Skip to main content
Search
Search
Advanced Search
Skip main navigation
Open access
Research Article
28 February 2024

Early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma screening in patients with chronic hepatitis B in China: a cost–effectiveness analysis

Authors: Yuemin Nan, Osvaldo Ulises Garay, Xianzhong Lu, Yue Zhang, Li Xie, Zhongyi Niu, and Wen Chen [email protected]Author Info & Affiliations
Volume 13, Number 4
https://doi.org/10.57264/cer-2023-0146
PDFFormats

Abstract

Aim: To evaluate the cost–effectiveness of seven screening strategies for chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients in China. Methods: A discrete event simulation model combining a decision tree and Markov structure was developed to simulate a CHB cohort aged ≥40 years on a lifetime horizon and evaluate the costs and health outcomes (quality-adjusted life years [QALYs] gained) of ultrasonography (US), alpha-fetoprotein (AFP), protein induced by vitamin K absence-II (PIVKA-II), AFP+US, AFP+PIVKA-II, GAAD (a diagnostic algorithm based on gender and age combined with results of AFP and PIVKA-II) and GAAD+US. Epidemiologic, clinical performance, utility and cost data were obtained from the literature, expert interviews and real-world data. Uncertainties on key parameters were explored through deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (DSA and PSA). Results: Compared with other strategies, GAAD+US detected the most HCC patients at early stage, and GAAD was the screening strategy with the lowest average cost per HCC case diagnosed. Using 3× China's 2022 GDP per capita ($38,233.34) as the threshold, the three strategies of US, GAAD and GAAD+US formed a cost–effectiveness frontier. Screening with US, GAAD, or GAAD+US was associated with costs of $6110.46, $7622.05 and $8636.32, and QALYs of 13.18, 13.48 and 13.52, respectively. The ICER of GAAD over US was $4993.39/QALY and the ICER of GAAD+US over GAAD was $26,691.45/QALY, which was less than 3× GDP per capita. Both DSA and PSA proved the stability of the results. Conclusion: GAAD+US was the most cost-effective strategy for early HCC diagnosis among CHB patients which could be considered as the liver cancer screening scheme for the high-risk population in China.

Supplementary Material

File (supplementary material 1.pdf)
File (supplementary material 2.pdf)
File (supplementary material 3.pdf)

References

Papers of special note have been highlighted as: • of interest
1.
Mittal S, El-Serag HB. Epidemiology of hepatocellular carcinoma: consider the population. J. Clin. Gastroenterol. 47(Suppl.), S2–S6 (2013).
PubMed
Google Scholar
2.
World Health Organisation. Globocan 2020 – All Cancers Factsheet (2020). https://gco.iarc.fr/today/data/factsheets/populations/160-china-fact-sheets.pdf
Google Scholar
3.
Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation. Global Burden of Disease Study 2017 (2023). https://ghdx.healthdata.org/gbd-2017
Google Scholar
4.
Prospective suRveillance for very Early hepatoCellular cARcinoma (PreCar) expert panel. Expert consensus on early screening strategies for liver cancer in China. Zhonghua Gan Zang Bing Za Zhi 29(6), 515–522 (2021).
PubMed
Google Scholar
5.
Lin J, Zhang H, Yu H et al. Epidemiological characteristics of primary liver cancer in Mainland China from 2003 to 2020: a representative multicenter study. Front. Oncol. 12, 906778 (2022).
PubMed
Google Scholar
6.
Allemani C, Matsuda T, Di Carlo V et al. Global surveillance of trends in cancer survival 2000–14 (CONCORD-3): analysis of individual records for 37,513,025 patients diagnosed with one of 18 cancers from 322 population-based registries in 71 countries. Lancet 391(10125), 1023–1075 (2018).
PubMed
Google Scholar
7.
Harris PS, Hansen RM, Gray ME et al. Hepatocellular carcinoma surveillance: an evidence-based approach. World J. Gastroenterol. 25, 1550–1559 (2019).
PubMed
Google Scholar
8.
Balogh J, Victor D 3rd, Asham EH et al. Hepatocellular carcinoma: a review. J. Hepatocell. Carcinoma 3, 41–53 (2016).
PubMed
Google Scholar
9.
Kudo M, Matsui O, Izumi N et al. JSH consensus-based clinical practice guidelines for the management of hepatocellular carcinoma: 2014 update by the Liver Cancer Study Group of Japan. Liver Cancer 3(3–4), 458–468 (2014).
PubMed
Google Scholar
10.
Kudo M. Management of hepatocellular carcinoma in Japan as a world-leading model. Liver Cancer 7(2), 134–147 (2018).
PubMed
Google Scholar
• A world-leading model for the management of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).
11.
National Administration of Disease Control and Prevention. Healthy China Action Cancer Control Implementation Plan (2019–2022) (2017). http://www.nhc.gov.cn/jkj/s5878/201909/2cb5dfb5d4f84f8881897e232b376b60.shtml
Google Scholar
12.
General Office of National Health Commission. Standard for diagnosis and treatment of primary liver cancer (2022 Edition). Infect. Dis. Info. 35(1), 1–26 (2022).
Google Scholar
• Recently published Chinese standards for the diagnosis and treatment of primary liver cancer.
13.
Yang T, Xing H, Wang G et al. A novel online calculator based on serum biomarkers to detect hepatocellular carcinoma among patients with hepatitis B. Clin. Chem. 65(12), 1543–1553 (2019).
PubMed
Google Scholar
14.
He J, Chen W, Shen H et al. China guideline for liver cancer screening (2022, Beijing). J. Clin. Hepatol. 38(8), 1739–1758 (2022).
Google Scholar
• Recent consensus article on liver cancer screening in China.
15.
Tzartzeva K, Obi J, Rich NE et al. Surveillance imaging and alpha fetoprotein for early detection of hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with cirrhosis: a meta-analysis. Gastroenterology 154(6), 1706–1718.e1 (2018).
PubMed
Google Scholar
16.
Piñero F, Dirchwolf M, Pessôa MG. Biomarkers in hepatocellular carcinoma: diagnosis, prognosis and treatment response assessment. Cells 9(6), 1370 (2020).
PubMed
Google Scholar
17.
Huang CF, Sharma A, Yu ML. The clinical utility of Elecsys GAAD score in the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma. 2022 APASL single top conference on hepatocellular carcinoma (2022). https://clinicalvalue.com/the-clinical-utility-of-elecsys-gaad-score-in-the-diagnosis-of-hepatocellular-carcinoma/
Google Scholar
18.
Liu G. China Guidelines for Pharmacoeconomic Evaluations version 2020. China Market Press,Beijing, China (2020).
Google Scholar
19.
Xing H, Zheng YJ, Han J et al. Protein induced by vitamin K absence or antagonist-II versus alpha-fetoprotein in the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Hepatobiliary Pancreat. Dis. Int. 17(6), 487–495 (2018).
PubMed
Google Scholar
20.
Chan HLY, Vogel A, Berg T et al. Performance evaluation of the Elecsys® GAAD assay for the detection of hepatocellular carcinoma across different disease stages and etiologies (2021). https://medically.gene.com/global/en/unrestricted/oncology/ISHVLD-2021/ishvld-2021-poster-chan-performance-evaluation-of-the-e.html
Google Scholar
21.
22.
GBD 2017 Cirrhosis Collaborators. The global, regional, and national burden of cirrhosis by cause in 195 countries and territories, 1990–2017: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. Lancet Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 5(3), 245–266 (2020).
PubMed
Google Scholar
23.
Toy M, Salomon JA, Jiang H et al. Population health impact and cost–effectiveness of monitoring inactive chronic hepatitis B and treating eligible patients in Shanghai, China. Hepatology 60(1), 46–55 (2014).
PubMed
Google Scholar
24.
Mehta N, Sarkar M, Dodge JL et al. Intention to treat outcome of T1 hepatocellular carcinoma with the “wait and not ablate” approach until meeting T2 criteria for liver transplant listing. Liver Transpl. 22(2), 178–187 (2016).
PubMed
Google Scholar
25.
Shanghai Municipal Health Commission. Collection of medical service items and prices of medical institutions in Shanghai (2017). https://wsjkw.sh.gov.cn/ylsfbz/index.html
Google Scholar
26.
Zhang M, Li Y, Wang K et al. cost–effectiveness of anti-tumor associated antigen autoantibody screening for hepatocellular carcinoma in the population with chronic hepatitis B-related cirrhosis. Natl Med. J. China 101(32), 2544–2551 (2021).
Google Scholar
27.
Chongqing Kangzhou Big Data Co., Ltd. YAOZH.COM (2023). https://www.yaozh.com/
Google Scholar
28.
Huang J, Zhu J, Huang H et al. Health utility scores and disability weights of liver cancer and related diseases in China:a systematic review. Chin. J. Evidence Based Med. 18(05), 410–417 (2018).
Google Scholar
29.
Parikh ND, Singal AG, Hutton DW et al. cost–effectiveness of hepatocellular carcinoma surveillance: an assessment of benefits and harms. Am. J. Gastroenterol. 115(10), 1642–1649 (2020).
PubMed
Google Scholar
30.
Thompson Coon J, Rogers G, Hewson P et al. Surveillance of cirrhosis for hepatocellular carcinoma: systematic review and economic analysis. Health Technol. Assess. 11(34), 1–206 (2007).
Google Scholar
31.
Zhao C, Jin M, Le RH et al. Poor adherence to hepatocellular carcinoma surveillance: a systematic review and meta-analysis of a complex issue. Liver Int. 38(3), 503–514 (2018).
PubMed
Google Scholar
32.
Yu X, Cheng W, Wu B et al. Compliance and effectiveness of screening in population with high risk for liver cancer in Xiaolan town, Zhongshan city. Chin. J. Clin. Oncol. 47(7), 350–353 (2020).
Google Scholar
33.
Xu K, Watanabe-Galloway S, Rochling FA et al. Practice, knowledge, and barriers for screening hepatocellular carcinoma among high-risk Chinese patients. Ann. Glob. Health. 83(2), 281–292 (2017).
PubMed
Google Scholar
34.
Xu B, Hu DC, Rosenberg DM et al. Chronic hepatitis B: a long-term retrospective cohort study of disease progression in Shanghai, China. J. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 18(12), 1345–1352 (2003).
PubMed
Google Scholar
35.
Hui AY, Chan HL, Leung NW et al. Survival and prognostic indicators in patients with hepatitis B virus-related cirrhosis after onset of hepatic decompensation. J. Clin. Gastroenterol. 34(5), 569–572 (2002).
PubMed
Google Scholar
36.
Zheng Y, Mao Y. Early diagnosis and treatment to improve 5-year survival rate of liver cancer in China. J. Hepatopancreatobil. Surg. 34(6), 321–324 (2022).
Google Scholar
37.
Qiu Y, Wang C, Gu K et al. cost–effectiveness analysis of community-based screening for high-risk groups of liver cancer in Shanghai from 2002 to 2005. Shanghai J. Prev. Med. 18(11), 533–535 (2006).
Google Scholar
38.
Zhang B, Yang B. cost–effectiveness analysis of primary liver cancer screening. Chin. J. Clin. Med. 6(2), 106–108 (1999).
Google Scholar
39.
Shih ST, Crowley S, Sheu JC. cost–effectiveness analysis of a two-stage screening intervention for hepatocellular carcinoma in Taiwan. J. Formos. Med. Assoc. 109(1), 39–55 (2010).
PubMed
Google Scholar
40.
Garay O, Ambühl LE, Bird TG et al. Cost-utility analysis of Elecsys GAAD algorithm versus ultrasound plus α-fetoprotein (AFP) for HCC surveillance in patients with compensated liver cirrhosis in the United Kingdom (UK). Value Health 25(12), S60 (2022).
Google Scholar
• A UK cost utility analysis showing that, compared with alpha-fetoprotein plus US, screening for HCC using gender, age, AFP and c (PIVKA-II) in patients with compensated cirrhosis is associated with lower cost and higher efficacy.
|