Background: The cost and complexity of the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test are barriers to diagnosis and treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. We investigated the cost-effectiveness of testing strategies using antigen instead of PCR testing.

Methods: We developed a mathematical model for HCV to estimate the number of diagnoses and cases of liver disease. We compared the following testing strategies: antibody test followed by PCR in case of positive antibody (baseline strategy); antibody test followed by HCV-antigen test (antibody-antigen); antigen test alone; PCR test alone. We conducted cost-effectiveness analyses considering either the costs of HCV testing of infected and uninfected individuals alone (A1), HCV testing and liver-related complications (A2), or all costs including HCV treatment (A3). The model was parameterized for the country of Georgia. We conducted several sensitivity analyses.

Results: The baseline scenario could detect 89% of infected individuals. Antibody-antigen detected 86% and antigen alone 88% of infected individuals. PCR testing alone detected 91% of the infected individuals: the remaining 9% either died or spontaneously recovered before testing. In analysis A1, the baseline strategy was not essentially more expensive than antibody-antigen. In analysis A2, strategies using PCR became cheaper than antigen-based strategies. In analysis A3, antibody-antigen was again the cheapest strategy, followed by the baseline strategy, and PCR testing alone.

Conclusions: Antigen testing, either following a positive antibody test or alone, performed almost as well as the current practice of HCV testing. The cost-effectiveness of these strategies depends on the inclusion of treatment costs.