RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Hepatitis delta virus (HDV) in conjunction with hepatitis B virus (HBV) increases adult morbidity and mortality. A number of studies have performed cost-benefit analyses for HBV interventions, but they have ignored the impact of HDV on these outcomes. METHODS: Using a mathematical model of HBV-HDV epidemiology, we compare health benefits and cost outcomes of four interventions: testing with HBV adult vaccination (diagnosis), diagnosis with antiviral treatment for HBV infections (mono-infections), diagnosis with antiviral treatment for HBV-HDV infections (dual-infections), and awareness programs. The relationship between optimal levels and outcomes of each of these interventions and HDV prevalence in HBV infected individuals ranging from 0 to 50% is determined. RESULTS: Over a 50 year period under no intervention, HBV prevalence, per capita total cost and death toll increase by 2.25%, -$11 and 2.6-fold respectively in moderate HDV endemic regions compared to mono-infected regions; the corresponding values for high HDV endemic regions are 4.2%, -$21 and 3.9-fold. Optimal interventions can be strategized similarly in mono and dually endemic regions. Only implementation of all four interventions achieves a very low HBV prevalence of around 1.5% in a moderate HDV endemic region such as China, with 2.8 million fewer deaths compared to no intervention. Although the policy of implementation of all four interventions costs additional $382 billion compared to no intervention, it still remains cost-effective with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $1400/QALY. Very high efficacy awareness programs achieve less prevalence with fewer deaths at a lower cost compared to treatment and/or vaccination programs. CONCLUSION: HDV substantially affects the performance of any HBV-related intervention. Its exclusion results in over-estimation of the effectiveness of HBV interventions.