ArticleHealth economics review2026
Value-based price corridor for bepirovirsen in chronic hepatitis B: an early health technology assessment in a cost-compressed setting.
Article in Health economics review, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWe conducted an early health technology assessment (eHTA) of bepirovirsen, an investigational finite-course therapy for chronic hepatitis B. In China, low-cost generic nucleos(t)ide analogues (NAs) create a demanding comparator environment. The value-based price of a potential functional-cure strategy therefore depends on local comparator prices, threshold selection, cure durability, safety, monitoring requirements, and cured-state utility assumptions.
methodsA lifetime Markov model simulated bepirovirsen 300 mg/week for 24 weeks plus background NAs against comparator-specific standard-of-care options. Chinese cost inputs were valued in 2024 renminbi (RMB) and converted to US dollars using the 2024 annual average exchange rate of 7.1957 RMB per US dollar. The base case used a China-context cost-effectiveness threshold (CET) of $13,500 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), approximating China's 2024 gross domestic product (GDP) per capita after currency conversion, and compared it with higher threshold scenarios. Because reliable long-term relapse rates were unavailable, a 48-week maintained-response scenario set bepirovirsen efficacy to 9.0%, corresponding to the B-Clear primary-outcome rate among participants receiving background NA therapy.
resultsBepirovirsen yielded 0.41-0.82 incremental QALYs across standard-of-care comparators. Compared with entecavir (ETV), the base case generated 0.82 additional QALYs, incurred an incremental total cost of $10,833.72 per patient at the value-based price, and avoided 906 hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) cases per 10,000 patients. Under the $13,500/QALY threshold, the value-based price per dose ranged from $92.92 to $367.44 across comparators. In the 48-week maintained-response scenario, the value-based price per dose was $70.29 versus ETV and ranged from $28.62 to $294.24 across comparators. The societal-perspective scenario increased the value-based price per dose to $426.41. Model-cohort expected value of perfect information (EVPI) was $0.46 million at the base-case threshold.
conclusionBepirovirsen's value-based price is conditional on comparator prices, CET selection, durability of hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) seroclearance, safety, monitoring needs, and cured-state utility assumptions. These eHTA results are hypothesis-generating and should be interpreted within the limits of phase II-derived efficacy inputs, uncertain relapse pathways, and adverse-event and monitoring costs that cannot yet be estimated reliably.
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.