Supplementary materials: Cost–effectiveness of switching from tenofovir disoproxil fumarate to tenofovir alafenamide versus entecavir for chronic hepatitis B patients in Greece

These are peer-reviewed supplementary figures and tables for the article 'Cost–effectiveness of switching from tenofovir disoproxil fumarate to tenofovir alafenamide versus entecavir for chronic hepatitis B patients in Greece' published in the Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research.Figure S1: Model overviewFigure S2: One-way sensitivity analyses QALYs (left) and costs (right), base caseTable S1: Probability of HBV DNA levels after 48 weeks on treatment (copies/ml)Table S2: Probability of ALT level after 48 weeks on treatment (IU/ml)Table S3: Probability of HbeAg seroconversion after 48 weeks on treatmentTable S4: HCC Risk Hazard Ratio by ALT NormalizationTable S5: Probability of Achieving ALT NormalizationAim: This study assessed the clinical impact and cost–effectiveness of switching from tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) to either tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) or entecavir (ETV) in a Greek chronic hepatitis B (CHB) population. Patients & methods: A Markov model from the perspective of a third-party payer in Greece quantified the health and economic benefits of switching from TDF to either TAF or ETV over a lifetime horizon. Results: Over a lifetime, patients who switch from TDF to TAF versus patients who switch from TDF to ETV had an overall lower incidence of compensated cirrhosis (0.4% lower), decompensated cirrhosis (0.04% lower) and hepatocellular carcinoma (0.25% lower). Chronic kidney disease and endstage renal disease were also lower in patients who switch to TAF; major osteoporotic fractures were similar for both groups. While total costs were higher for switching from TDF to TAF versus TDF to ETV due to the higher cost of TAF, switching from TDF to TAF versus ETV was cost effective with an incremental cost–effectiveness ratio of €17,113 per quality-adjusted life year. Conclusion: Switching from TDF to TAF in patients living with CHB is a cost effective strategy to reduce adverse liver disease outcomes, while improving bone- and renal-related safety outcomes.

本数据集收录了发表于《比较有效性研究杂志》的论文《从替诺福韦二吡啶酯（TDF）切换至替诺福韦阿法匹林（TAF）或恩替卡韦（ETV）治疗希腊慢性乙型肝炎（CHB）患者的成本-效益分析》的同行评审补充图表和表格。图S1：模型概览；图S2：单方向敏感性分析（QALYs，左侧）和成本（右侧），基准案例；表S1：治疗48周后HBV DNA水平概率（拷贝/毫升）；表S2：治疗48周后ALT水平概率（国际单位/毫升）；表S3：治疗48周后HbeAg血清转换概率；表S4：通过ALT标准化后的HCC风险危害比；表S5：达到ALT正常化的概率。研究目的：本项研究评估了在希腊慢性乙型肝炎患者群体中，从TDF切换至TAF或ETV的疗效影响及成本-效益。研究对象与方法：基于希腊第三方支付者的视角，采用马尔可夫模型量化了从TDF切换至TAF或ETV在终身时间范围内的健康和经济效益。研究结果：在终身范围内，与从TDF切换至ETV的患者相比，从TDF切换至TAF的患者整体上降低了肝硬化（降低0.4%）、失代偿期肝硬化（降低0.04%）和肝细胞癌（降低0.25%）的发病率。在转换为TAF的患者中，慢性肾病和终末期肾病的发生率也较低；两组患者的主要骨质疏松性骨折发生率相似。尽管由于TAF成本较高，从TDF切换至TAF的总成本高于从TDF切换至ETV，但切换至TAF相较于ETV的成本效益更高，增量成本-效益比为每质量调整生命年（QALY）17,113欧元。研究结论：对于患有CHB的患者，从TDF切换至TAF是一种成本效益策略，旨在降低不良肝脏疾病结局，同时改善骨骼和肾脏相关安全性结局。