Liu Baoxian, Wei Mengchao, Liu Furong, Chen Shuling, Peng Zhenwei, Li Bin, Zhou Qian, Wang Haibo, Peng Sui, Kuang Ming
Division of Interventional Ultrasound, The First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University Guangzhou 510080, China.
Department of Liver Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University Guangzhou 510080, China.
Am J Transl Res. 2018 Aug 15;10(8):2685-2695. eCollection 2018.
In the real-world, it is unclear that after the radiofrequency ablation (RFA), whether it is a cost-effective strategy to administer nucleotide analogue (NA) for patients with hepatitis B virus (HBV)-related HCC patients. The aim of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of the RFA plus NA versus RFA alone in patients with HBV-related HCC within the Milan criteria in China and the USA. A Markov model was developed to simulate a cohort of patients with HCC within the Milan criteria and Child-Pugh A/B cirrhosis and underwent RFA with or without NA therapy over their remaining life expectancy. Analysis was performed in two geographical cost settings: China and the USA. The RFA plus NA therapy provided an average of 7.57 years, whereas RFA monotherapy offered 5.83 years. The RFA plus NA therapy produced 5.09 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), whereas RFA monotherapy achieved 3.89 QALYs. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of the RFA plus NA therapy versus RFA monotherapy was $10368.19/QALY in China and $38805.45/QALY in the USA. These values were below the thresholds of the cost-effectiveness in both countries. Sensitivity analysis revealed that the utility of recurrent HCC was the most sensitive parameter in all cost scenarios in both of the RFA plus NA therapy and RFA monotherapy groups. Our Markov model has shown that for the patients with HBV-related HCC within the Milan criteria and Child-Pugh A/B cirrhosis, RFA plus NA is more cost-effective than RFA monotherapy across the two different cost scenarios namely, China and the USA.
在现实世界中,对于乙型肝炎病毒(HBV)相关肝癌患者,在进行射频消融(RFA)后给予核苷类似物(NA)是否是一种具有成本效益的策略尚不清楚。本研究的目的是评估在中国和美国,对于符合米兰标准的HBV相关肝癌患者,RFA联合NA与单纯RFA相比的成本效益。建立了一个马尔可夫模型,以模拟一组符合米兰标准且为Child-Pugh A/B级肝硬化的肝癌患者,他们在剩余预期寿命内接受了有或无NA治疗的RFA。在两种地理成本环境下进行了分析:中国和美国。RFA联合NA治疗的平均生存期为7.57年,而单纯RFA治疗为5.83年。RFA联合NA治疗产生了5.09个质量调整生命年(QALY),而单纯RFA治疗实现了3.89个QALY。在中国,RFA联合NA治疗与单纯RFA治疗相比的增量成本效益比(ICER)为每QALY 10368.19美元,在美国为每QALY 38805.45美元。这些数值均低于两国的成本效益阈值。敏感性分析显示,在RFA联合NA治疗组和单纯RFA治疗组的所有成本情景中,复发性肝癌的效用是最敏感的参数。我们的马尔可夫模型表明,对于符合米兰标准且为Child-Pugh A/B级肝硬化的HBV相关肝癌患者,在两种不同的成本情景下,即中国和美国,RFA联合NA比单纯RFA更具成本效益。