ArticleJournal of viral hepatitis2026
An Exploratory Cost-Utility Analysis of Screening and Treating Immigrants in Canada for Hepatitis D.
Article in Journal of viral hepatitis, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Hepatitis D is common among immigrants in Canada, who account for approximately 23% of the population and tend to originate from high-endemic countries. Mortality rates are notably high among those with chronic infections, and immigrants are less likely to engage in screening and treatment services. This paper aims to assess the cost-utility of screening and treating Hepatitis D Virus (HDV)-positive immigrants in Canada compared with a scenario in which no screening is conducted. This analysis takes a public-payer perspective, uses a lifetime time horizon with a 1.5% annual discount rate, and expresses costs in 2023 Canadian dollars. A state-transition model representing the natural progression of chronic hepatitis B and hepatitis D was developed in TreeAge Pro and mapped onto three interventions: screening and treatment with bulevirtide; screening and treatment with pegylated interferon alfa-2a; and screening and treatment with both bulevirtide and pegylated interferon alfa-2a. The analysis was conducted in accordance with the guidelines of Canada's Drug Agency. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was estimated for each intervention. Model sensitivity was performed using both univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. All screening and treatment strategies resulted in a reduction in cases of decompensated cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma and liver death, with combination therapy demonstrating the most favourable outcomes. Nevertheless, HDV screening and treatment with pegylated interferon alfa-2a monotherapy was the only cost-effective strategy (ICER: $23,177/QALY). While monotherapy with pegylated interferon alfa-2a proved cost-effective, combination therapy with bulevirtide is likely more clinically effective and may be cost-effective if treatment costs decrease significantly.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.