferon and ribavirin and dual therapy with pegylated interferon and ribavirin in patients with chronic hepatitis C genotype 1 without polymorphism Q80K, who had not responded to previous treatment. Global cost-effectiveness model was adapted to the Russian health care system. We calculated differences in direct medical costs between the antiviral therapy schemes, treatment of long-term complications of chronic hepatitis C and the costs of achieving sustained virological response (SVR) to treatment. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio - additional cost per life year saved was calculated as well. Available published data and the tariffs of the Russian healthcare system were used for the calculations. Simeprevir was shown to be more effective than dual therapy with acceptable additional costs and more effective than boceprevir and telaprevir in the number of life years saved being less costly therapy option.
我们对蛋白酶抑制剂simeprevir与俄罗斯目前可用的蛋白酶抑制剂（博赛泼维与特拉匹韦）联合聚乙二醇化干扰素和利巴韦林，以及聚乙二醇化干扰素和利巴韦林双药疗法，在既往治疗无应答的非Q80K多态性慢性丙型肝炎1型患者中进行了临床和经济学分析。全球成本效益模型已根据俄罗斯医疗保健系统进行调整。我们计算了抗病毒治疗方案之间的直接医疗成本差异、慢性丙型肝炎长期并发症的治疗成本以及实现治疗持续病毒学应答（SVR）的成本。还计算了增量成本效益比——每挽救一个生命年的额外成本。计算时使用了已发表的可用数据和俄罗斯医疗保健系统的收费标准。结果显示，simeprevir比双药疗法更有效，且额外成本可接受，在挽救生命年数方面比博赛泼维和特拉匹韦更有效，且是成本更低的治疗选择。
