Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Compares blood-based biomarkers to ultrasound for HCC surveillance in cirrhosis, highlighting cost-effectiveness implications.
Background: Ultrasound-based surveillance for HCC is limited by suboptimal sensitivity and low adherence. Blood-based biomarkers are potential alternatives for routine HCC surveillance. We aimed to define optimal sensitivity, specificity, and cost parameters under which blood-based biomarkers could serve as cost-effective alternatives in patients with cirrhosis. Methods: We developed a microsimulation model of the natural history of HCC in individuals with compensated cirrhosis. We compared the cost-effectiveness of biannual surveillance using 2 blood-based biomarkers—HES V2.0 and GALAD—versus ultrasound-based surveillance across a range of sensitivity, specificity, test costs, and adherence levels. Outcomes included quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), with a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/QALY. Results: At a $200 test cost, the optimal HES V2.0 performance was 83.8% sensitivity and 62.4% specificity, yielding more QALYs than ultrasound-based surveillance (6790 vs. 6780 per 1000 patients) with an ICER of $27,686/QALY. The optimal GALAD performance was 65.9% sensitivity and 76.4% specificity, yielding a modest QALY increase (6782 vs. 6780 per 1000 patients) with an ICER of $21,374/QALY. HES V2.0 detected more very early-stage HCCs than ultrasound-based surveillance (50.9 vs. 42.4 per 1000 patients) but increased downstream diagnostic imaging, whereas GALAD yielded smaller QALY gains with a moderate increase in diagnostic testing. At specificity ≥80%, neither biomarker was cost-effective, but cost-effectiveness was strongly influenced by adherence and test cost. Conclusions: Blood-based biomarkers such as HES V2.0 and GALAD can be cost-effective alternatives to ultrasound-based HCC surveillance under defined performance and cost conditions. These findings provide quantitative benchmarks to guide clinical evaluation and inform the development of future blood-based strategies for early HCC detection.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sahinkoc et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: