Community-based prevention of hepatitis-B-related liver cancer: Australian insights.

PROBLEM: Although most primary hepatocellular cancers (HCCs) are attributable to chronic viral hepatitis and largely preventable, such cancers remain a leading cause of cancer-related mortality wherever chronic hepatitis B is endemic. APPROACH: Many HCCs could be prevented by increasing awareness and knowledge of hepatitis B, optimizing the monitoring of chronic hepatitis B and using antiviral treatments - but there are gaps in the implementation of such strategies. LOCAL SETTING: The "B Positive" programme, based in Sydney, Australia, is designed to improve hepatitis-B-related health outcomes among immigrants from countries with endemic hepatitis B. The programme offers information about disease screening, vaccination and treatment options, as well as optimized access to care. RELEVANT CHANGES: The B Positive programme has been informed by economic modelling. The programme offers culturally tailored education on chronic hepatitis B to target communities and their health practitioners and regular follow-up through a population-based registry of cases. LESSONS LEARNT: As the costs of screening for chronic hepatitis B and follow-up are relatively low and less than one in every four cases may require antiviral drugs, optimizing access to treatment seems an appropriate and cost-effective management option. The identification and accurate staging of cases and the judicious use of antiviral medications are predicated upon an informed and educated health workforce. As establishing community trust is a lengthy process, delaying the implementation of programmes against chronic hepatitis B until antiviral drugs become cheaper is unwarranted.

Cost of treating chronic hepatitis B: comparison of current treatment guidelines.

AIM: To compare program costs of chronic hepatitis B (CHB) screening and treatment using Australian and other published CHB treatment guidelines. METHODS: Economic modeling demonstrated that in Australia a strategy of hepatocellular cancer (HCC) prevention in patients with CHB is more cost-effective than current standard care, or HCC screening. Based upon this model, we developed the B positive program to optimize CHB management of Australians born in countries of high CHB prevalence. We estimated CHB program costs using the B positive program algorithm and compared them to estimated costs of using the CHB treatment guidelines published by the Asian-Pacific, American and European Associations for the Study of Liver Disease (APASL, AASLD, EASL) and those suggested by an independent United States hepatology panel. We used a Markov model that factored in the costs of CHB screening and treatment, individualized by viral load and alanine aminotransferase levels, and calculated the relative costs of program components. Costs were discounted by 5% and calculated in Australian dollars (AUD). RESULTS: Using the B positive algorithm, total program costs amount to 13,979,224 AUD, or 9634 AUD per patient. The least costly strategy is based upon using the AASLD guidelines, which would cost 34% less than our B positive algorithm. Using the EASL and the United States Expert Group guidelines would increase program costs by 46%. The largest expenditure relates to the cost of drug treatment (66.9% of total program costs). The contribution of CHB surveillance (20.2%) and HCC screening and surveillance (6.6%) is small--and together they represent only approximately a quarter of the total program costs. CONCLUSION: The significant cost variations in CHB screening and treatment using different guidelines are relevant for clinicians and policy makers involved in designing population-based disease control programs.

Using a population-based approach to prevent hepatocellular cancer in New South Wales, Australia: effects on health services utilisation.

BACKGROUND: Australians born in countries where hepatitis B infection is endemic are 6-12 times more likely to develop hepatocellular cancer (HCC) than Australian-born individuals. However, a program of screening, surveillance and treatment of chronic hepatitis B (CHB) in high risk populations could significantly reduce disease progression and death related to end-stage liver disease and HCC. Consequently we are implementing the B Positive pilot project, aiming to optimise the management of CHB in at-risk populations in south-west Sydney. Program participants receive routine care, enhanced disease surveillance or specialist referral, according to their stage of CHB infection, level of viral load and extent of liver injury. In this paper we examine the program's potential impact on health services utilisation in the study area. METHODS: Estimated numbers of CHB infections were derived from Australian Bureau of Statistics data and applying estimates of HBV prevalence rates from migrants' countries of birth. These figures were entered into a Markov model of disease progression, constructing a hypothetical cohort of Asian-born adults with CHB infection. We calculated the number of participants in different CHB disease states and estimated the numbers of GP and specialist consultations and liver ultrasound examinations the cohort would require annually over the life of the program. RESULTS: Assuming a 25% participation rate among the 5,800 local residents estimated to have chronic hepatitis B infection, approximately 750 people would require routine follow up, 260 enhanced disease surveillance and 210 specialist care during the first year after recruitment is completed. This translates into 5 additional appointments per year for each local GP, 25 for each specialist and 420 additional liver ultrasound examinations. CONCLUSIONS: While the program will not greatly affect the volume of local GP consultations, it will lead to a significant increase in demand for specialist services. New models of CHB care may be required to aid program implementation and up scaling the program will need to factor in additional demands on health care utilisation in areas of high hepatitis B sero-prevalence.

Antiviral therapy for hepatitis B-related liver cancer prevention is more cost-effective than cancer screening.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: In Australia, Asian-born populations are 6-12 times more likely to develop hepatocellular cancer (HCC) than Australian-born individuals. We therefore, modelled the consequences of different management strategies for chronic hepatitis B (CHB) in Asian-born adults aged > or = 35 years. METHODS: A Markov model compared (1) enhanced surveillance for HCC alone (HCC surveillance), or (2) enhanced HCC surveillance coupled with CHB treatment (HCC prevention) to the current practice, of low CHB treatment uptake. Patients were stratified and managed according to risk categories, based upon hepatitis B virus (HBV) viral load and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) levels. We measured costs, health outcomes [cases of HCC and deaths averted, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained] and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). RESULTS: HCC surveillance would cost on average AU$8479 per person, compared to AU$2632 with current clinical practice and result in a gain of 0.014 QALYs (AU$401,516/QALY gained). A HCC prevention strategy would cost on average AU$14,600 per person, result in 0.923 QALYs gained (AU$12,956/QALY gained), reduce cases of cirrhosis by 52%, HCC diagnoses by 47% and CHB-related deaths by 56%, compared to current practice. CONCLUSIONS: HCC prevention appears to be a cost-effective public health strategy in at-risk populations in Australia and is preferable to HCC surveillance as a cancer control strategy.