Search

Background & Aims: The cost‐effectiveness to screen hepatic fibrosis in at‐risk population as recommended by several professional societies has been limited. This study aimed to investigate the cost‐effectiveness of this screening strategy in the expanded at‐risk population recently proposed by several societies. Methods: A combined model of the decision tree and Markov models was developed to compare expected costs, quality‐adjusted life‐years (QALYs) and incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio (ICER) between screening and no screening groups. The model included liver disease‐related health states and cardiovascular disease (CVD) states as a base‐case analysis. Screening strategy consisted of fibrosis‐4 index (FIB‐4) followed by vibration‐controlled transient elastography (VCTE) and intensive lifestyle intervention (ILI) as a treatment for diagnosed patients. Results: Cost‐effectiveness analysis showed that screening the at‐risk population entailed $298 incremental costs and an additional 0.0199 QALY per patient compared to no screening (ICER $14 949/QALY). Screening was cost‐effective based on the implicit ICER threshold of $25 000/QALY in Korea. When the effects of ILI on CVD and extrahepatic malignancy were incorporated into the cost‐effectiveness model, the ICER decreased by 0.85 times from the base‐case analysis (ICER $12 749/QALY). In contrast, when only the effects of liver disease were considered in the model, excluding cardiovascular disease effects, ICER increased from the baseline case analysis to $16 305. Even when replacing with medical costs in Japan and U.S., it remained cost‐effective with the estimate below the countries' ICER threshold. Conclusions: Our study provides compelling evidence supporting the cost‐effectiveness of FIB‐4‐based screening the at‐risk population for advanced hepatic fibrosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Poor adherence to tuberculosis (TB) treatment is an obstacle to controlling the disease. The Korean government's national TB control plan includes a program on adherence to TB treatment to manage patients with TB. This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of a national TB program for improving patient adherence. A discrete event simulation (DES) model was developed to estimate the costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of adherent and non-adherent patients. In this model, we considered treatment completion, loss to follow-up, recurrence, death, and treatment changes from drug-susceptible to multidrug-resistant TB as clinical events. We obtained input parameters such as costs, probability of events, and time distributions for each event from the Korean National Health Insurance claims data. We estimated the costs and QALYs before implementation of the program (adherence rate = 79%) and at present (current adherence rate = 94%). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was used to evaluate whether the program was cost-effective given the willingness-to-pay threshold. In the simulation, the program increasing the proportion of adherent patients gained 0.018 QALY/patient while spending $162/patient. The ICER of the TB program was $8790/QALY. Given a willingness-to-pay threshold of $20,000, the national TB program was considered cost-effective. Improvements in adherence to TB treatment through the current TB program were cost-effective. The DES model accurately reflected the real world. Commitment programs to improve patient adherence may help manage TB nationwide. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Studies using data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and real-world data (RWD) have suggested that adjuvant cytokine-induced killer (CIK) cell immunotherapy after curative treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) prolongs recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS). However, the cost-effectiveness of CIK cell immunotherapy as an adjuvant therapy for HCC compared to no adjuvant therapy is uncertain. Methods: We constructed a partitioned survival model to compare the expected costs, life-year (LY), and quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) of a hypothetical population of 10,000 patients between CIK cell immunotherapy and no adjuvant therapy groups. Patients with HCC aged 55 years who underwent a potentially curative treatment were simulated with the model over a 20-year time horizon, from a healthcare system perspective. To model the effectiveness, we used OS and RFS data from RCTs and RWD. We estimated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) and performed extensive sensitivity analyses. Results: Based on the RCT data, the CIK cell immunotherapy incrementally incurred a cost of $61,813, 2.07 LYs, and 1.87 QALYs per patient compared to no adjuvant therapy, and the estimated ICER was $33,077/QALY. Being less than the willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000/QALY, CIK cell immunotherapy was cost-effective. Using the RWD, the ICER was estimated as $25,107/QALY, which is lower than that obtained using RCT. The time horizon and cost of productivity loss were the most influential factors on the ICER. Conclusion: We showed that receiving adjuvant CIK cell immunotherapy was more cost-effective than no adjuvant therapy in patients with HCC who underwent a potentially curative treatment, attributed to prolonged survival, reduced recurrence of HCC, and better prognosis of recurrence. Receiving CIK cell immunotherapy may be more cost-effective in real-world clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]