ArticlePharmacoEconomics2020
Value in Hepatitis C Virus Treatment: A Patient-Centered Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.
Article in PharmacoEconomics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Informing the Equitable Implementation of Hepatitis C Interventions: Cost-Effectiveness Modeling in Rural Populations of People Who Inject Drugs.PharmacoEconomics · 2026Article
- Strengthening Value Assessment and Health Economics and Outcomes Research Proposals Through Patient Engagement: Guidelines for Researchers.The patient · 2026Review
- Towards a Multi-sectoral Approach to Population Health: A Scoping Review of Cross-sectoral Evaluations of Health Interventions.Applied health economics and health policy · 2026Review
- A Proposal for Addressing Bioethical Concerns Along the 10-Step Framework for Community Engagement.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Article
- Development of stakeholder-informed recommendations for inclusion of family spillover effects in health technology assessment.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2024Article
- Current epidemiology of chronic liver disease.Gastroenterology report · 2024Review
- Hepatitis C Screening and Antibody Prevalence Among Newly Arrived Refugees to the United States, 2010-2017.Journal of immigrant and minority health · 2023Article
- Hepatitis C Virus: Insights Into Its History, Treatment, Challenges, and Future Directions.Cureus · 2023Review
- Commentary: Advocating for patient and public involvement and engagement in health economic evaluation.Research involvement and engagement · 2023Article
- A cost-effectiveness study of universal screening for hepatitis C virus infection in South Korea: A societal perspective.Clinical and molecular hepatology · 2022Article
- Contextual Considerations and Recommendations for Estimating the Value of Alzheimer's Disease Therapies.PharmacoEconomics · 2021Article
- Article
- Reduced work absenteeism in patients with hepatitis C treated with second-generation direct-acting antivirals.Journal of viral hepatitis · 2021Article
- Cost-effectiveness of new antiviral treatments for non-genotype 1 hepatitis C virus infection in China: a societal perspective.BMJ global health · 2020Article
- Stakeholder-Engaged Derivation of Patient-Informed Value Elements.The patient · 2020Article
- Changes in Cost-Effectiveness for Chronic Hepatitis C Virus Pharmacotherapy: The Case for Continuous Cost-Effectiveness Analyses.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundInnovations in hepatitis C virus (HCV) therapy included in traditional comparative evaluations focus on sustained virologic response (SVR) without addressing challenges patients report beyond virologic cure. This study aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of HCV drug therapy with a patient-centered approach.
methodsAn individual-based Markov model was constructed using guidance from a stakeholder advisory board (SAB), a patient Delphi panel, and published literature to evaluate direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) compared to no treatment. The United States (US) health sector and societal perspectives were considered for 10- and 20-year time horizons. Inputs for treatment costs and effectiveness reflect a generic regimen. Indirect costs used for the societal model included estimates from self-reported productivity in a matched-control sample. Beyond the traditional quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) health outcome, this study included two novel measures developed from the Delphi panel and SAB: infected life-years and workdays missed. All costs were measured in 2018 US dollars.
resultsHealth sector costs and QALYs were higher in the treatment group in both 10- and 20-year models. Total infected life-years and workdays missed were reduced in the treatment group for both models. When costs of absenteeism, presenteeism, and patient/caregiver time were included, the DAA intervention was cost-saving at both 10 and 20 years. Health sector results were sensitive to drug costs and utility estimates for post-SVR health states. Societal results were sensitive to presenteeism estimates and drug costs.
conclusionTreatment was cost-effective from a health sector perspective and cost-saving when including non-health costs such as patient/caregiver time and productivity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.