Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30288448›Full record

ReviewMDM policy & practice

Population Health and Cost-Effectiveness Implications of a "Treat All" Recommendation for HCV: A Review of the Model-Based Evidence.

Lauren E Cipriano, Jeremy D Goldhaber-Fiebert

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in MDM policy & practice. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. [Hepatitis C elimination among drug users in China: challenges, strategies and experiences].Zhonghua gan zang bing za zhi = Zhonghua ganzangbing zazhi = Chinese journal of hepatology · 2022
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. The Elimination of Hepatitis C as a Public Health Threat.Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in medicine · 2020
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Observational
  19. Review
  20. Economically Efficient Hepatitis C Virus Treatment Prioritization Improves Health Outcomes.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2018
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Lauren E CiprianoIvey Business School and the Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5568-4516
Jeremy D Goldhaber-FiebertCenter for Health Policy and Center for Primary Care and Outcomes Research, Department of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
Stanford University · USWestern University · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The World Health Organization HCV Guideline Development Group is considering a "treat all" recommendation for persons infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV). We reviewed the model-based evidence of cost-effectiveness and population health impacts comparing expanded treatment policies to more limited treatment access policies, focusing primarily on evaluations of all-oral directly acting antivirals published after 2012. Searching PubMed, we identified 2,917 unique titles. Sequentially reviewing titles and abstracts identified 226 potentially relevant articles for full-text review. Sixty-nine articles met all inclusion criteria-42 cost-effectiveness analyses and 30 models of population-health impacts, with 3 articles presenting both types of analysis. Cost-effectiveness studies for many countries concluded that expanding treatment to people with mild liver fibrosis, who inject drugs (PWID), or who are incarcerated is generally cost-effective compared to more restrictive treatment access policies at country-specific prices. For certain patient subpopulations in some countries-for example, elderly individuals without fibrosis-treatment is only cost-effective at lower prices. A frequent limitation is the omission of benefits and consequences of HCV transmission (i.e., treatment as prevention; risks of reinfection), which may underestimate or overestimate the cost-effectiveness of a "treat all" policy. Epidemiologic modeling studies project that through a combination of prevention, aggressive screening and diagnosis, and prompt treatment for all fibrosis stages, it may be possible to virtually eliminate HCV in many countries. Studies show that if resources are not available to diagnose and treat all HCV-infected individuals, treatment prioritization may be needed, with alternative prioritization strategies resulting in tradeoffs between reducing mortality or reducing incidence. Notably, because most new HCV infections are among PWID in many settings, HCV elimination requires unrestricted treatment access combined with injection transmission disruption strategies. The model-based evidence suggests that a properly constructed strategy that substantially expands HCV treatment could achieve cost-effective improvements in population health in many countries.

Indexed as

cost-effectiveness analysisepidemic modelinghepatitis Cinfectious disease controlpatient prioritizationtreatment expansion

Identifiers

PMID30288448
PMCPMC6157435
OpenAlexW2804935335

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.