Skip to main content
main-content

01.12.2012 | Research article | Ausgabe 1/2012 Open Access

BMC Health Services Research 1/2012

Cost-effectiveness analysis of different rescue therapies in patients with lamivudine-resistant chronic hepatitis B in China

Zeitschrift:
BMC Health Services Research > Ausgabe 1/2012
Autoren:
Bin Wu, Jinfang Shen, Huafeng Cheng
Wichtige Hinweise

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.​1186/​1472-6963-12-385) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Competing interests

Declaration of personal interests: All authors have nothing to declare. Declaration of funding interests: This work was supported by a grant from the Shanghai Pharmaceutical Association (no. 2010-YY-03), and a grant from Shanghai government (NO.08411951500), and a grant from School of Medecine, Shanghai Jiaotong University (NO.JYY0902).

Authors’ contributions

Dr. BW and JS contributed to conception and design, Dr. HC contributed to analysis and interpretation of the data, Prof. JS contributed to collection and assembly of data. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Abstract

Background

Several rescue therapies have been used in patients with lamivudine (LAM)-resistant chronic hepatitis B (CHB); however, the economic outcome of these therapies is unclear. The object of the current analysis was to evaluate the lifetime cost-effectiveness of rescue therapies among patients with LAM-resistant CHB.

Methods

A Markov model was developed to simulate the clinical course of patients with LAM-resistant CHB. From the perspective of Chinese health care, a lifetime cost-utility analysis was performedfor 4 rescue strategies: adefovir (ADV), entecavir (ETV) or tenofovir (TDF) monotherapy and combination therapy using LAM and ADV. A hypothetical cohort of 45-year-old patients with genotypic or clinical LAM-resistant CHB entered the model, and the beginning health state was LAM-resistant CHB without other complications. The transition probabilities, efficacy and resistance data for each rescue therapy as well as the costs and utility data were estimated from the literature. The discount rate (3%) utilized for costs and benefits. Sensitivity analyses were used to explore the impact of uncertainty on the results.

Results

In LAM-resistant HBeAg-positive and HBeAg-negative CHB cohorts, TDF monotherapy and combination therapy were on the efficiency frontier for both positive and negative populations. Compared with no treatment, the use of combination therapy cost an additional $6,531.7 to gain 1 additional quality-adjusted life year (QALY) for HBeAg-positive patients and $4,571.7 to gain 1 additional QALY for HBeAg-negative patients. TDF monotherapy for HBeAg-positive patients, shows greater increase in QALYs but higher incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) in comparison with combination therapy. In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, combination therapy was the preferred option for health care systems with limited health resources, such as Chinese health care system.

Conclusion

In Chinese patients with LAM-resistant CHB, combination therapy is a more cost-effective option than the competing rescue therapies.
Zusatzmaterial
Authors’ original file for figure 1
12913_2012_2282_MOESM1_ESM.pdf
Authors’ original file for figure 2
12913_2012_2282_MOESM2_ESM.pdf
Authors’ original file for figure 3
12913_2012_2282_MOESM3_ESM.pdf
Authors’ original file for figure 4
12913_2012_2282_MOESM4_ESM.pdf
Authors’ original file for figure 5
12913_2012_2282_MOESM5_ESM.pdf
Authors’ original file for figure 6
12913_2012_2282_MOESM6_ESM.pdf
Literatur
Über diesen Artikel

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2012

BMC Health Services Research 1/2012 Zur Ausgabe