We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Screening for hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with hepatitis C cirrhosis: a cost-utility analysis.
American Journal of Gastroenterology 2003 March
OBJECTIVES: Screening for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is advocated in cirrhotic patients to optimize early detection and treatment. However, the cost-effectiveness is not well defined. Our objective was to perform a cost-utility analysis from a third-party payer's perspective of no screening, alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) concentration measurement alone, abdominal ultrasound (US) and AFP, abdominal three-phase CT and AFP, and abdominal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and AFP.
METHODS: A Markov model was constructed simulating the natural history of hepatitis C-related cirrhosis in a cohort of patients age 50 yr over a time horizon of their remaining life expectancy. Transition probabilities were obtained from published data and U.S. vital statistics. Costs represented Medicare reimbursement data. Costs and health effects were discounted at a 3% annual rate.
RESULTS: Screening with ultrasonography and AFP concentration measurement was associated with an incremental cost-utility ratio of 26,689 US dollars per quality-adjusted life year, whereas screening with abdominal three-phase CT and AFP concentration measurement was associated with an incremental cost-utility ratio of 25,232 US dollars per quality-adjusted life year compared with no screening. Compared with three-phase CT and AFP, magnetic resonance and AFP imaging costs 118,000 US dollars per quality-adjusted life year. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the results are most sensitive to the annual incidence of HCC, proportion of tumors amenable to treatment, and to transplant candidacy, whereas the choice of screening strategy is most sensitive to the test characteristics and cost.
CONCLUSIONS: Screening for HCC with CT is a cost-effective strategy in transplant-eligible patients with cirrhosis secondary to chronic hepatitis C viral (HCV) infection, comparable with other commonly accepted screening interventions such as mammography and colonoscopy.
METHODS: A Markov model was constructed simulating the natural history of hepatitis C-related cirrhosis in a cohort of patients age 50 yr over a time horizon of their remaining life expectancy. Transition probabilities were obtained from published data and U.S. vital statistics. Costs represented Medicare reimbursement data. Costs and health effects were discounted at a 3% annual rate.
RESULTS: Screening with ultrasonography and AFP concentration measurement was associated with an incremental cost-utility ratio of 26,689 US dollars per quality-adjusted life year, whereas screening with abdominal three-phase CT and AFP concentration measurement was associated with an incremental cost-utility ratio of 25,232 US dollars per quality-adjusted life year compared with no screening. Compared with three-phase CT and AFP, magnetic resonance and AFP imaging costs 118,000 US dollars per quality-adjusted life year. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the results are most sensitive to the annual incidence of HCC, proportion of tumors amenable to treatment, and to transplant candidacy, whereas the choice of screening strategy is most sensitive to the test characteristics and cost.
CONCLUSIONS: Screening for HCC with CT is a cost-effective strategy in transplant-eligible patients with cirrhosis secondary to chronic hepatitis C viral (HCV) infection, comparable with other commonly accepted screening interventions such as mammography and colonoscopy.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Catastrophic Antiphospholipid Syndrome: A Review of Current Evidence and Future Management Practices.Curēus 2024 September
Paroxysmal Nocturnal Hemoglobinuria, Pathophysiology, Diagnostics, and Treatment.Transfusion Medicine and Hemotherapy 2024 October
Safety of anaesthesia techniques in patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy: a systematic review with meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials.Anaesthesia 2024 October 22
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app