RT Journal Article SR Electronic T1 Hepatitis C Core Antigen test as an alternative for diagnosing HCV infection: mathematical model and cost-effectiveness analysis JF medRxiv FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press SP 2019.12.12.19014621 DO 10.1101/2019.12.12.19014621 A1 Maryam Sadeghimehr A1 Olivia Keiser A1 Francesco Negro A1 Maia Butsashvili A1 Sonjelle Shilton A1 Irina Tskhomelidze A1 Maia Tsereteli A1 Barbara Bertisch A1 Janne Estill YR 2019 UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2019/12/15/2019.12.12.19014621.abstract AB Background The cost and complexity of polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing is a significant barrier for the diagnosis and treatment of patients infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV). We investigated the cost-effectiveness of various testing strategies using antigen as an alternative to PCR.Methods We developed a mathematical model for HCV to estimate the number of newly diagnosed individuals and cases of different stages of liver disease. We compared the following testing strategies: antibody test followed by PCR in case of positive antibody (baseline strategy); antibody test followed by HCV-antigen test (antibody-antigen); antigen test alone; and PCR test alone. We conducted cost-effectiveness analyses considering the costs of HCV testing (of both infected and uninfected individuals) (A1), liver-related complications (A2) and all costs including HCV treatment (A3). The model was parameterized for the country of Georgia, and several sensitivity analyses were conducted to generalize the findings for different settings.Results Using the current standard of testing, 89% of infected individuals were detected. Comparatively, antibody-antigen and antigen testing alone detected 86% and 88% of infected individuals, respectively. PCR testing alone detected 91% of the infected individuals with the remaining 9% dying or spontaneously recovering before testing. In analysis A1, antibody-antigen testing was not found to be essentially cheaper compared to the baseline strategy. In analysis A2, strategies using PCR were cheaper than antigen-based strategies. In analysis A3, antibody-antigen testing was the cheapest strategy, followed by the baseline strategy, and PCR testing alone.Conclusion Antigen testing, either following a positive antibody test or alone, performed almost as well as the current practice of HCV testing. The cost-effectiveness of these strategies strongly depends on the inclusion of treatment costs.Lay summary Core antigen testing is a reliable alternative test for diagnose HCV infection. Antigen-based strategies may be cost-effective, in particular if treatment costs are considered.HighlightsStrategies using an antigen test to diagnose HCV infection performed reasonably well compared with the traditional antibody- and PCR based approach.According to our study, antigen test alone missed about 3%, and antibody followed by PCR test 2% of HCV infected individuals.The maximum difference in quality-adjusted life expectancy across the different strategies of diagnosing HCV was only one month.Competing Interest StatementThis study was funded by Gilead Switzerland Sarl. The funders had no role in study design, analysis, interpretation of the findings and writing of the article.Funding StatementThis study was funded by Gilead Switzerland Sarl. OK was funded by a professorship grant from the Swiss National Science Foundation (no 163878).Author DeclarationsAll relevant ethical guidelines have been followed; any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained and details of the IRB/oversight body are included in the manuscript.YesAll necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesWe reviewed the literature and contacted persons directly involved in the elimination project in the country of Georgia who helped to interpret already published data.