Cost-effectiveness of screening for hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with cirrhosis due to chronic hepatitis C

Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2004 Jun 1;19(11):1159-72. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2036.2004.01963.x.

Abstract

Background: Screening for hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhotic patients using abdominal ultrasonography and alpha-foetoprotein levels is widely practiced.

Aim: To evaluate its cost-effectiveness using a Markov decision model.

Methods: Several screening strategies with abdominal ultrasonography or computerized tomography and serum alpha-foetoprotein at 6-12-month intervals in 40-year-old patients with chronic hepatitis C and compensated cirrhosis were simulated from a societal perspective, resulting in discounted costs per quality-adjusted life-year saved. Extensive sensitivity analysis was performed.

Results: For the least efficacious strategy, annual alpha-foetoprotein/ultrasonography, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (vs. no screening) was $23 043/quality-adjusted life-year. Biannual alpha-foetoprotein/annual ultrasonography, the most commonly used strategy in the United States, was more efficacious, with a cost-effectiveness ratio of $33 083/quality-adjusted life-year vs. annual alpha-foetoprotein/ultrasonography. The most efficacious strategy, biannual alpha-foetoprotein/ultrasonography, resulted in a cost-effectiveness ratio of $73 789/quality-adjusted life-year vs. biannual alpha-foetoprotein/annual ultrasonography. Biannual alpha-foetoprotein/annual computerized tomography screening resulted in a cost-effectiveness ratio of $51 750/quality-adjusted life-year vs. biannual alpha-foetoprotein/annual ultrasonography screening.

Conclusions: Screening for hepatocellular carcinoma is as cost-effective as other accepted screening protocols. Of the strategies evaluated, biannual alpha-foetoprotein/annual ultrasonography gives the most quality-adjusted life-year gain while still maintaining a cost-effectiveness ratio <$50 000/quality-adjusted life-year. Biannual alpha-foetoprotein/annual computerized tomography screening may be cost-effective.

Publication types

  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Carcinoma, Hepatocellular / economics
  • Carcinoma, Hepatocellular / prevention & control*
  • Cost-Benefit Analysis
  • Decision Support Techniques
  • Hepatitis C, Chronic / complications*
  • Hepatitis C, Chronic / economics
  • Humans
  • Liver Cirrhosis / economics
  • Liver Cirrhosis / virology*
  • Liver Neoplasms / economics
  • Liver Neoplasms / prevention & control*
  • Markov Chains
  • Mass Screening / economics*
  • Models, Economic
  • Probability
  • Quality-Adjusted Life Years
  • Sensitivity and Specificity