You are viewing the site in preview mode

Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 5 Summary of literature relating to the health economic implications of SVR

From: Achieving sustained virologic response in hepatitis C: a systematic review of the clinical, economic and quality of life benefits

Study (setting) Patients Interventions Key findings
Morais et al. 2013 (Brazil) [86] Treatment-naïve patients with genotype 1 with F2 fibrosis in Brazil Boceprevir plus PR and telaprevir plus PR In the public health system cost per SVR was BRL 50,751 for telaprevir plus PR and BRL 63,481 for boceprevir plus PR. In the private health system cost per SVR was BRL 88,508 for telaprevir plus PR and BRL 82,518 for boceprevir plus PR
Backx et al. 2014 (UK) [85] Treated genotype 1 patients Patients treated with PR for a minimum of 2 months For non-cirrhotic patients 5-year post-treatment costs were 13-fold higher for non SVR patients vs. SVR (GBP 2,530 versus GBP 190), and 56-fold higher for non-SVR patients who were retreated (GBP 10,722)
Camma et al. 2012 (Italy) [87] Treatment-naïve HCV genotype 1, aged 50 years with F2 fibrosis Boceprevir- or telaprevir based triple therapy (including RGT) versus pegIFN plus ribavirin alone, time horizon of 20 years ICER per SVR versus pegIFN plus ribavirin was EUR 56,960–85,650 for boceprevir and EUR 74,600–118,000 for telaprevir
Yfantopoulos et al. 2012 (Greece) [88] Treatment-naïve and treatment-experienced HCV genotype 1 Telaprevir-based triple therapy versus boceprevir-based triple therapy In total population, mean cost per SVR was EUR 46,635 for telaprevir and EUR 56,146 for boceprevir. For treatment-naïve population cost per SVR was EUR 38,868 and EUR 42,983, respectively. For treatment-experienced patients cost per SVR was EUR 48,966 and EUR 59,902 respectively. Telaprevir was dominant to boceprevir
Manos et al. 2013 (United States) [89] Chronic HCV patients treated from 2002–2007, excluding pre- and post-liver transplant antiviral treatment PegIFN plus ribavirin In the 5 years following treatment mean yearly total (hospital and outpatient) costs in genotype 1 patients were USD 2,504 higher for non-responders than for patients with SVR (p = 0.042)
  1. HCC, hepatocellular carcinoma; ICER, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio; RGT, response-guided therapy; SVR, sustained virologic response.