AbstractBackground & AimsThe cost‐effectiveness to screen hepatic fibrosis in at‐risk population as recommended by several professional societies has been limited. This study aimed to investigate the cost‐effectiveness of this screening strategy in the expanded at‐risk population recently proposed by several societies.MethodsA combined model of the decision tree and Markov models was developed to compare expected costs, quality‐adjusted life‐years (QALYs) and incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio (ICER) between screening and no screening groups. The model included liver disease‐related health states and cardiovascular disease (CVD) states as a base‐case analysis. Screening strategy consisted of fibrosis‐4 index (FIB‐4) followed by vibration‐controlled transient elastography (VCTE) and intensive lifestyle intervention (ILI) as a treatment for diagnosed patients.ResultsCost‐effectiveness analysis showed that screening the at‐risk population entailed $298 incremental costs and an additional 0.0199 QALY per patient compared to no screening (ICER $14 949/QALY). Screening was cost‐effective based on the implicit ICER threshold of $25 000/QALY in Korea. When the effects of ILI on CVD and extrahepatic malignancy were incorporated into the cost‐effectiveness model, the ICER decreased by 0.85 times from the base‐case analysis (ICER $12 749/QALY). In contrast, when only the effects of liver disease were considered in the model, excluding cardiovascular disease effects, ICER increased from the baseline case analysis to $16 305. Even when replacing with medical costs in Japan and U.S., it remained cost‐effective with the estimate below the countries' ICER threshold.ConclusionsOur study provides compelling evidence supporting the cost‐effectiveness of FIB‐4‐based screening the at‐risk population for advanced hepatic fibrosis.