Background
Pakistan has a hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection prevalence of 6-9% and aims to achieve World Health Organization (WHO) targets for elimination of HCV by the year 2030 through scaling HCV diagnosis and accelerating access to care. The clinical and economic benefits of various HCV testing strategies have not yet been evaluated in Pakistan.
Objective
To evaluate the potential cost-effectiveness of a reference laboratory-based (CEN) confirmatory testing approach vs a molecular near-patient point-of-care (POC) confirmatory approach to screen the general population for HCV in Pakistan.
Methods
We developed a decision-analytic model comparing HCV testing under two scenarios: screening with an anti-HCV antibody test (Anti-HCV) followed by either POC nucleic acid testing (NAT) (Anti-HCV-POC), or reference laboratory NAT (Anti-HCV-CEN), using data from published literature, the Pakistan Ministry of Health, and expert judgment. Outcome measures included: number of HCV infections identified per year, percentage of individuals correctly classified, total costs, average costs per individual tested, and cost-effectiveness. Sensitivity analysis was also performed.
Results
At a national level for a tested population of 25 million, the Anti-HCV-CEN strategy would identify 142,406 more HCV infections in one year and increase correct classification of individuals by 0.57% compared with the Anti-HCV-POC strategy. The total annual cost of HCV testing was reduced using the Anti-HCV-CEN strategy by $7.68 million ($0.31 per person). Thus, incrementally, the Anti-HCV-CEN strategy costs less and identifies more HCV infections than Anti-HCV-POC.
Conclusions
Anti-HCV-CEN would provide the best value for money when scaling up HCV testing in Pakistan.