TY - JOUR
T1 - Cost-effectiveness of direct antiviral agents for hepatitis c virus infection and a combined intervention of syringe access and medication-assisted therapy for opioid use disorders in an injection drug use population
AU - Stevens, Elizabeth R.
AU - Nucifora, Kimberly A.
AU - Hagan, Holly
AU - Jordan, Ashly E.
AU - Uyei, Jennifer
AU - Khan, Bilal
AU - Dombrowski, Kirk
AU - des Jarlais, Don
AU - Scott Braithwaite, R.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America.
PY - 2020/6/10
Y1 - 2020/6/10
N2 - Background: There are too many plausible permutations and scale-up scenarios of combination hepatitis C virus (HCV) interventions for exhaustive testing in experimental trials. Therefore, we used a computer simulation to project the health and economic impacts of alternative combination intervention scenarios for people who inject drugs (PWID), focusing on direct antiviral agents (DAA) and medication-assisted treatment combined with syringe access programs (MAT+). Methods. We performed an allocative efficiency study, using a mathematical model to simulate the progression of HCV in PWID and its related consequences. We combined 2 previously validated simulations to estimate the cost-effectiveness of intervention strategies that included a range of coverage levels. Analyses were performed from a health-sector and societal perspective, with a 15-year time horizon and a discount rate of 3%. Results. From a health-sector perspective (excluding criminal justice system-related costs), 4 potential strategies fell on the cost-efficiency frontier. At 20% coverage, DAAs had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $27 251/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). Combinations of DAA at 20% with MAT+ at 20%, 40%, and 80% coverage had ICERs of $165 985/QALY, $325 860/ QALY, and $399 189/QALY, respectively. When analyzed from a societal perspective (including criminal justice system-related costs), DAA at 20% with MAT+ at 80% was the most effective intervention and was cost saving. While DAA at 20% with MAT+ at 80% was more expensive (eg, less cost saving) than MAT+ at 80% alone without DAA, it offered a favorable value compared to MAT+ at 80% alone ($23 932/QALY). Conclusions. When considering health-sector costs alone, DAA alone was the most cost-effective intervention. However, with criminal justice system-related costs, DAA and MAT+ implemented together became the most cost-effective intervention.
AB - Background: There are too many plausible permutations and scale-up scenarios of combination hepatitis C virus (HCV) interventions for exhaustive testing in experimental trials. Therefore, we used a computer simulation to project the health and economic impacts of alternative combination intervention scenarios for people who inject drugs (PWID), focusing on direct antiviral agents (DAA) and medication-assisted treatment combined with syringe access programs (MAT+). Methods. We performed an allocative efficiency study, using a mathematical model to simulate the progression of HCV in PWID and its related consequences. We combined 2 previously validated simulations to estimate the cost-effectiveness of intervention strategies that included a range of coverage levels. Analyses were performed from a health-sector and societal perspective, with a 15-year time horizon and a discount rate of 3%. Results. From a health-sector perspective (excluding criminal justice system-related costs), 4 potential strategies fell on the cost-efficiency frontier. At 20% coverage, DAAs had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $27 251/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). Combinations of DAA at 20% with MAT+ at 20%, 40%, and 80% coverage had ICERs of $165 985/QALY, $325 860/ QALY, and $399 189/QALY, respectively. When analyzed from a societal perspective (including criminal justice system-related costs), DAA at 20% with MAT+ at 80% was the most effective intervention and was cost saving. While DAA at 20% with MAT+ at 80% was more expensive (eg, less cost saving) than MAT+ at 80% alone without DAA, it offered a favorable value compared to MAT+ at 80% alone ($23 932/QALY). Conclusions. When considering health-sector costs alone, DAA alone was the most cost-effective intervention. However, with criminal justice system-related costs, DAA and MAT+ implemented together became the most cost-effective intervention.
KW - Combination intervention
KW - Cost-effectiveness
KW - DAA
KW - HCV
KW - PWID
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85086346472&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85086346472&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1093/cid/ciz726
DO - 10.1093/cid/ciz726
M3 - Article
C2 - 31400755
AN - SCOPUS:85086346472
SN - 1058-4838
VL - 70
SP - 2652
EP - 2662
JO - Clinical Infectious Diseases
JF - Clinical Infectious Diseases
IS - 12
ER -