Abstract
Background Health state utility values (HSUVs) identified from utility elicitation studies are widely used in pharmacoeconomic evaluations for chronic hepatitis C (CHC) and are particularly instrumental in health technology assessment (HTA) evaluation like the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE).
Objective The objective of this study is to identify HSUVs used in cost-utility analyses (CUAs) for CHC in Europe and evaluate the impact of HSUVs selection on cost-effectiveness results in terms of incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained (ICER).
Methods A systematic search of pharmacoeconomic evaluations for CHC was updated in Medline and Embase from the period of 2012-2017 to the period of 2017-2020. Data on health states, HSUVs and utility elicitation studies were extracted. The difference in HSUVs of the same health state in different CUAs and the difference between HSUVs of one health state and of the interlink health state in the same CUAs were calculated. A quality assessment was performed to evaluate the selection of HSUVs in CUAs. Sets of HSUVs identified were used in a re-constructed CUA model to assess the impact on ICER.
Results Twenty-six CUAs conducted in European countries and referring to 17 utility elicitation studies were included. The difference in HSUVs of the same health states in different CUAs ranged from 0.021 (liver transplant) to 0.468 (decompensated cirrhosis). The difference between HSUVs of one health state and of the interlink health state of next disease severity level was calculated between health state of F0-F1/mild and F2-F3/moderate (n=11, 0.040 to 0.110), F2-F3/moderate and F4/compensated cirrhosis (n=18, 0.027 to 0.130), compensated cirrhosis and decompensated cirrhosis (n=22, 0.020 to 0.100), decompensated cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma (n=24, 0.000 to 0.200), hepatocellular carcinoma and liver transplant in the first year (n=17, −0.329 to 0.170) and liver transplant in the first year and in subsequent years (n=17, −0.340 to 0.000). The utility elicitation study selected by most CUAs (n=11)was recommended as the source of HSUVs, as least for the CUAs conducted in the UK, based on the results of quality assessment. Seven sets of HSUVs were generated to fit the re-constructed model and changed the results of incremental analysis from being cost-effective to not cost-effective (ICER raging from £2,460 to £24,954 per QALY gained), and to dominated in the UK setting.
Conclusions The CUAs for CHC were found to apply various HSUVs from different utility elicitation studies in the same health state. This variability of HSUVs has the potential to significantly affect ICER and ICER-based reimbursement decision. A rigorous selection of HSUVs in CUAs to inform healthcare resource allocation is suggested for future studies of CUAs and guideline development.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
Not applicable.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Not applicable
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The data relating to the systematic review are all included in the article and/or its supplementary materials. The model used in the study can be made available to researchers upon request.
