Cost-effectiveness of scaling-up HCV prevention and treatment in the United States for people who inject drugs.

AIMS: To examine the cost-effectiveness of hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment of people who inject drugs (PWID), combined with medication-assisted treatment (MAT) and syringe-service programs (SSP), to tackle the increasing HCV epidemic in the United States. DESIGN: HCV transmission and disease progression models with cost-effectiveness analysis using a health-care perspective. SETTING: Rural Perry County, KY (PC) and urban San Francisco, CA (SF), USA. Compared with PC, SF has a greater proportion of PWID with access to MAT or SSP. HCV treatment of PWID is negligible in both settings. PARTICIPANTS: PWID data were collected between 1998 and 2015 from Social Networks Among Appalachian People, U Find Out, Urban Health Study and National HIV Behavioral Surveillance System studies. INTERVENTIONS AND COMPARATOR: Three intervention scenarios modeled: baseline-existing SSP and MAT coverage with HCV screening and treatment with direct-acting antiviral for ex-injectors only as per standard of care; intervention 1-scale-up of SSP and MAT without changes to treatment; and intervention 2-scale-up as intervention 1 combined with HCV screening and treatment for current PWID. MEASUREMENTS: Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) and uncertainty using cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. Benefits were measured in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). FINDINGS: For both settings, intervention 2 is preferred to intervention 1 and the appropriate comparator for intervention 2 is the baseline scenario. Relative to baseline, for PC intervention 2 averts 1852 more HCV infections, increases QALYS by 3095, costs $21.6 million more and has an ICER of $6975/QALY. For SF, intervention 2 averts 36 473 more HCV infections, increases QALYs by 7893, costs $872 million more and has an ICER of $11 044/QALY. The cost-effectiveness of intervention 2 was robust to several sensitivity analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Hepatitis C screening and treatment for people who inject drugs, combined with medication-assisted treatment and syringe-service programs, is a cost-effective strategy for reducing hepatitis C burden in the United States.

Scaling Up Hepatitis C Prevention and Treatment Interventions for Achieving Elimination in the United States: A Rural and Urban Comparison.

In the United States, hepatitis C virus (HCV) transmission is rising among people who inject drugs (PWID). Many regions have insufficient prevention intervention coverage. Using modeling, we investigated the impact of scaling up prevention and treatment interventions on HCV transmission among PWID in Perry County, Kentucky, and San Francisco, California, where HCV seroprevalence among PWID is >50%. A greater proportion of PWID access medication-assisted treatment (MAT) or syringe service programs (SSP) in urban San Francisco (established community) than in rural Perry County (young, expanding community). We modeled the proportion of HCV-infected PWID needing HCV treatment annually to reduce HCV incidence by 90% by 2030, with and without MAT scale-up (50% coverage, both settings) and SSP scale-up (Perry County only) from 2017. With current MAT and SSP coverage during 2017-2030, HCV incidence would increase in Perry County (from 21.3 to 22.6 per 100 person-years) and decrease in San Francisco (from 12.9 to 11.9 per 100 person-years). With concurrent MAT and SSP scale-up, 5% per year of HCV-infected PWID would need HCV treatment in Perry County to achieve incidence targets-13% per year without MAT and SSP scale-up. In San Francisco, a similar proportion would need HCV treatment (10% per year) irrespective of MAT scale-up. Reaching the same impact by 2025 would require increases in treatment rates of 45%-82%. Achievable provision of HCV treatment, alongside MAT and SSP scale-up (Perry County) and MAT scale-up (San Francisco), could reduce HCV incidence.

Estimating State-Level Health Burden of Diabetes: Diabetes-Attributable Fractions for Diabetes Complications.

INTRODUCTION: Limited information is available on the health burden of diabetes at the state level. This study estimated state-specific attributable fractions and the number of cases attributable to diabetes for diabetes-related complications. METHODS: For each state, diabetes-attributable fractions for nine diabetes complications were estimated: three self-reported complications from the 2013 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, hospitalizations with three complications from 2011 to 2014 State Inpatient Databases, and three complications from 2013 Medicare data. Attributable fractions were calculated using RR and diabetes prevalence and the total number of cases using attributable fractions and total number of complications. Adjusted RR of each complication for people with and without diabetes by age and sex was estimated using a generalized linear model. Analyses were conducted in 2015-2016. RESULTS: Median state-level diabetes-attributable fractions for self-reported complications were 0.14 (range, 0.10-0.19) for mobility limitations; 0.13 (range, 0.04-0.21) for limitations in instrumental activities of daily living; and 0.12 (range, 0.06-0.20) for severe visual impairment or blindness. Median state-level diabetes-attributable fractions for diabetes-associated hospitalizations were 0.19 (range, 0.08-0.24) for congestive heart failure; 0.08 (range, 0.02-0.16) for myocardial infarction; and 0.62 (range, 0.46-0.73) for lower extremity amputations. Median state-level diabetes-attributable fractions for complications among Medicare beneficiaries were 0.17 (range, 0.14-0.23) for coronary heart disease; 0.28 (range, 0.24-0.33) for chronic kidney disease; and 0.22 (range, 0.08-0.32) for peripheral vascular disease. CONCLUSIONS: Diabetes carries a significant health burden, and results vary across states. Efforts to prevent or delay diabetes or to improve diabetes management could reduce the health burden because of diabetes.

Projected Costs of Informal Caregiving for Cardiovascular Disease: 2015 to 2035: A Policy Statement From the American Heart Association.

INTRODUCTION: In a recent report, the American Heart Association estimated that medical costs and productivity losses of cardiovascular disease (CVD) are expected to grow from $555 billion in 2015 to $1.1 trillion in 2035. Although the burden is significant, the estimate does not include the costs of family, informal, or unpaid caregiving provided to patients with CVD. In this analysis, we estimated projections of costs of informal caregiving attributable to CVD for 2015 to 2035. METHODS: We used data from the 2014 Health and Retirement Survey to estimate hours of informal caregiving for individuals with CVD by age/sex/race using a zero-inflated binomial model and controlling for sociodemographic factors and health conditions. Costs of informal caregiving were estimated separately for hypertension, coronary heart disease, heart failure, stroke, and other heart disease. We analyzed data from a nationally representative sample of 16 731 noninstitutionalized adults ≥54 years of age. The value of caregiving hours was monetized by the use of home health aide workers' wages. The per-person costs were multiplied by census population counts to estimate nation-level costs and to be consistent with other American Heart Association analyses of burden of CVD, and the costs were projected from 2015 through 2035, assuming that within each age/sex/racial group, CVD prevalence and caregiving hours remain constant. RESULTS: The costs of informal caregiving for patients with CVD were estimated to be $61 billion in 2015 and are projected to increase to $128 billion in 2035. Costs of informal caregiving of patients with stroke constitute more than half of the total costs of CVD informal caregiving ($31 billion in 2015 and $66 billion in 2035). By age, costs are the highest among those 65 to 79 years of age in 2015 but are expected to be surpassed by costs among those ≥80 years of age by 2035. Costs of informal caregiving for patients with CVD represent an additional 11% of medical and productivity costs attributable to CVD. CONCLUSIONS: The burden of informal caregiving for patients with CVD is significant; accounting for these costs increases total CVD costs to $616 billion in 2015 and $1.2 trillion in 2035. These estimates have important research and policy implications, and they may be used to guide policy development to reduce the burden of CVD on patients and their caregivers.

The cost-effectiveness of using chronic kidney disease risk scores to screen for early-stage chronic kidney disease.

BACKGROUND: Better treatment during early stages of chronic kidney disease (CKD) may slow progression to end-stage renal disease and decrease associated complications and medical costs. Achieving early treatment of CKD is challenging, however, because a large fraction of persons with CKD are unaware of having this disease. Screening for CKD is one important method for increasing awareness. We examined the cost-effectiveness of identifying persons for early-stage CKD screening (i.e., screening for moderate albuminuria) using published CKD risk scores. METHODS: We used the CKD Health Policy Model, a micro-simulation model, to simulate the cost-effectiveness of using CKD two published risk scores by Bang et al. and Kshirsagar et al. to identify persons in the US for CKD screening with testing for albuminuria. Alternative risk score thresholds were tested (0.20, 0.15, 0.10, 0.05, and 0.02) above which persons were assigned to receive screening at alternative intervals (1-, 2-, and 5-year) for follow-up screening if the first screening was negative. We examined incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), incremental lifetime costs divided by incremental lifetime QALYs, relative to the next higher screening threshold to assess cost-effectiveness. Cost-effective scenarios were determined as those with ICERs less than $50,000 per QALY. Among the cost-effective scenarios, the optimal scenario was determined as the one that resulted in the highest lifetime QALYs. RESULTS: ICERs ranged from $8,823 per QALY to $124,626 per QALY for the Bang et al. risk score and $6,342 per QALY to $405,861 per QALY for the Kshirsagar et al. risk score. The Bang et al. risk score with a threshold of 0.02 and 2-year follow-up screening was found to be optimal because it had an ICER less than $50,000 per QALY and resulted in the highest lifetime QALYs. CONCLUSIONS: This study indicates that using these CKD risk scores may allow clinicians to cost-effectively identify a broader population for CKD screening with testing for albuminuria and potentially detect people with CKD at earlier stages of the disease than current approaches of screening only persons with diabetes or hypertension.