Cost-effectiveness analysis of hepatitis E vaccination strategies among patients with chronic hepatitis B in China

This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of hepatitis E vaccination strategies in chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients.

Based on the societal perspective, the cost-effectiveness of three hepatitis E vaccination strategies-vaccination without screening, screening-based vaccination, and no vaccination-among CHB patients was evaluated using a decision tree-Markov model, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated. Values for treatment costs and health utilities were estimated from a prior investigation on disease burden, and values for transition probabilities and vaccination-related costs were obtained from previous studies and government agencies. Sensitivity analyses were undertaken for assessing model uncertainties.

It was estimated that CHB patients superinfected with hepatitis E virus (HEV) incurred significantly longer disease course, higher economic burden, and more health loss compared to those with HEV infection alone (all p < 0.05). The ICERs of vaccination without screening and screening-based vaccination compared to no vaccination were 41,843.01 yuan/quality-adjusted life year (QALY) and 29,147.32 yuan/QALY, respectively, both lower than China's per-capita gross domestic product (GDP) in 2018. The screening-based vaccination reduced the cost and gained more QALYs than vaccination without screening. One-way sensitivity analyses revealed that vaccine price, vaccine protection rate, and decay rate of vaccine protection had the greatest impact on the cost-effectiveness analysis. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses confirmed the base-case results, and if the willingness-to-pay value reached per-capita GDP, the probability that screening-based vaccination would be cost-effective was approaching 100%.

The disease burden in CHB patients superinfected with HEV is relatively heavy in China, and the screening-based hepatitis E vaccination strategy for CHB patients is the most cost-effective option.