Reviewer's report
Title:Cost-Effectiveness of Sofosbuvir-Based Treatments for Chronic Hepatitis C
in the US
Version:3Date:24 March 2015
Reviewer: Sergio Iannazzo
Reviewer's report:
The authors improved significantly the manuscript and touched all points raised
in the previous round of revision. Overall I believe that the manuscript is now
acceptable. A few residual concerns remain around the following (minor) points:
1. the abstract is still not entirely clear, especially for what concerns the
description of the comparators tested. I suggest to summarize the information
currently well presented in page 4 rows 159-163 and page 5 rows 164-170
2 . in tables 7.1 and 7.2 I suggest to use the more standard terms "dominant" and
"dominated" rather them "efficient" and "inefficient"
3 . in Figures 1-9 I suggest to avoid representing negative thresholds of $/QALY,
since the interpretation of these can be confusing. Moreover I suggest to present
all charts with the same horizontal scale to improve the comparability and to
avoid to report numbers in the scientific notation, which may be non familiar to all
readers (use instead $ x 1,000 or $ million)
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
'I declare that I have no competing interests
Reviewer's report
Title:Cost-Effectiveness of Sofosbuvir-Based Treatments for Chronic Hepatitis C
in the US
Version:3Date:24 March 2015
Reviewer: Sergio Iannazzo
Reviewer's report:
The authors improved significantly the manuscript and touched all points raised
in the previous round of revision. Overall I believe that the manuscript is now
acceptable. A few residual concerns remain around the following (minor) points:
1. the abstract is still not entirely clear, especially for what concerns the
description of the comparators tested. I suggest to summarize the information
currently well presented in page 4 rows 159-163 and page 5 rows 164-170
2 . in tables 7.1 and 7.2 I suggest to use the more standard terms "dominant" and
"dominated" rather them "efficient" and "inefficient"
3 . in Figures 1-9 I suggest to avoid representing negative thresholds of $/QALY,
since the interpretation of these can be confusing. Moreover I suggest to present
all charts with the same horizontal scale to improve the comparability and to
avoid to report numbers in the scientific notation, which may be non familiar to all
readers (use instead $ x 1,000 or $ million)
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
'I declare that I have no competing interests
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer's report
Title:Cost-Effectiveness of Sofosbuvir-Based Treatments for Chronic Hepatitis C
in the US
Version:3Date:24 March 2015
Reviewer: Sergio Iannazzo
Reviewer's report:
The authors improved significantly the manuscript and touched all points raised
in the previous round of revision. Overall I believe that the manuscript is now
acceptable. A few residual concerns remain around the following (minor) points:
1. the abstract is still not entirely clear, especially for what concerns the
description of the comparators tested. I suggest to summarize the information
currently well presented in page 4 rows 159-163 and page 5 rows 164-170
2 . in tables 7.1 and 7.2 I suggest to use the more standard terms "dominant" and
"dominated" rather them "efficient" and "inefficient"
3 . in Figures 1-9 I suggest to avoid representing negative thresholds of $/QALY,
since the interpretation of these can be confusing. Moreover I suggest to present
all charts with the same horizontal scale to improve the comparability and to
avoid to report numbers in the scientific notation, which may be non familiar to all
readers (use instead $ x 1,000 or $ million)
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
'I declare that I have no competing interests
assistant