Department of Pharmacotherapy & Outcomes Science, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Pharmacy, Richmond, VA.
J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2021 Feb;27(2):137-146. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2021.27.2.137.
The hepatitis C virus (HCV) prevalence rate among injection drug users (IDUs) in North America is 55.2%, with 1.41 million individuals estimated to be HCV-antibody positive. Studies have shown the effectiveness of syringe service programs (SSPs) alone, medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) alone, or SSP+MOUD combination in reducing HCV transmission among opioid IDUs. To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of SSP alone, MOUD alone, and SSP + MOUD combination in preventing HCV cases among opioid IDUs in the United States. We used a decision tree analysis model based on published literature and publicly available data. Effectiveness was presented as the number of HCV cases avoided per 100 opioid IDUs. A micro-costing approach was undertaken and included both direct medical and nonmedical costs. Cost-effectiveness was assessed from a public payer perspective over a 1-year time horizon. It was expressed as an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and an incremental cost savings per HCV case avoided per 100 opioid IDUs compared with cost savings with "no intervention." Costs were standardized to 2019 U.S. dollars. The incremental cost savings per HCV case avoided per 100 opioid IDUs compared with no intervention were as follows: SSP + MOUD combination = $347,573; SSP alone = $363,821; MOUD alone = $317,428. The ICER for the combined strategy was $4,699 compared with the ICER for the SSP group. Sensitivity analysis showed that the results of the base-case cost-effectiveness analysis were sensitive to variations in the probabilities of injection-risk behavior for the SSP and SSP + MOUD combination groups, probability of no HCV with no intervention, and costs of MOUD and HCV antiviral medications. The SSP + MOUD combination and SSP alone strategies dominate MOUD alone and no intervention strategies. SSP had the largest incremental cost savings per HCV case avoided per 100 opioid IDUs compared with the no intervention strategy. Public payers adopting the SSP + MOUD combination harm-reduction strategy instead of SSP alone would have to pay an additional $4,699 to avoid an additional HCV case among opioid IDUs. Although these harm-reduction programs will provide benefits in a 1-year time frame, the largest benefit may become evident in the years ahead. This research had no external funding. The authors declare no financial interests in this article. Ijioma is a Health Economics and Outcomes Research (HEOR) postdoctoral Fellow with Virginia Commonwealth University and Indivior. Indivior is a pharmaceutical manufacturer of opioid addiction treatment drugs but was not involved in the design, analysis, or write-up of the manuscript.
北美注射吸毒者(IDU)中的丙型肝炎病毒(HCV)流行率为 55.2%,估计有 141 万人 HCV 抗体呈阳性。研究表明,单独使用注射器服务计划(SSP)、单独使用阿片类药物使用障碍(MOUD)药物或 SSP+MOUD 联合方案可降低阿片类 IDU 中的 HCV 传播。评估单独使用 SSP、单独使用 MOUD 以及 SSP+MOUD 联合方案预防美国阿片类 IDU 中 HCV 病例的成本效益。我们使用了基于已发表文献和公开可用数据的决策树分析模型。有效性表示每 100 名阿片类 IDU 避免的 HCV 病例数。采用微观成本法,包括直接医疗和非医疗成本。从公共支付者的角度在 1 年的时间范围内评估成本效益。它表示为每 100 名阿片类 IDU 与“无干预”相比,每避免 1 例 HCV 病例的增量成本效益比(ICER)和每避免 1 例 HCV 病例的增量成本节约。成本已标准化为 2019 年的美元。与无干预相比,每避免 100 名阿片类 IDU 的 HCV 病例的增量成本节约如下:SSP+MOUD 联合=347,573 美元;SSP 单独=363,821 美元;MOUD 单独=317,428 美元。联合策略的 ICER 为 4699 美元,而 SSP 组的 ICER 为 4699 美元。敏感性分析表明,基础成本效益分析的结果对 SSP 和 SSP+MOUD 联合组的注射风险行为概率、无干预情况下无 HCV 的概率以及 MOUD 和 HCV 抗病毒药物的成本变化敏感。SSP+MOUD 联合和 SSP 单独策略优于 MOUD 单独和无干预策略。与无干预策略相比,SSP 单独每避免 100 名阿片类 IDU 的 HCV 病例的增量成本节约最大。采用 SSP+MOUD 联合减少伤害策略而不是 SSP 单独的公共支付者,每避免阿片类 IDU 中的另一个 HCV 病例,需要额外支付 4699 美元。尽管这些减少伤害的方案将在 1 年内提供效益,但最大的效益可能会在未来几年显现。本研究没有外部资金。作者在本文中没有声明任何经济利益。Ijioma 是弗吉尼亚联邦大学的健康经济学和结果研究(HEOR)博士后研究员。Indivior 是阿片类药物成瘾治疗药物的制药制造商,但并未参与设计、分析或撰写本文。