Elbasha E H, Robertson M N, Nwankwo C
Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA.
Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2017 Feb;45(3):455-467. doi: 10.1111/apt.13882. Epub 2016 Dec 1.
The presence of baseline NS5A resistance-associated variants (RAVs) impacted treatment response in HCV genotype 1a (GT1a)-infected patients treated with elbasvir/grazoprevir (EBR/GZR) for 12 weeks, but not patients treated with EBR/GZR and ribavirin (RBV) for 16 weeks.
To assess the cost-effectiveness of baseline testing for NS5A RAVs in EBR/GZR-treated patients compared without testing, and with current treatments for GT1a patients.
We simulated the course of treatment with EBR/GZR, ledipasvir/sofosbuvir (LDV/SOF) and ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir+dasabuvir (3D) with or without RBV and natural history of disease of GT1a patients. Treatment-related data from clinical trials were used in a state-transition model of the natural history of chronic HCV GT1a infection and liver disease to project lifetime costs (US$2015) and quality-adjusted life years (QALY). Other clinical and economic inputs were estimated from published sources. We conducted base case and sensitivity analyses.
RAVs testing-guided treatment with EBR/GZR resulted in more QALYs than EBR/GZR without testing, 3D+RBV, or LDV/SOF8. This strategy was cost-saving relative to 3D+RBV or LDV/SOF8 and was cost-effective compared with EBR/GZR without testing. LDV/SOF12 was not cost-effective compared with the EBR/GZR RAVs testing-based strategy. Treatment with EBR/GZR guided by RAVs testing is the most effective regimen among treatment-experienced patients without cirrhosis and cirrhotic patients. In sensitivity analysis, RAVs testing was cost-effective in 48-55% and 63-85% among noncirrhotic and cirrhotic patients respectively.
RAVs testing before treatment with EBR/GZR is likely to be a cost-effective alternative to the use of EBR/GZR without testing, LDV/SOF, or 3D among GT1a treatment-naïve or treatment-experienced patients.
基线NS5A耐药相关变异(RAVs)的存在会影响接受艾尔巴韦/格拉瑞韦(EBR/GZR)治疗12周的丙型肝炎基因1a型(GT1a)感染患者的治疗反应,但不会影响接受EBR/GZR联合利巴韦林(RBV)治疗16周的患者的治疗反应。
评估在接受EBR/GZR治疗的患者中,与不进行检测相比,以及与目前针对GT1a患者的治疗方法相比,对NS5A RAVs进行基线检测的成本效益。
我们模拟了使用EBR/GZR、来迪派韦/索磷布韦(LDV/SOF)和奥比他韦/帕利哌韦/利托那韦+达沙布韦(3D)联合或不联合RBV的治疗过程,以及GT1a患者的疾病自然史。来自临床试验的治疗相关数据被用于慢性丙型肝炎GT1a感染和肝病自然史的状态转换模型,以预测终身成本(2015年美元)和质量调整生命年(QALY)。其他临床和经济投入是根据已发表的资料估算的。我们进行了基础病例分析和敏感性分析。
RAVs检测指导下的EBR/GZR治疗比未进行检测的EBR/GZR、3D+RBV或LDV/SOF产生更多的QALY。与3D+RBV或LDV/SOF相比,该策略具有成本节约优势,与未进行检测的EBR/GZR相比具有成本效益。与基于RAVs检测的EBR/GZR策略相比,LDV/SOF12不具有成本效益。在无肝硬化和肝硬化的有治疗经验的患者中,RAVs检测指导下的EBR/GZR治疗是最有效的治疗方案。在敏感性分析中,RAVs检测在非肝硬化患者和肝硬化患者中的成本效益分别为48%-55%和63%-85%。
在GT1a初治或有治疗经验的患者中,在使用EBR/GZR治疗前进行RAVs检测可能是一种比不进行检测的EBR/GZR、LDV/SOF或3D更具成本效益的选择。