Health benefits of antiviral therapy for mild chronic hepatitis C: randomised control trial and economic evaluation

Authors: Wright M, Grieve R, Roberts J, Main J, Thomas HC

Journal: Health Technology Assessment Volume: 10 Issue: 21

Publication date: June 2006

DOI: 10.3310/hta10210

Citation:

Wright M, Grieve R, Roberts J, Main J, Thomas HC.Health benefits of antiviral therapy for mild chronic hepatitis C: randomised control trial and economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess 2006;10(21)


Download: Citation (for this publication as a .ris file) (3.8 KB)


Journal issues* can be purchased by completing the form.


The cost of reports varies according to number of pages and postage address. The minimum cost for a copy sent to a UK address is £30.00. We will contact you on receipt of your completed form to advise you of actual cost. If you have any queries, please contact nihredit@southampton.ac.uk.


*We regret that unfortunately we are unable to supply bound print copies of Health Technology Assessment published before issue 12:31. However, PDFs are available to print from the "Downloads" tab of the issue page.

Responses

No responses have been published. If you would like to submit a response to this publication, please do so using the form below.

Comments submitted to the NIHR Journals Library are electronic letters to the editor. They enable our readers to debate issues raised in research reports published in the Journals Library. We aim to post within 2 working days all responses that contribute substantially to the topic investigated, as determined by the Editors.

Your name and affiliations will be published with your comment.

Once published, you will not have the right to remove or edit your response. The Editors may add, remove, or edit comments at their absolute discretion.

Post your response

Surname

Forename

Middle Initial

Occupation / Job title

Affiliation / Employer

Email

Address

Other authors

For example, if you are responding as a team or group. Please ensure you include full names and separate these using commas

Statement of competing interests

We believe that readers should be aware of any competing interests (conflicts of interest).

The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) define competing interests as including: financial relationships with industry (for example through employment, consultancies, stock, ownership, honoraria, and expert testimony), either directly or through immediate family; personal relationships; academic competition; and intellectual passion.

If yes, provide details below:

Enter response title

Enter response message

Enter CAPTCHA

Security key

Regenerate security key

By submitting your response, you are stating that you agree to the terms & conditions

The full text of this issue is available as a PDF document from the Downloads section on this page.

Abstract

Objectives

To determine whether combined therapy with interferon-alpha and ribavirin was more effective and cost-effective than no treatment for patients with mild chronic hepatitis C.

Design

A multicentre, randomised, controlled, non-blinded trial assessed the efficacy of combination therapy. A Markov model used these efficacy data combined with data on transition probabilities, costs and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) to assess the lifetime cost-effectiveness of the intervention.

Setting

A multicentre NHS setting.

Participants

Treatment-naive, adult patients with histologically mild chronic hepatitis C (Ishak necroinflammatory scores <4 and fibrosis scores <3 on liver biopsy).

Interventions

Patients were randomised to receive interferon-alpha and ribavirin for 48 weeks or no treatment (control).

Main outcome measures

The primary outcome measure was the proportion of patients having a sustained virological response (SVR), measured at 6 months after cessation of therapy. Secondary outcome measures were: the ability of early phase kinetics to predict the eventual outcome of treating mild disease; HRQoL measured using the Short Form 36 and EuroQol (5 Dimensions) questionnaires, and the cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) of interferon-alpha and ribavirin for mild disease compared with no treatment.

Results

In the treatment group, 32 out of 98 patients (33%) achieved an SVR. Patients infected with genotype 1 had a lower SVR than those infected with genotype non-1 (18% versus 49%, p = 0.02). No patients who failed to achieve a 2-log drop in viral load at 12 weeks achieved an SVR. HRQoL fell during treatment and rose with treatment cessation. For patients having an SVR there were modest improvements in HRQoL at 6 months post-treatment. The mean cost per QALY gained was 4535 pounds sterling for 40-year-old patients with genotype non-1 and 25,188 pounds sterling for patients with genotype 1. For patients with genotype 1 aged 65, providing interferon-alpha and ribavirin for mild disease led to fewer QALYs gained, and a mean cost per QALY of 53,017 pounds sterling. The model using efficacy estimates from the literature, showed that the cost per QALY gained from providing pegylated interferon alpha-2b and ribavirin at a mild stage rather than a moderate stage was 7821 pounds sterling for patients with genotype non-1 and 28,409 pounds sterling for patients with genotype 1.

Conclusions

Based on the evidence collected in this study, interferon-alpha and ribavirin treatment for mild chronic hepatitis C patients is in general cost-effective at the 30,000 pounds sterling per QALY threshold previously used by policy-makers in the NHS. For patients with chronic hepatitis C aged 65 or over with genotype 1, antiviral treatment at a mild stage does not appear cost-effective. Further research is required on the cost-effectiveness of pegylated interferon and ribavirin, in particular the intervention's long-term impact on HRQoL and health service costs requires further evaluation. Further research is also needed to develop predictive tests, based on pharmacogenomics, that can identify those cases most likely to respond to antiviral therapy. Liver biopsy before treatment no longer appears justified apart from for older patients (aged 65 or over) with genotype 1. However, further research should monitor the impact this strategy would have on costs and outcomes.

Publication updates

If you would like to receive information on publications and the latest news, click below to sign up.