Gloria Woo

Tenofovir and entecavir are the most effective antiviral agents for chronic hepatitis B: a systematic review and Bayesian meta-analyses.

BACKGROUND & AIMS The relative efficacies of licensed antiviral therapies for treatment-naive chronic hepatitis B (CHB) infection in randomized controlled trials have not been determined. We evaluated the relative efficacies of the first 12 months of CHB treatments. METHODS Drugs evaluated were lamivudine, pegylated interferon, adefovir, entecavir, telbivudine, and tenofovir, as monotherapies and combination therapies, in treatment-naive individuals. Databases were searched for randomized controlled trials of the first 12 months of therapy in hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg)-positive and/or HBeAg-negative patients with CHB published in English before October 31, 2009. Bayesian mixed treatment comparisons were used to calculate the odds ratios, including 95% credible intervals and predicted probabilities of surrogate outcomes to determine the relative effects of each treatment. RESULTS In HBeAg-positive patients, tenofovir was most effective in inducing undetectable levels of HBV DNA (predicted probability, 88%), normalization of alanine aminotransferase (ALT) levels (66%), HBeAg seroconversion (20%), and hepatitis B surface antigen loss (5%); it ranked third in histologic improvement of the liver (53%). Entecavir was most effective in improving liver histology (56%), second for inducing undetectable levels of HBV DNA (61%) and normalization of ALT levels (70%), and third in loss of hepatitis B surface antigen (1%). In HBeAg-negative patients, tenofovir was the most effective in inducing undetectable levels of HBV DNA (94%) and improving liver histology (65%); it ranked second for normalization of ALT levels (73%). CONCLUSIONS In the first year of treatment for CHB, tenofovir and entecavir are the most potent oral antiviral agents for HBeAg-positive patients; tenofovir is most effective for HBeAg-negative patients.

Hepatitis B Virus Screening Before Chemotherapy for Lymphoma: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

PURPOSE Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation is a potentially fatal complication of chemotherapy that can be largely prevented with antiviral prophylaxis. It remains unclear whether HBV screening is cost effective. METHODS A decision model was developed to compare the clinical outcomes, costs, and cost effectiveness of three HBV screening strategies for patients with lymphoma before R-CHOP (rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone) chemotherapy: screen all patients for hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg; Screen-All), screen patients identified as being at high risk for HBV infection (Screen-HR), and screen no one (Screen-None). Patients testing positive were administered antiviral therapy until 6 months after completion of chemotherapy. Those not screened were initiated on antiviral therapy only if HBV hepatitis occurred. Probabilities of HBV and lymphoma outcomes were derived from systematic literature review. A third-party payer perspective was adopted, costs were expressed in 2011 Canadian dollars, and a 1-year time horizon was used. RESULTS Screen-All was the dominant strategy. It was least costly at

Cost-effectiveness analyses of hepatitis A vaccine: a systematic review to explore the effect of methodological quality on the economic attractiveness of vaccination strategies.

32,589, compared with

Cost effectiveness of screening immigrants for hepatitis B.

32,598 for Screen-HR and

Health State Utilities and Quality of Life in Patients with Hepatitis B

32,657 for Screen-None. It was also associated with the highest 1-year survival rate at 84.99%, compared with 84.96% for Screen-HR and 84.86% for Screen-None. The analysis was sensitive to the prevalence of HBsAg positivity in the low-risk population, with Screen-HR becoming least costly when this value was ≤ 0.20%. CONCLUSION In patients receiving R-CHOP for lymphoma, screening all patients for HBV reduces the rate of HBV reactivation (10-fold) and is less costly than screening only high-risk patients or screening no patients.

Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Implantable Venous Access Device Insertion Using Interventional Radiologic versus Conventional Operating Room Methods in Pediatric Patients with Cancer

Cost-effectiveness/cost-utility studies of hepatitis A vaccine were identified via a series of literature searches (MEDLINE, EMBASE, HSTAR and SSCI). Citations and full-text articles were reviewed independently by two reviewers. Reference searching, author searches and expert consultation ensured literature saturation. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were abstracted for base-case analyses, converted to

The Cost and Public Health Burden of Invasive Meningococcal Disease Outbreaks: A Systematic Review

US, year 2005 values, and categorised to reflect various levels of cost effectiveness. Quality of reporting, methodological issues and key modelling issues were assessed using frameworks published in the literature.Thirty-one cost-effectiveness studies (including 12 cost-utility analyses) were included from full-text article review (n = 58) and citation screening (n = 570). These studies evaluated universal mass vaccination (n = 14), targeted vaccination (n = 17) and vaccination of susceptibles (i.e. individuals initially screened for antibody and, if susceptible, vaccinated) [n = 13]. For universal vaccination, 50% of the ICERs were <

Disease burden of chronic hepatitis B among immigrants in Canada.

US20 000 per QALY or life-year gained. Analyses evaluating vaccination in children, particularly in high incidence areas, produced the most attractive ICERs. For targeted vaccination, cost effectiveness was highly dependent on the risk of infection.Incidence, vaccine cost and discount rate were the most influential parameters in sensitivity analyses. Overall, analyses that evaluated the combined hepatitis A/hepatitis B vaccine, adjusted incidence for under-reporting, included societal costs and that came from studies of higher methodological quality tended to have more attractive cost-effectiveness ratios. Methodological quality varied across studies. Major methodological flaws included inappropriate model type, comparator, incidence estimate and inclusion/exclusion of costs.

How much are we spending? The estimation of research expenditures on cardiovascular disease in Canada.

Background: The prevalence of chronic hepatitis B (CHB) infection among the immigrants of North America ranges from 2 to 15%, among whom 40% develop advanced liver disease. Screening for hepatitis B surface antigen is not recommended for immigrants.

Estimating the payoffs from cardiovascular disease research in Canada: an economic analysis.

BACKGROUND The effect of chronic hepatitis B (CHB) infection on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and health state utilities has not been well characterized. OBJECTIVE To measure utility scores and HRQoL across disease states associated with CHB infection. METHODS Patients attending four tertiary care clinics for CHB were approached between July 2007 and March 2009. Respondents completed version 2 of the Short-Form 36 Health Survey, the EQ5D, a visual analogue scale, the Health Utilities Index Mark 3, standard gamble, and demographics and risk factor surveys in English, Cantonese or Mandarin. Charts were reviewed to determine disease stage and comorbidities. RESULTS A total of 433 patients were studied: 294 had no cirrhosis; 79 had compensated cirrhosis; seven had decompensated cirrhosis; 23 had hepatocellular carcinoma; and 30 had received a liver transplant. The mean standard gamble utilities for these disease states were 0.89, 0.87, 0.82, 0.84 and 0.86, respectively. HRQoL scores in noncirrhotic patients were similar to those of the general population. Scores of patients with compensated cirrhosis were not significantly lower; however, patients with decompensated cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma had significantly lower HRQoL scores compared with noncirrhotic patients (P<0.05). Similar scores were observed among patients on and off oral antiviral treatment. Post-liver transplant patients had a higher HRQoL than patients with decompensated cirrhosis. Age, number of comorbidities and relationship status were significantly associated with HRQoL scores. CONCLUSIONS HRQoL in CHB patients is only impaired in the later stages of liver disease. Neither CHB infection nor antiviral treatment is associated with a lower quality of life.