Skip to main content
Browse Subject Areas

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

  • Loading metrics

Clinical and economic value of sofosbuvir-based regimens in the treatment of chronic hepatitis C in Spain

  • Rafael Esteban ,

    Contributed equally to this work with: Rafael Esteban, Raquel Domínguez-Hernández, Victoria Martín-Escudero, Miguel Ángel Casado

    Roles Conceptualization, Methodology, Validation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

    Affiliations Liver Unit, Hospital Universitari Vall d’Hebron, Barcelona, Spain, CIBERehd, Instituto Carlos III, Barcelona, Spain

  • Raquel Domínguez-Hernández ,

    Contributed equally to this work with: Rafael Esteban, Raquel Domínguez-Hernández, Victoria Martín-Escudero, Miguel Ángel Casado

    Roles Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Methodology, Software, Validation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

    Affiliation Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research Iberia (PORIB), Madrid, Spain

  • Victoria Martín-Escudero ,

    Contributed equally to this work with: Rafael Esteban, Raquel Domínguez-Hernández, Victoria Martín-Escudero, Miguel Ángel Casado

    Roles Conceptualization, Methodology, Validation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

    Affiliation Gilead Sciences, Madrid, Spain

  • Miguel Ángel Casado

    Contributed equally to this work with: Rafael Esteban, Raquel Domínguez-Hernández, Victoria Martín-Escudero, Miguel Ángel Casado

    Roles Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Methodology, Validation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

    Affiliation Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research Iberia (PORIB), Madrid, Spain



The treatment of chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) with direct-acting antivirals has undergone a spectacular revolution and added significant value to healthcare systems and patients. The aim of the study was to evaluate the efficiency and value of Sofosbuvir (SOF)-based regimens for a target population of 85,959 chronic HCV patients treated in Spain during 2015–2019, compared to previous therapeutic strategies (peginterferon/ and ribavirin in double/triple therapy with telaprevir or boceprevir).


A previously developed lifetime Markov model was adapted to simulate the disease HCV evolution. In SOF-based regimens, all patients (100%) were treated regardless with sustained virological response (SVR) of 93–98%, obtained from real-world data. In previous therapeutic, only ≥F2 patients were treated according to clinical practice (38%) with an average SVR of 61% taken from published literature. The value was measured as clinical and economic impact in terms of avoided HCV-related mortality and liver complications; total costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) applying an annual 3% discount rate.


Compared to previous therapeutic, during lifetime, SOF-based regimens reduced decompensated cirrhosis by 89%, hepatocellular carcinoma by 77% and liver transplant by 84%, decreasing the cost associated to liver complications management in €770 million. SOF-based regimens also decreased liver-related mortality by 82%. Besides, SOF-based regimens gained 310,765/QALYs, saving €274 million (considering drugs, monitoring, and HCV management).


For Spain, SOF-based regimens offer value for HCV patients in terms of lowering HCV-related liver disease burden and generating significant cost savings for the health system, contributing to the WHO goal.


Approximately 58 million people worldwide have chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection [WHO]. In its chronic phase, the disease can cause serious long-term liver complications such as cirrhosis, liver cancer, and even the need for a liver transplant [1], being one of the most common causes of liver mortality and morbidity [2, 3]. In addition, it represents a significant economic burden on health systems, associated not only with the cost of complications and liver transplantation [4, 5] but also with the high comorbidity, the use of concomitant medication in young patients (> 45 years) [6] and extrahepatic manifestations [79].

The availability direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) since 2015 has changed the paradigm of chronic hepatitis C (CHC) treatment. Sofosbuvir was the first DAA used in the therapeutic arsenal. With previous therapies based on pegylated interferon (PEG-IFN) in combination with double or triple therapy with telaprevir or boceprevir, survival virological response (SVR) rates were low, depending on the genotype, and not all patients had access to treatment or required long follow-up [10]. The new DAAs based on sofosbuvir provide important clinical benefits, with a high effectiveness (SVR12> 95%), which leads to a reduction in mortality, an improvement in liver function, a delay in the appearance or the disappearance of cirrhotic complications (ascites, hypertension reduction) and even prevention of liver transplantation in some cases [1113]. They have a shorter duration of administration than previous regimens, with good tolerance, and cause fewer adverse effects [14]. In addition, they have allowed the early treatment of the disease, since they can be given from mild initial stages of fibrosis (F0-F4), even more, the sofosbuvir/velpatasvir with or without voxilaprevir regimens are pangenotypic, and the simplification in their administration has facilitated access to treatment for more patients [15]. Likewise, the use of DAAs has led to a decrease in the prevalence of HCV viremia in recent years [16], although there are still certain population groups, such as injected drug users, with high prevalence. The use of DAAs, in conjunction with other prevention and detection interventions, has produced a reduction in HCV transmission [17].

The emergence of DAAs also motivated the WHO to set the goal of eliminating hepatitis C, proposing to reduce new infections by 90% and mortality by 65% by 2030 [18]. Given the public health problem posed by hepatitis C, in Spain in 2015 the Strategic Plan for the Approach to Hepatitis C (PEAHC) was established. Since then, the creation by various organs not only of clinical guidelines for the assessment and use of new therapies but also of strategies and recommendations that promote the diagnosis of the disease [15, 19, 20] has made it possible to detect hidden infections and treat them. Therefore, based on the evolution of treatment so far and based on the benefits of DAAs, Spain could be one of the first countries to achieve the elimination of hepatitis C [21].

The objective of this analysis was to evaluate the clinical and economic value of sofosbuvir-based regimens (SOF-regimens) as therapy for CHC during the period between 2015 and 2019 compared to previous therapeutic strategies in Spain.


An economic evaluation was performed through modelling to evaluate the efficiency of sofosbuvir-based regimens (SOF-regimens) in patients with CHC, comparing two treatment alternatives: SOF-regimens (Harvoni®, Epclusa®, Vosevi®, and Sovaldi® in combination with daclatasvir or simeprevir) compared to previous therapeutic strategies (PEG-IFN and ribavirin in double or triple therapy with telaprevir or boceprevir). The target population, 85,959 patients, was obtained from the total population of chronic patients treated with SOF-based therapies during 2015–2019 in Spain [22, 23].

For the analysis, we adapted a previously validated and published Markov model that simulated the annual progression of chronic patients through the different health states of the disease (mild, moderate and advanced fibrosis; SVR; decompensated cirrhosis; hepatocellular carcinoma; liver transplant; and posttransplant) until death [4]. To perform the simulation, the same parameters on transition probabilities, utility values and costs of each health state were used as those included in the published model (S1 Table in S1 File) [4]. The values of mortality by all causes and by hepatic causes were updated according to the latest data published in Spain [24].

Patients, who had a mean age of 45 years [22], were incorporated into the model annually (35% for 2015, 23% for 2016, 19% for 2017, 13% for 2018 and 10% for 2019), distributed by fibrosis states from F0 to F4. This distribution varied annually according to the year of treatment [22] (Table 1), with the percentage of cirrhotic patients ranging from 14–50% [22]. With SOF regimens, 100% of patients are treated regardless of their fibrosis status (F0-F4). The SVR rates of these regimens, obtained from real-world studies, varied between 93.8 and 98.5% [2530]. With the previous therapeutic strategies, following clinical guidelines, only patients in states ≥F2 have access to treatment, representing 38% of the total target population (9,800 per year) [31]. The average SVRs for these strategies were derived from published studies (60.6–61.2%) [4, 5] (Table 1). Untreated patients progress in the simulation according to the natural history of the disease.

The direct health costs associated with each strategy included the average pharmacological cost (€16,023, SOF-regimens obtained from real-world data; €15,003, previous therapeutic strategies [4], the cost of treatment monitoring (€264, SOF-regimens [32]; between €2,371 and €2,466€, previous therapeutic strategies [4] and the costs of disease management, common by both strategies [4]. The total cost was the sum of the three costs. All costs were updated to 2020, according to the interannual variation of the published Consumer Price Index [33].

The value of the SOF-regimens was evaluated based on the comparison of both strategies from the perspective of the National Health System (NHS). The results are shown for a time horizon of the entire life of the patients in clinical terms (mortality and hepatic complications avoided), economic (costs associated with hepatic complications) and efficiency (total costs and quality-adjusted life-years, QALYs). An annual discount rate of 3% was applied to all results [34].

In addition, a monetary estimate was made of the social value of the QALY gain [35] obtained from the most effective alternative compared to the least effective. The calculations were performed by multiplying the total number of incremental QALYs by the willingness to pay, taking into account different efficiency thresholds: 20,000, 25,000 and 30,000 euros per QALY [36, 37].

Additionally, to evaluate the robustness of the results of the analysis, univariate and multivariate deterministic sensitivity analyses (DSA) were performed by modifying the most significant parameters. The univariate DSA included: the SVR rate for DAAs (95%) (DSA1) [22] and for previously therapies (55.0–75.2%) (DSA2) [45], DAAs costs (±20%) (DSA3), previously therapies (±20%) (DSA4) the cost of treatment monitoring (± 20%) (DSA5) and the variation of the discount rate (0% and 5%) [36] (DSA6). Multivariate DSA parameters were [45], utility values (DSA7) [45] and health costs associated with each health (±20%) (DSA8).


Compared with the previous therapeutic strategies, during the entire time horizon of the analysis, SOF-regimens decreased hepatic mortality by 82% (-15,810 cases). Cases of decompensated cirrhosis were reduced by 89% (-14,372), cases of hepatocellular carcinoma by 77% (-9,473) and patients who would need a liver transplant by 84% (-1,878) (Fig 1). In economic terms, there was a cost savings associated with these hepatic complications of € 770 million with the use of SOF-regimens compared to previous therapeutic strategies (Fig 2).

Fig 1. Number of clinical events and reduction in clinical events cases between both strategies for the total cohort.

DC, decompensate cirrhosis; HCC, hepatocellular carcinoma; LT, liver transplant.

Fig 2. Liver-related complications cost for the total cohort.

DC, decompensate cirrhosis; HCC, hepatocellular carcinoma; LT, liver transplant.

The results of the cost-effectiveness analysis in which the SOF-regimens were compared with the previous therapeutic strategies showed an increase in the entire cohort of 310,765 QALYs and a savings of 274 million euros (Fig 3).

Fig 3. Cost-effectiveness results for the total cohort.

SOF, sofosbuvir; QALYs, Quality-adjusted life years.

The monetary value of the increase in QALYs achieved with the SOF-regimens in the total population of patients treated compared to previous therapeutic strategies, using the number of incremental QALYs and considering an availability to pay between €20,000 and €30,000 per QALY gained, ranged between 6,215 and 9,323 million euros. With the SOF-regimens, a return on investment of between €4.5 and €6.8 would be obtained for each euro invested, considering a cost per QALY gained between € 20,000–30,000.

The sensitivity analyses showed that the results described above were robust. The QALYs values ranged between 306,207 and 964,856 additional QALYs, and the incremental cost ranged between 175 and 1,272 million euros. The parameter with the greatest influence on the QALYs results were utility values and SVR rates of both treatments. The parameter with the greatest influence on the results of total costs were drug and management costs. The discount rate was the parameter with the greatest impact on both clinical and economical results. The variation in QALYs and total costs when each parameter is changed with the maximum and minimum values were shown in S2 Table in S1 File.


Hepatitis C is a global public health problem with a significant clinical burden associated with its morbidity and mortality, which generates high costs to the health system. The advent of DAAs, including SOF-regimens, and the involvement of different health agents to achieve the objectives of the WHO have allowed the treatment and cure of a large number of patients with CHC. Therefore, our analysis evaluated the clinical and economic benefits of patients treated with SOF-regimens between the years 2015 and 2019 in Spain.

The analysis shows that treatment with SOF-regimens achieves significant clinical and economic benefits. The obtaining of such high SVR rates compared to previous therapeutic strategies is reflected in the decrease in cases of liver decompensation, hepatocellular carcinoma and indications for liver transplants, in addition to liver mortality. Likewise, this decrease in the clinical burden associated with liver complications leads to a reduction in the economic burden, producing substantial savings for the NHS. In addition, the use of SOF-regimens compared to previous therapeutic strategies is cost-effective, resulting in greater effectiveness measured in QALYs and a reduction in total costs.

The analysis shows the efficiency of the SOF-regimens in a real cohort of patients already treated. Together with the clinical characteristics and response rates obtained from clinical practice and evaluated by official bodies, our findings give robustness to the results in the form of an actual estimate. In addition, these results highlight the effort made by health organizations and professionals to treat and cure the greatest number of patients with CHC.

Other studies that have analysed the efficiency of DAAs have shown similar results of health outcomes, showing that they are greater than those yielded by previous therapies and that DAA treatment would reduce the costs of the disease, generating savings in the cost of health care and improving long-term health [4, 5, 38, 39].

The present analysis has some limitations. One of them derives from the inclusion of direct health costs exclusively, without considering the evaluation of the impact of the use of SOF-regimens on productivity and absence from work, compared to previous therapeutic strategies. Other studies evaluating the indirect costs associated with DAAs have shown that their use generates an increase in productivity and less absence from work [40, 41]. In our analysis, these costs were not included, but they are of great importance in the evaluation of the disease as a whole, and their inclusion would have generated a greater benefit. Subsequent studies should evaluate the indirect costs linked to increased productivity and reduced absence from work, in addition to direct cost savings. Another limitation is that the comorbidity associated with hepatitis C generates a series of extrahepatic manifestations not considered in this analysis. There are studies that show that the use of DAAs reduces the risk of suffering hepatitis C comorbidities and their costs [7, 8]. Their inclusion would have benefited the strategy based on the SOF-regimens since these regimens have a lower comorbidity burden than previous therapies, which would have decreased their cost.

On the other hand, it should be noted that the use of DAAs has contributed to the elimination of hepatitis C in Spain. The diversity of measures implemented to favour the detection and diagnosis of hidden infections, such as point-of-care and one-step diagnosis, among others, have made it possible to increase screening and access to treatment.


Treatment with regimens based on SOF has achieved a significant reduction in long-term clinical events and mortality due to HCV, which contributes to the objectives of the WHO of eliminating hepatitis C. In addition, treatment with SOF- regimens reduces the economic burden of the disease and generates significant savings for the NHS.


  1. 1. World Health Organization. Hepatitis C. [cited 16 Nov 2020].
  2. 2. Paik JM, Golabi P, Younossi Y, Mishra A, Younossi ZM. Changes in the Global Burden of Chronic Liver Diseases From 2012 to 2017: The Growing Impact of NAFLD. Hepatology. 2020;72: 1605–1616. pmid:32043613
  3. 3. GBD 2015 Maternal Mortality Collaborators. Global, regional, and national levels of maternal mortality, 1990–2015: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015. Lancet. 2016;388: 1775–1812. pmid:27733286
  4. 4. Turnes J, Domínguez-Hernández R, Casado MÁ. Cost-effectiveness analysis of two treatment strategies for chronic hepatitis C before and after access to direct-acting antivirals in Spain. Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2017;40: 433–446. pmid:28645446
  5. 5. Turnes J, Domínguez-Hernández R, Casado MÁ. Value and innovation of direct-acting antivirals: long-term health outcomes of the strategic plan for the management of hepatitis C in Spain. Rev Esp Enferm Dig. 2017;109: 809–817. pmid:29152988
  6. 6. Sicras-Mainar A, Navarro-Artieda R, Sáez-Zafra M. Comorbidity, concomitant medication, use of resources and healthcare costs associated with chronic hepatitis C virus carriers in Spain. Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018;41: 234–244. pmid:29287992
  7. 7. Cacoub P, Buggisch P, Carrión JA, Cooke GS, Zignego AL, Beckerman R, et al. Direct medical costs associated with the extrahepatic manifestations of hepatitis C infection in Europe. J Viral Hepat. 2018;25: 811–817. pmid:29476572
  8. 8. Flores-Chávez A, Carrion JA, Forns X, Ramos-Casals M. Extrahepatic manifestations associated with Chronic Hepatitis C Virus Infection. Rev Esp Sanid Penit. 2017;19: 87–97. pmid:29364334
  9. 9. Younossi Z, Park H, Henry L, Adeyemi A, Stepanova M. Extrahepatic Manifestations of Hepatitis C: A Meta-analysis of Prevalence, Quality of Life, and Economic Burden. Gastroenterology. 2016;150: 1599–1608. pmid:26924097
  10. 10. Giménez-Manzorro Á, García-González X, Rodríguez-González CG, Ochoa-Palominos A, Sanjurjo-Sáez M, Clemente-Ricote G. [Cost-effectiveness and safety of telaprevir and boceprevir for chronic hepatitis C in real-world clinical practice]. Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2015;38: 575–582. pmid:26321320
  11. 11. Sahakyan Y, Lee-Kim V, Bremner KE, Bielecki JM, Krahn MD. Impact of direct-acting antiviral regimens on mortality and morbidity outcomes in patients with chronic hepatitis c: Systematic review and meta-analysis. J Viral Hepat. 2021;28: 739–754. pmid:33556225
  12. 12. Simmons B, Saleem J, Heath K, Cooke GS, Hill A. Long-Term Treatment Outcomes of Patients Infected With Hepatitis C Virus: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Survival Benefit of Achieving a Sustained Virological Response. Clin Infect Dis. 2015;61: 730–740. pmid:25987643
  13. 13. Foster GR, Irving WL, Cheung MCM, Walker AJ, Hudson BE, Verma S, et al. Impact of direct acting antiviral therapy in patients with chronic hepatitis C and decompensated cirrhosis. J Hepatol. 2016;64: 1224–1231. pmid:26829205
  14. 14. Ramos H, Linares P, Badia E, Martín I, Gómez J, Almohalla C, et al. Interferon-free treatments in patients with hepatitis C genotype 1–4 infections in a real-world setting. World J Gastrointest Pharmacol Ther. 2017;8: 137–146. pmid:28533924
  15. 15. Calleja JL, Macias J, Forns X, Garcia F, Berenguer M, Garcia Deltoro M, et al. Guidelines on treatment of hepatitis C virus infection. Spanish Association for the Study of the Liver (AEEH). Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018;41: 597–608. pmid:30270150
  16. 16. Rodríguez-Tajes S, Domínguez Á, Carrión JA, Buti M, Quer JC, Morillas RM, et al. Significant decrease in the prevalence of hepatitis C infection after the introduction of direct acting antivirals. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2020;35: 1570–1578. pmid:31957902
  17. 17. Heffernan A, Cooke GS, Nayagam S, Thursz M, Hallett TB. Scaling up prevention and treatment towards the elimination of hepatitis C: a global mathematical model. Lancet. 2019;393: 1319–1329. pmid:30704789
  18. 18. World Health Organization. (2016). Global health sector strategy on viral hepatitis 2016–2021. Towards ending viral hepatitis. [cited 16 Nov 2020]. World Health Organization.
  19. 19. Ghany MG, Morgan TR, AASLD-IDSA Hepatitis C Guidance Panel. Hepatitis C Guidance 2019 Update: American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases-Infectious Diseases Society of America Recommendations for Testing, Managing, and Treating Hepatitis C Virus Infection. Hepatology. 2020;71: 686–721. pmid:31816111
  20. 20. European Association for the Study of the Liver. Electronic address:, Clinical Practice Guidelines Panel: Chair:, EASL Governing Board representative:, Panel members: EASL recommendations on treatment of hepatitis C: Final update of the series☆. J Hepatol. 2020;73: 1170–1218. pmid:32956768
  21. 21. Polaris Observatory Collaborators. The case for simplifying and using absolute targets for viral hepatitis elimination goals. J Viral Hepat. 2021;28: 12–19. pmid:32979881
  22. 22. Patients starting treatment for chronic hepatitis C with direct-acting antivirals. Ministerio de Sanidad. [cited 14 Dec 2019].
  23. 23. Gilead Sciences. Data on file 2018–2019.
  24. 24. Instituto Nacional de Estadística (INE). INEbase / Sociedad /Salud /Estadística de defunciones según la causa de muerte / Resultados. In: INE [Internet]. [cited 14 Dec 2019].
  25. 25. Asselah T. Daclatasvir plus sofosbuvir for HCV infection: an oral combination therapy with high antiviral efficacy. J Hepatol. 2014;61: 435–438. pmid:24816173
  26. 26. Calleja JL, Crespo J, Rincón D, Ruiz-Antorán B, Fernandez I, Perelló C, et al. Effectiveness, safety and clinical outcomes of direct-acting antiviral therapy in HCV genotype 1 infection: Results from a Spanish real-world cohort. J Hepatol. 2017;66: 1138–1148. pmid:28189751
  27. 27. Dolatimehr F, Karimi-Sari H, Rezaee-Zavareh MS, Alavian SM, Behnava B, Gholami-Fesharaki M, et al. Combination of sofosbuvir, pegylated-interferon and ribavirin for treatment of hepatitis C virus genotype 1 infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Daru. 2017;25: 11. pmid:28427463
  28. 28. Llaneras J, Riveiro-Barciela M, Lens S, Diago M, Cachero A, García-Samaniego J, et al. Effectiveness and safety of sofosbuvir/velpatasvir/voxilaprevir in patients with chronic hepatitis C previously treated with DAAs. J Hepatol. 2019;71: 666–672. pmid:31203153
  29. 29. Mangia A, Piazzolla V, Giannelli A, Visaggi E, Minerva N, Palmieri V, et al. SVR12 rates higher than 99% after sofosbuvir/velpatasvir combination in HCV infected patients with F0-F1 fibrosis stage: A real world experience. PLoS One. 2019;14: e0215783. pmid:31091254
  30. 30. Yee BE, Nguyen NH, Jin M, Lutchman G, Lim JK, Nguyen MH. Lower response to simeprevir and sofosbuvir in HCV genotype 1 in routine practice compared with clinical trials. BMJ Open Gastroenterol. 2016;3: e000056. pmid:26966547
  31. 31. Razavi H, Waked I, Sarrazin C, Myers RP, Idilman R, Calinas F, et al. The present and future disease burden of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection with today’s treatment paradigm. J Viral Hepat. 2014;21 Suppl 1: 34–59. pmid:24713005
  32. 32. García-Herola A, Domínguez-Hernández R, Casado MÁ. Clinical and economic impact of an alert system in primary care for the detection of patients with chronic hepatitis C. PLoS One. 2021;16: e0260608. pmid:34928962
  33. 33. Instituto Nacional de Estadística. Cálculo de variaciones del Indice de Precios de Consumo. In: INE [Internet]. [cited 14 Dec 2019].
  34. 34. López Bastida J, Oliva J, Antoñanzas F, García-Altés A, Gisbert R, Mar J, et al. [A proposed guideline for economic evaluation of health technologies]. Gac Sanit. 2010;24: 154–170. pmid:19959258
  35. 35. Van Nuys K, Brookmeyer R, Chou JW, Dreyfus D, Dieterich D, Goldman DP. Broad Hepatitis C Treatment Scenarios Return Substantial Health Gains, But Capacity Is A Concern. Health Aff (Millwood). 2015;34: 1666–1674. pmid:26438742
  36. 36. Sacristán JA, Oliva J, Campillo-Artero C, Puig-Junoy J, Pinto-Prades JL, Dilla T, et al. [What is an efficient health intervention in Spain in 2020?]. Gac Sanit. 2020;34: 189–193. pmid:31558385
  37. 37. Vallejo-Torres L, García-Lorenzo B, Serrano-Aguilar P. Estimating a cost-effectiveness threshold for the Spanish NHS. Health Econ. 2018;27: 746–761. pmid:29282798
  38. 38. Mennini FS, Marcellusi A, Robbins Scott S, Montilla S, Craxi A, Buti M, et al. The impact of direct acting antivirals on hepatitis C virus disease burden and associated costs in four european countries. Liver Int. 2021;41: 934–948. pmid:33529499
  39. 39. Mar J, Ibarrondo O, Martínez-Baz I, Juanbeltz R, San Miguel R, Casado I, et al. Economic evaluation of a population strategy for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C with direct-acting antivirals. Rev Esp Enferm Dig. 2018;110: 621–628. pmid:30032627
  40. 40. Oliva-Moreno J, Peña-Longobardo LM, Alonso S, Fernández-Bolaños A, Gutiérrez ML, Hidalgo-Vega Á, et al. Labour productivity losses caused by premature death associated with hepatitis C in Spain. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2015;27: 631–637. pmid:25853930
  41. 41. Younossi Z, Brown A, Buti M, Fagiuoli S, Mauss S, Rosenberg W, et al. Impact of eradicating hepatitis C virus on the work productivity of chronic hepatitis C (CH-C) patients: an economic model from five European countries. J Viral Hepat. 2016;23: 217–226. pmid:26482680