Department of Medicine, Section of Infectious Diseases, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts.
Department of Pediatrics, Section of Infectious Diseases, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts.
J Am Soc Nephrol. 2023 Feb 1;34(2):205-219. doi: 10.1681/ASN.2022030245.
National guidelines recommend twice-yearly hepatitis C virus (HCV) screening for patients receiving in-center hemodialysis. However, studies examining the cost-effectiveness of HCV screening methods or frequencies are lacking.
We populated an HCV screening, treatment, and disease microsimulation model with a cohort representative of the US in-center hemodialysis population. Clinical outcomes, costs, and cost-effectiveness of the Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) 2018 guidelines-endorsed HCV screening frequency (every 6 months) were compared with less frequent periodic screening (yearly, every 2 years), screening only at hemodialysis initiation, and no screening. We estimated expected quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) between each screening strategy and the next less expensive alternative strategy, from a health care sector perspective, in 2019 US dollars. For each strategy, we modeled an HCV outbreak occurring in 1% of centers. In sensitivity analyses, we varied mortality, linkage to HCV cure, screening method (ribonucleic acid versus antibody testing), test sensitivity, HCV infection rates, and outbreak frequencies.
Screening only at hemodialysis initiation yielded HCV cure rates of 79%, with an ICER of $82,739 per QALY saved compared with no testing. Compared with screening at hemodialysis entry only, screening every 2 years increased cure rates to 88% and decreased liver-related deaths by 52%, with an ICER of $140,193. Screening every 6 months had an ICER of $934,757; in sensitivity analyses using a willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000 per QALY gained, screening every 6 months was never cost-effective.
The KDIGO-recommended HCV screening interval (every 6 months) does not seem to be a cost-effective use of health care resources, suggesting that re-evaluation of less-frequent screening strategies should be considered.
国家指南建议对接受中心血液透析的患者每半年进行一次丙型肝炎病毒(HCV)筛查。然而,缺乏关于 HCV 筛查方法或频率的成本效益研究。
我们使用代表美国中心血液透析人群的队列对 HCV 筛查、治疗和疾病微模拟模型进行了填充。使用肾脏病改善全球结果(KDIGO)2018 指南推荐的 HCV 筛查频率(每 6 个月)(每 6 个月),与不太频繁的定期筛查(每年,每 2 年)、仅在开始血液透析时进行筛查和不进行筛查进行比较。我们从医疗保健部门的角度估计了每个筛查策略与下一个更便宜的替代策略之间的预期质量调整生命年(QALY)和增量成本效益比(ICER),并在 2019 年美元。对于每种策略,我们都对 1%的中心发生 HCV 爆发进行了建模。在敏感性分析中,我们改变了死亡率、与 HCV 治愈的联系、筛查方法(核糖核酸与抗体检测)、检测灵敏度、HCV 感染率和爆发频率。
仅在血液透析时进行筛查可获得 79%的 HCV 治愈率,与不进行检测相比,每 QALY 节省的 ICER 为 82739 美元。与仅在血液透析进入时筛查相比,每 2 年筛查可将治愈率提高到 88%,并将肝脏相关死亡人数减少 52%,ICER 为 140193 美元。每 6 个月筛查的 ICER 为 934757 美元;在使用 150000 美元/QALY 收益的意愿支付阈值进行的敏感性分析中,每 6 个月筛查从未具有成本效益。
KDIGO 推荐的 HCV 筛查间隔(每 6 个月)似乎不是对医疗保健资源的有效利用,这表明应考虑重新评估更不频繁的筛查策略。