Cost-effectiveness of hepatitis C virus test-and-treat and risk reduction strategies among men who have sex with men living with HIV in France.

Abstract

Studies suggest that hepatitis C virus (HCV) micro-elimination is feasible among men who have sex with men (MSM) living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), through treatment-as-prevention and interventions aimed at reducing risk behaviours. However, their economic impact is poorly understood. The aim of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of HCV screening and risk reduction strategies in France. A compartmental deterministic mathematical model was developed to describe HCV disease transmission and progression among MSM living with HIV in France. We evaluated different combinations of HCV screening frequency (every 12, 6 or 3 months) and risk reduction strategies (targeting only high-risk or all MSM) from 2021 onwards. The model simulated the number of HCV infections, life-expectancy (LYs), quality-adjusted life-expectancy (QALYs), lifetime costs and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) over a lifetime horizon (leading to an end of the simulation in 2065). All strategies increased QALYs, compared with current practices, that is yearly HCV screening, with no risk reduction. A behavioural intervention resulting in a 20% risk reduction in the high-risk group, together with yearly screening, was the least expensive strategy, and, therefore, cost-saving compared to current practices. The ICER per QALY gained for the strategy combining risk reduction for the high-risk group with 6-month HCV screening, compared to risk reduction with yearly screening, was €61,389. It also prevented 398 new HCV infections between 2021 and 2065, with a cost per infection averted of €37,790. All other strategies were dominated (more expensive and less effective than some other available alternative) or not cost-effective (ICER per QALY gained > €100,000). In the French context, current HCV screening practices without risk reduction among MSM living with HIV cannot be justified on economic grounds. Risk reduction interventions targeted to high-risk individuals-alongside screening either once or twice a year-could be cost-effective depending on the policymaker's willingness-to-pay.