BACKGROUND: Although the current standard of care for controlling anaemia and neutropenia during anti-viral therapy for hepatitis C is to use dose reduction of ribavirin and pegylated interferon, respectively, erythropoietin and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor are now being advocated as alternatives to dose reduction. AIM: To determine the cost-effectiveness of erythropoietin and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor as an alternative to anti-viral dose reduction during antihepatitis C therapy. METHODS: Decision analysis was used to assess cost-effectiveness by estimating the cost of using a growth factor per quality-adjusted life-year gained. RESULTS: Under baseline assumptions, the cost per quality-adjusted life-year of using growth factors ranged from 16,247 US dollars for genotype 1 with neutropenia to 145,468 US dollars for genotype 2/3 patients with anaemia. These findings are sensitive to the relationship between dose reduction and sustained virological response. CONCLUSIONS: Based upon our findings and the varying strength of the evidence for a relationship between dose reduction and sustained virological response: granulocyte colony-stimulating factor may be cost-effective for genotype 1 patients; erythropoietin is probably not cost-effective for genotype 2/3 patients; no conclusion can be reached regarding the cost-effectiveness of erythropoietin for genotype 1 patients or granulocyte colony-stimulating factor for genotype 2/3 patients. Randomized trials are needed to firmly establish the relationship between dose reduction and sustained virological response.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chapko et al. (2006) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: