Open Access Highly Accessed Research article

Boceprevir for previously untreated patients with chronic hepatitis C Genotype 1 infection: a US-based cost-effectiveness modeling study

Shannon Allen Ferrante1*, Jagpreet Chhatwal23, Clifford A Brass14, Antoine C El Khoury1, Fred Poordad5, Jean-Pierre Bronowicki6 and Elamin H Elbasha1

Author Affiliations

1 Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., Whitehouse Station, NJ, USA

2 Department of Health Policy and Management, University of Pittsburgh Graduate School of Public Health, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

3 Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

4 Novartis, East Hanover, NJ, USA

5 Hepatology and Liver Transplantation, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA

6 INSERM 954, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nancy, Université de Lorraine, 54500 Vandoeuvre les Nancy, France

For all author emails, please log on.

BMC Infectious Diseases 2013, 13:190  doi:10.1186/1471-2334-13-190

Published: 27 April 2013

Abstract

Background

SPRINT-2 demonstrated that boceprevir (BOC), an oral hepatitis C virus (HCV) nonstructural 3 (NS3) protease inhibitor, added to peginterferon alfa-2b (P) and ribavirin (R) significantly increased sustained virologic response rates over PR alone in previously untreated adult patients with chronic HCV genotype 1. We estimated the long-term impact of triple therapy vs. dual therapy on the clinical burden of HCV and performed a cost-effectiveness evaluation.

Methods

A Markov model was used to estimate the incidence of liver complications, discounted costs (2010 US$), quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of three treatment strategies for treatment-naïve patients with chronic HCV genotype 1. The model simulates the treatment regimens studied in SPRINT-2 in which PR was administered for 4 weeks followed by: 1) placebo plus PR for 44 weeks (PR48); 2) BOC plus PR using response guided therapy (BOC/RGT); and 3) BOC plus PR for 44 weeks (BOC/PR48) and makes projections within and beyond the trial. HCV-related state-transition probabilities, costs, and utilities were obtained from previously published studies. All costs and QALYs were discounted at 3%.

Results

The model projected approximately 38% and 43% relative reductions in the lifetime incidence of liver complications in the BOC/RGT and BOC/PR48 regimens compared with PR48, respectively. Treatment with BOC/RGT is associated with an incremental cost of $10,348 and an increase of 0.62 QALYs compared to treatment with PR48. Treatment with BOC/PR48 is associated with an incremental cost of $35,727 and an increase of 0.65 QALYs compared to treatment with PR48. The ICERs were $16,792/QALY and $55,162/QALY for the boceprevir-based treatment groups compared with PR48, respectively. The ICER for BOC/PR48 compared with BOC/RGT was $807,804.

Conclusion

The boceprevir-based regimens used in the SPRINT-2 trial were projected to substantially reduce the lifetime incidence of liver complications and increase the QALYs in treatment-naive patients with hepatitis C genotype 1. It was also demonstrated that boceprevir-based regimens offer patients the possibility of experiencing great clinical benefit with a shorter duration of therapy. Both boceprevir-based treatment strategies were projected to be cost-effective at a reasonable threshold in the US when compared to treatment with PR48.

Keywords:
Cost-effectiveness; Economic evaluation; Hepatitis c virus; Boceprevir