| Title |
Economic evaluation of Zepatier for the management of HCV in the Italian scenario
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
HEPAC Health Economics in Prevention and Care, April 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10198-018-0980-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
F. R. Rolli, M. Ruggeri, F. Kheiraoui, C. Drago, M. Basile, C. Favaretti, A. Cicchetti |
| Abstract |
Hepatitis C virus (HCV) is a major health issue worldwide. New generation of direct-active antiviral medications is an epoch-making turning point in the management of HCV infections. Conducing a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing the combination of elbasvir/grazoprevir and sofosbuvir + pegylated interferon/ribavirin for the management of all HCV patients (even those in the initial stages of fibrosis). A Markov model was built on the natural history of the disease to assess the efficacy of the alternatives. The outcomes are expressed in terms of quality adjusted life-years (QALYs) and result in terms of incremental cost-effectiveness ratio). Elbasvir/grazoprevir implies an expenditure of €21,104,253.74 with a gain of 19,287.90 QALYs and sofosbuvir + pegylated interferon/ribavirin implies an expenditure of €31,904,410.11 with a gain of 18,855.96 QALYs. Elbasvir/grazoprevir is thus a dominant strategy. Consideration should be given to the opportunity cost of not treating patients with a lower degree of fibrosis (F0-F2). |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 16 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 13% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 13% |
| Researcher | 2 | 13% |
| Other | 2 | 13% |
| Unknown | 4 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 31% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 6% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 6% |
| Chemistry | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 6 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 April 2018.
All research outputs
#20,663,600
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from HEPAC Health Economics in Prevention and Care
#1,039
of 1,303 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#265,378
of 339,757 outputs
Outputs of similar age from HEPAC Health Economics in Prevention and Care
#12
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,303 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 339,757 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.