ArticleCost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E2025
A cost-utility analysis of Glecaprevir/Pibrentasvir versus Sofosbuvir/Daclatasvir and Sofosbuvir/Velpatasvir for treatment of hepatitis C in Iran.
Article in Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesNew antiviral medications for hepatitis C can significantly reduce liver disease risk, and decrease mortality rates and associated costs. The cost-effectiveness of Glecaprevir/Pibrentasvir (GLE/PIB) has not yet been compared with other treatments in Iran, although it has demonstrated effectiveness and cost-effectiveness in other countries such as Japan and Brazil. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the cost-effectiveness of Glecaprevir/Pibrentasvir compared with Sofosbuvir/Daclatasvir (SOF/DCV) and Sofosbuvir/Velpatasvir (SOF/VEL) in Iran. MATHERIAL AND
methodsThe analysis was conducted using a Markov model with a one-year cycle in a lifetime horizon from the perspective of the Ministry of Health. Effectiveness was calculated based on Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALY). Costs were based on the direct medical costs (DMC) of Hepatitis C Virus treatment in Iran in 2024. The extraction of effectiveness was based on the results of published valid studies. The extraction of costs was done based on micro-costing and local costing. A cost-effectiveness comparison of the three investigated medication regimens was conducted through incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and Incremental net benefit (INB). Finally, one-way sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) were used to evaluate the uncertainty of the model parameters.
resultsThe study showed that the direct medical costs (DMC) and Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) for GLE/PIB, SOF/DCV, and SOF/VEL were $7505, $5493, $5443, and 21.053, 20.806, and 20.898 QALYs, respectively. The ICER of GLE/PIB compared with SOF/DCV and SOF/VEL was $8138 and 13,282, respectively. The ICER was below the national willingness-to-pay threshold of 18,261 PPP$ (one time the GDP per capita for 2022), indicating that GLE/PIB was a cost-effective treatment. In the sensitivity analysis, the model was most sensitive to some parameters such as the cost of Chronic Hepatitis C (CHC) state for GLE/PIB, the cost of CHC for SOF/VEL, and the Utility of CHC for GLE/PIB and SOF/VEL. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, the probability of GLE/PIB being cost-effective compared to SOF/DCV was 56% and compared with SOF/VEL was 53.7%. The acceptability curve also showed that GLE/PIB was the superior choice in 40.6% of simulations based on differential willingness to pay.
conclusionThe results showed that GLE/PIB is cost-effective compared with the two common medication regimens in Iran, SOF/DCV and SOF/VEL, consistent with Iran's national willingness-to-pay threshold based on one time the GDP per capita, making it a good treatment option for patients with hepatitis C.
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.