ArticleHepatology communications2025
Health economic outcomes of a minimal monitoring approach to providing HCV therapy.
Article in Hepatology communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe ACTG A5360 trial demonstrated that HCV treatment without planned on-treatment monitoring is safe and effective. We report the health economic outcomes of MINMON.
methodsA5360 was a 5-country, single-arm trial providing sofosbuvir/velpatasvir to people with HCV infection with no planned clinic visits between treatment initiation and week 24 sustained virologic response (SVR) evaluation. Trial records included planned/and most unplanned lab tests and visits. Participants completed a 4-week recall questionnaire at weeks 0, 24, 48, and 72 reporting hospital nights, emergency department visits, and ambulatory visits. We tabulated consumption and multiplied units of consumption by country-specific cost. We report the cost and cost per SVR of MINMON (2020 US$) from program and health sector perspectives. Sensitivity analyses compared MINMON costs to the standard of care (SoC). We consulted in-country experts to develop country-specific SoC treatment protocols and used micro-costing to estimate their costs. We compare the cost/SVR in MINMON with that of the simulated SoC, varying the expected SVR with the SoC.
resultsMINMON cost/SVR (program perspective) varied by country from $1692/SVR (Thailand) to $27,632/SVR (United States). The cost/SVR (health sector perspective) ranged from $6273/SVR (South Africa) to $123,974/SVR (United States) MINMON had a lower cost/SVR than SoC across broad assumptions about SVR proportions, especially in low- and middle-income countries. In the United States-, MINMON had an appealing cost per cure compared to the SoC, unless retention on treatment fell below the SoC.
conclusionsMINMON is a cost-saving strategy for HCV treatment, particularly in low- and middle-income country settings.
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.