Dataset Information

Expanding antiretroviral options in resource-limited settings--a cost-effectiveness analysis.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Current World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines for treatment of HIV in resource-limited settings call for 2 antiretroviral regimens. The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of increasing the number of antiretroviral regimens is unknown. METHODS:Using a simulation model, we compared the survival and costs of current WHO regimens with two 3-regimen strategies: an initial regimen of 3 nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors followed by the WHO regimens and the WHO regimens followed by a regimen with a second-generation boosted protease inhibitor (2bPI). We evaluated monitoring with CD4 counts only and with both CD4 counts and viral load. We used cost and effectiveness data from Cape Town and tested all assumptions in sensitivity analyses. RESULTS:Over the lifetime of the cohort, 25.6% of individuals failed both WHO regimens by virologic criteria. However, when patients were monitored using CD4 counts alone, only 6.5% were prescribed additional highly active antiretroviral therapy due to missed and delayed detection of failure. The life expectancy gain for individuals who took a 2bPI was 6.7-8.9 months, depending on the monitoring strategy. When CD4 alone was available, adding a regimen with a 2bPI was associated with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $2581 per year of life gained, and when viral load was available, the ratio was $6519 per year of life gained. Strategies with triple-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor regimens in initial therapy were dominated. Results were sensitive to the price of 2bPIs. CONCLUSIONS:About 1 in 4 individuals who start highly active antiretroviral therapy in sub-Saharan Africa will fail currently recommended regimens. At current prices, adding a regimen with a 2bPI is cost effective for South Africa and other middle-income countries by WHO standards.

SUBMITTER: Bendavid E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2757100 | biostudies-literature | 2009 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Expanding antiretroviral options in resource-limited settings--a cost-effectiveness analysis.

Bendavid Eran E Wood Robin R Katzenstein David A DA Bayoumi Ahmed M AM Owens Douglas K DK

Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999) 20090901 1

<h4>Background</h4>Current World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines for treatment of HIV in resource-limited settings call for 2 antiretroviral regimens. The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of increasing the number of antiretroviral regimens is unknown.<h4>Methods</h4>Using a simulation model, we compared the survival and costs of current WHO regimens with two 3-regimen strategies: an initial regimen of 3 nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors followed by the WHO regimens and the WHO ...[more]

PMID: 19448557

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCryptococcal meningitis (CM) is the most common form of meningitis in Africa. World Health Organization guidelines recommend 14-d amphotericin-based induction therapy; however, this is impractical for many resource-limited settings due to cost and intensive monitoring needs. A cost-effectiveness analysis was performed to guide stakeholders with respect to optimal CM treatment within resource limitations.Methods and findingsWe conducted a decision analysis to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of six CM induction regimens: fluconazole (800-1,200 mg/d) monotherapy, fluconazole + flucytosine (5FC), short-course amphotericin (7-d) + fluconazole, 14-d of amphotericin alone, amphotericin + fluconazole, and amphotericin + 5FC. We computed actual 2012 healthcare costs in Uganda for medications, supplies, and personnel, and average laboratory costs for three African countries. A systematic review of cryptococcal treatment trials in resource-limited areas summarized 10-wk survival outcomes. We modeled one-year survival based on South African, Ugandan, and Thai CM outcome data, and survival beyond one-year on Ugandan and Thai data. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were determined and used to calculate the cost-effectiveness ratio and ICER. The cost of hospital care ranged from $154 for fluconazole monotherapy to $467 for 14 d of amphotericin + 5FC. Based on 18 studies investigating outcomes for HIV-infected individuals with CM in resource-limited settings, the estimated mean one-year survival was lowest for fluconazole monotherapy, at 40%. The cost-effectiveness ratio ranged from $20 to $44 per QALY. Overall, amphotericin-based regimens had higher costs but better survival. Short-course amphotericin (1 mg/kg/d for 7 d) with fluconazole (1,200 mg/d for14 d) had the best one-year survival (66%) and the most favorable cost-effectiveness ratio, at $20.24/QALY, with an ICER of $15.11 per additional QALY over fluconazole monotherapy. The main limitation of this study is the pooled nature of a systematic review, with a paucity of outcome data with direct comparisons between regimens.ConclusionsShort-course (7-d) amphotericin induction therapy coupled with high-dose (1,200 mg/d) fluconazole is "very cost effective" per World Health Organization criteria and may be a worthy investment for policy-makers seeking cost-effective clinical outcomes. More head-to-head clinical trials are needed on treatments for this neglected tropical disease. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary.

Project description:BackgroundThe cost-effectiveness of routine viral load (VL) monitoring of HIV-infected patients on antiretroviral therapy (ART) depends on various factors that differ between settings and across time. Low-cost point-of-care (POC) tests for VL are in development and may make routine VL monitoring affordable in resource-limited settings. We developed a software tool to study the cost-effectiveness of switching to second-line ART with different monitoring strategies, and focused on POC-VL monitoring.MethodsWe used a mathematical model to simulate cohorts of patients from start of ART until death. We modeled 13 strategies (no 2nd-line, clinical, CD4 (with or without targeted VL), POC-VL, and laboratory-based VL monitoring, with different frequencies). We included a scenario with identical failure rates across strategies, and one in which routine VL monitoring reduces the risk of failure. We compared lifetime costs and averted disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs). We calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER). We developed an Excel tool to update the results of the model for varying unit costs and cohort characteristics, and conducted several sensitivity analyses varying the input costs.ResultsIntroducing 2nd-line ART had an ICER of US$1651-1766/DALY averted. Compared with clinical monitoring, the ICER of CD4 monitoring was US$1896-US$5488/DALY averted and VL monitoring US$951-US$5813/DALY averted. We found no difference between POC- and laboratory-based VL monitoring, except for the highest measurement frequency (every 6 months), where laboratory-based testing was more effective. Targeted VL monitoring was on the cost-effectiveness frontier only if the difference between 1st- and 2nd-line costs remained large, and if we assumed that routine VL monitoring does not prevent failure.ConclusionCompared with the less expensive strategies, the cost-effectiveness of routine VL monitoring essentially depends on the cost of 2nd-line ART. Our Excel tool is useful for determining optimal monitoring strategies for specific settings, with specific sex-and age-distributions and unit costs.

Project description:BackgroundThe results of international clinical trials that are assessing when to initiate antiretroviral therapy (ART) will not be available for several years.ObjectiveTo inform HIV treatment decisions about the optimal CD4 threshold at which to initiate ART in South Africa while awaiting the results of these trials.DesignCost-effectiveness analysis by using a computer simulation model of HIV disease.Data sourcesPublished data from randomized trials and observational cohorts in South Africa.Target populationHIV-infected patients in South Africa.Time horizon5-year and lifetime.PerspectiveModified societal.InterventionNo treatment, ART initiated at a CD4 count less than 0.250 x 10(9) cells/L, and ART initiated at a CD4 count less than 0.350 x 10(9) cells/L.Outcome measuresMorbidity, mortality, life expectancy, medical costs, and cost-effectiveness.Results of base-case analysisIf 10% to 100% of HIV-infected patients are identified and linked to care, a CD4 count threshold for ART initiation of 0.350 x 10(9) cells/L would reduce severe opportunistic diseases by 22,000 to 221,000 and deaths by 25,000 to 253,000 during the next 5 years compared with ART initiation at 0.250 x 10(9) cells/L; cost increases would range from $142 million (10%) to $1.4 billion (100%). Either ART initiation strategy would increase long-term survival by at least 7.9 years, with a mean per-person life expectancy of 3.8 years with no ART and 12.5 years with an initiation threshold of 0.350 x 10(9) cells/L. Compared with an initiation threshold of 0.250 x 10(9) cells/L, a threshold of 0.350 x 10(9) cells/L has an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $1200 per year of life saved.Results of sensitivity analysisInitiating ART at a CD4 count less than 0.350 x 10(9) cells/L would remain cost-effective over the next 5 years even if the probability that the trial would demonstrate the superiority of earlier therapy is as low as 17%.LimitationThis model does not consider the possible benefits of initiating ART at a CD4 count greater than 0.350 x 10(9) cells/L or of reduced HIV transmission.ConclusionEarlier initiation of ART in South Africa will probably reduce morbidity and mortality, improve long-term survival, and be cost-effective. While awaiting trial results, treatment guidelines should be liberalized to allow initiation at CD4 counts less than 0.350 x 10(9) cells/L, earlier than is currently recommended.Primary funding sourceNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation.

Project description:BackgroundPoint-of-care CD4 tests at HIV diagnosis could improve linkage to care in resource-limited settings. Our objective is to evaluate the clinical and economic impact of point-of-care CD4 tests compared to laboratory-based tests in Mozambique.Methods and findingsWe use a validated model of HIV testing, linkage, and treatment (CEPAC-International) to examine two strategies of immunological staging in Mozambique: (1) laboratory-based CD4 testing (LAB-CD4) and (2) point-of-care CD4 testing (POC-CD4). Model outcomes include 5-y survival, life expectancy, lifetime costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Input parameters include linkage to care (LAB-CD4, 34%; POC-CD4, 61%), probability of correctly detecting antiretroviral therapy (ART) eligibility (sensitivity: LAB-CD4, 100%; POC-CD4, 90%) or ART ineligibility (specificity: LAB-CD4, 100%; POC-CD4, 85%), and test cost (LAB-CD4, US$10; POC-CD4, US$24). In sensitivity analyses, we vary POC-CD4-specific parameters, as well as cohort and setting parameters to reflect a range of scenarios in sub-Saharan Africa. We consider ICERs less than three times the per capita gross domestic product in Mozambique (US$570) to be cost-effective, and ICERs less than one times the per capita gross domestic product in Mozambique to be very cost-effective. Projected 5-y survival in HIV-infected persons with LAB-CD4 is 60.9% (95% CI, 60.9%-61.0%), increasing to 65.0% (95% CI, 64.9%-65.1%) with POC-CD4. Discounted life expectancy and per person lifetime costs with LAB-CD4 are 9.6 y (95% CI, 9.6-9.6 y) and US$2,440 (95% CI, US$2,440-US$2,450) and increase with POC-CD4 to 10.3 y (95% CI, 10.3-10.3 y) and US$2,800 (95% CI, US$2,790-US$2,800); the ICER of POC-CD4 compared to LAB-CD4 is US$500/year of life saved (YLS) (95% CI, US$480-US$520/YLS). POC-CD4 improves clinical outcomes and remains near the very cost-effective threshold in sensitivity analyses, even if point-of-care CD4 tests have lower sensitivity/specificity and higher cost than published values. In other resource-limited settings with fewer opportunities to access care, POC-CD4 has a greater impact on clinical outcomes and remains cost-effective compared to LAB-CD4. Limitations of the analysis include the uncertainty around input parameters, which is examined in sensitivity analyses. The potential added benefits due to decreased transmission are excluded; their inclusion would likely further increase the value of POC-CD4 compared to LAB-CD4.ConclusionsPOC-CD4 at the time of HIV diagnosis could improve survival and be cost-effective compared to LAB-CD4 in Mozambique, if it improves linkage to care. POC-CD4 could have the greatest impact on mortality in settings where resources for HIV testing and linkage are most limited. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary.

Dataset Information

Expanding antiretroviral options in resource-limited settings--a cost-effectiveness analysis.

Publications

Expanding antiretroviral options in resource-limited settings--a cost-effectiveness analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets