Cost-effectiveness of genotype testing for primary resistance in Brazil.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objective
HIV genotype-resistance testing can help identify more effective antiretroviral treatment (ART) regimens for patients, substantially increasing the likelihood of viral suppression and immune recovery. We sought to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of genotype-resistance testing before first-line ART initiation in Brazil.Design
We used a previously published microsimulation model of HIV disease (CEPAC-International) and data from Brazil to compare the clinical impact, costs, and cost-effectiveness of initial genotype testing (Genotype) with no initial genotype testing (No genotype).Methods
Model parameters were derived from the HIV Clinical Cohort at the Evandro Chagas Clinical Research Institute and from published data, using Brazilian sources whenever possible. Baseline patient characteristics included 69% male, mean age of 36 years (SD, 10 years), mean CD4 count of 347 per microliter (SD, 300/µL) at ART initiation, annual ART costs from 2012 US $1400 to US $13,400, genotype test cost of US $230, and primary resistance prevalence of 4.4%. Life expectancy and costs were discounted 3% per year. Genotype was defined as "cost-effective" compared with No Genotype if its incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was less than 3 times the 2012 Brazilian per capita GDP of US $12,300.Results
Compared with No genotype, Genotype increased life expectancy from 18.45 to 18.47 years and reduced lifetime cost from US $45,000 to $44,770; thus, in the base case, Genotype was cost saving. Genotype was cost-effective at primary resistance prevalence as low as 1.4% and remained cost-effective when subsequent-line ART costs decreased to 30% of baseline value. Cost-inefficient results were observed only when simultaneously holding multiple parameters to extremes of their plausible ranges.Conclusions
Genotype-resistance testing in ART-naive individuals in Brazil will improve survival and decrease costs and should be incorporated into HIV treatment guidelines in Brazil.
SUBMITTER: Luz PM
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4294967 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundNew screening technologies and vaccination against human papillomavirus (HPV), the necessary cause of cervical cancer, may impact optimal approaches to prevent cervical cancer. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of alternative screening strategies to inform cervical cancer prevention guidelines in Norway.MethodsWe leveraged the primary epidemiologic and economic data from Norway to contextualise a simulation model of HPV-induced cervical cancer. The current cytology-only screening was compared with strategies involving cytology at younger ages and primary HPV-based screening at older ages (31/34+ years), an option being actively deliberated by the Norwegian government. We varied the switch-age, screening interval, and triage strategies for women with HPV-positive results. Uncertainty was evaluated in sensitivity analysis.ResultsCurrent cytology-only screening was less effective and more costly than strategies that involve switching to primary HPV testing in older ages. For unvaccinated women, switching at age 34 years to primary HPV testing every 4 years was optimal given the Norwegian cost-effectiveness threshold ($83,000 per year of life saved). For vaccinated women, a 6-year screening interval was cost-effective. When we considered a wider range of strategies, we found that an earlier switch to HPV testing (at age 31 years) may be preferred.ConclusionsStrategies involving a switch to HPV testing for primary screening in older women is expected to be cost-effective compared with current recommendations in Norway.
| S-EPMC3341862 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundInherited genetic variants can modify the cancer-chemopreventive effect of aspirin. We evaluated the clinical and economic value of genotype-guided aspirin use for colorectal cancer chemoprevention in average-risk individuals.MethodsA decision analytical model compared genotype-guided aspirin use versus no genetic testing, no aspirin. The model simulated 100,000 adults ≥50 years of age with average colorectal cancer and cardiovascular disease risk. Low-dose aspirin daily starting at age 50 years was recommended only for those with a genetic test result indicating a greater reduction in colorectal cancer risk with aspirin use. The primary outcomes were quality-adjusted life-years (QALY), costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).ResultsThe mean cost of using genotype-guided aspirin was $187,109 with 19.922 mean QALYs compared with $186,464 with 19.912 QALYs for no genetic testing, no aspirin. Genotype-guided aspirin yielded an ICER of $66,243 per QALY gained, and was cost-effective in 58% of simulations at the $100,000 willingness-to-pay threshold. Genotype-guided aspirin was associated with 1,461 fewer polyps developed, 510 fewer colorectal cancer cases, and 181 fewer colorectal cancer-related deaths. This strategy prevented 1,078 myocardial infarctions with 1,430 gastrointestinal bleeding events, and 323 intracranial hemorrhage cases compared with no genetic testing, no aspirin.ConclusionsGenotype-guided aspirin use for colorectal cancer chemoprevention may offer a cost-effective approach for the future management of average-risk individuals.ImpactA genotype-guided aspirin strategy may prevent colorectal cancer, colorectal cancer-related deaths, and myocardial infarctions, while minimizing bleeding adverse events. This model establishes a framework for genetically-guided aspirin use for targeted chemoprevention of colorectal cancer with application toward commercial testing in this population.
| S-EPMC8172453 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background:The prevalence of pre-treatment drug resistance (PDR) to non-nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) agents is increasing in sub-Saharan Africa, which may decrease the effectiveness of efavirenz-based antiretroviral therapy (ART) programs. However, due to recent safety concerns, there has been hesitancy to replace efavirenz-based ART with dolutegravir in women of reproductive potential. Our objective was to evaluate whether PDR testing for women not initiating dolutegravir-based ART would be a cost-effective strategy to address the challenges posed by PDR. Methods:We developed an HIV drug resistance model that simulates the emergence and transmission of resistance mutations, calibrated to the Kenyan epidemic. We modeled three care strategies for PDR testing among women not initiating dolutegravir-based ART: no PDR testing, PDR testing with a low-cost point mutation assay, known as oligonucleotide ligation assay (OLA), and PDR testing with consensus sequencing. Using a health sector perspective, this model was used to evaluate the health outcomes, lifetime costs, and cost-effectiveness under each strategy over a 15-year time horizon starting in 2019. Findings:OLA and CS PDR testing were projected to have incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) of $10,741/QALY gained and $134,396/QALY gained, respectively, which are not cost-effective by national income standards. Viral suppression rates among women at 12 months after ART initiation were 87·8%, 89·0%, and 89·3% with no testing, OLA testing, and CS testing, respectively. PDR testing with OLA and CS were associated with a 0.5% and 0.6% reduction in incidence rate compared to no PDR testing. Initial PDR prevalence among women was 13.1% in 2019. By 2034, this prevalence was 17·6%, 17·4%, and 17·3% with no testing, OLA testing, and CS testing, respectively. Interpretation:PDR testing for women is unlikely to be cost-effective in Kenya whether one uses a low-cost assay, such as OLA, or consensus sequencing. Funding:National Institutes of Health, Gilead Sciences.
| S-EPMC7256304 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Recent Phase 2b dengue vaccine trials have demonstrated the safety of the vaccine and estimated the vaccine efficacy with further trials underway. In anticipation of vaccine roll-out, cost-effectiveness analysis of potential vaccination policies that quantify the dynamics of disease transmission are fundamental to the optimal allocation of available doses. We developed a dengue transmission and vaccination model and calculated, for a range of vaccination costs and willingness-to-pay thresholds, the level of vaccination coverage necessary to sustain herd-immunity, the price at which vaccination is cost-effective and is cost-saving, and the sensitivity of our results to parameter uncertainty. We compared two vaccine efficacy scenarios, one a more optimistic scenario and another based on the recent lower-than-expected efficacy from the latest clinical trials. We found that herd-immunity may be achieved by vaccinating 82% (95% CI 58-100%) of the population at a vaccine efficacy of 70%. At this efficacy, vaccination may be cost-effective for vaccination costs up to US$ 534 (95% CI $369-1008) per vaccinated individual and cost-saving up to $204 (95% CI $39-678). At the latest clinical trial estimates of an average of 30% vaccine efficacy, vaccination may be cost-effective and cost-saving at costs of up to $237 (95% CI $159-512) and $93 (95% CI $15-368), respectively. Our model provides an assessment of the cost-effectiveness of dengue vaccination in Brazil and incorporates the effect of herd immunity into dengue vaccination cost-effectiveness. Our results demonstrate that at the relatively low vaccine efficacy from the recent Phase 2b dengue vaccine trials, age-targeted vaccination may still be cost-effective provided the total vaccination cost is sufficiently low.
| S-EPMC3755607 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AbstractThe first approved dengue vaccine, CYD-TDV, a chimeric, live-attenuated, tetravalent dengue virus vaccine, was recently licensed in 13 countries, including Brazil. In light of recent vaccine approval, we modeled the cost-effectiveness of potential vaccination policies mathematically based on data from recent vaccine efficacy trials that indicated that vaccine efficacy was lower in seronegative individuals than in seropositive individuals. In our analysis, we investigated several vaccination programs, including routine vaccination, with various vaccine coverage levels and those with and without large catch-up campaigns. As it is unclear whether the vaccine protects against infection or just against disease, our model incorporated both direct and indirect effects of vaccination. We found that in the presence of vaccine-induced indirect protection, the cost-effectiveness of dengue vaccination decreased with increasing vaccine coverage levels because the marginal returns of herd immunity decreases with vaccine coverage. All routine dengue vaccination programs that we considered were cost-effective, reducing dengue incidence significantly. Specifically, a routine dengue vaccination of 9-year-olds would be cost-effective when the cost of vaccination per individual is less than $262. Furthermore, the combination of routine vaccination and large catch-up campaigns resulted in a greater reduction of dengue burden (by up to 93%) than routine vaccination alone, making it a cost-effective intervention as long as the cost per course of vaccination is $255 or less. Our results show that dengue vaccination would be cost-effective in Brazil even with a relatively low vaccine efficacy in seronegative individuals.
| S-EPMC5417221 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundGenotypic antiretroviral resistance testing (GRT) in HIV infection with drug resistant virus is recommended to optimize antiretroviral therapy, in particular in patients with virological failure. We estimated the clinical effect, cost and cost-effectiveness of using GRT as compared to expert opinion in patients with antiretroviral treatment failure.MethodsWe developed a mathematical model of HIV disease to describe disease progression in HIV-infected patients with treatment failure and compared the incremental impact of GRT versus expert opinion to guide antiretroviral therapy. The analysis was conducted from the health care (discount rate 4%) and societal (discount rate 2%) perspective. Outcome measures included life-expectancy, quality-adjusted life-expectancy, health care costs, productivity costs and cost-effectiveness in US Dollars per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. Clinical and economic data were extracted from the large Swiss HIV Cohort Study and clinical trials.ResultsPatients whose treatment was optimized with GRT versus expert opinion had an increase in discounted life-expectancy and quality-adjusted life-expectancy of three and two weeks, respectively. Health care costs with and without GRT were $US 421,000 and $US 419,000, leading to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $US 35,000 per QALY gained. In the analysis from the societal perspective, GRT versus expert opinion led to an increase in discounted life-expectancy and quality-adjusted life-expectancy of three and four weeks, respectively. Health care costs with and without GRT were $US 551,000 and $US 549,000, respectively. When productivity changes were included in the analysis, GRT was cost-saving.ConclusionsGRT for treatment optimization in HIV-infected patients with treatment failure is a cost-effective use of scarce health care resources and beneficial to the society at large.
| S-EPMC1769464 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundUS guidelines recommend genotype testing at human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) diagnosis ("baseline genotype") to detect transmitted drug resistance (TDR) to nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTIs), nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs), and protease inhibitors. With integrase strand inhibitor (INSTI)-based regimens now recommended as first-line antiretroviral therapy (ART), the of baseline genotypes is uncertain.MethodsWe used the Cost-effectiveness of Preventing AIDS Complications model to examine the clinical impact and cost-effectiveness of baseline genotype compared to no baseline genotype for people starting ART with dolutegravir (DTG) and an NRTI pair. For people with no TDR (83.8%), baseline genotype does not alter regimen selection. Among people with transmitted NRTI resistance (5.8%), baseline genotype guides NRTI selection and informs subsequent ART after adverse events (DTG AEs, 14%). Among people with transmitted NNRTI resistance (7.2%), baseline genotype influences care only for people with DTG AEs switching to NNRTI-based regimens. The 48-week virologic suppression varied (40%-92%) depending on TDR. Costs included $320/genotype and $2500-$3000/month for ART.ResultsCompared to no baseline genotype, baseline genotype resulted in <1 additional undiscounted quality-adjusted life-day (QALD), cost an additional $500/person, and was not cost-effective (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio: $420 000/quality-adjusted life-year). In univariate sensitivity analysis, clinical benefits of baseline genotype never exceeded 5 QALDs for all newly diagnosed people with HIV. Baseline genotype was cost-effective at current TDR prevalence only under unlikely conditions, eg, DTG-based regimens achieving ≤50% suppression of transmitted NRTI resistance.ConclusionsWith INSTI-based first-line regimens in the United States, baseline genotype offers minimal clinical benefit and is not cost-effective.
| S-EPMC7318781 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionIn recent years, new technologies - noticeably ultra-portable echocardiographic machines - have emerged, allowing for Rheumatic Heart Disease (RHD) early diagnosis. We aimed to perform a cost-utility analysis to assess the cost-effectiveness of RHD screening with handheld devices in the Brazilian context.MethodsA Markov model was created to assess the cost-effectiveness of one-time screening for RHD in a hypothetical cohort of 11-year-old socioeconomically disadvantaged children, comparing the intervention to standard care using a public perspective and a 30-year time horizon. The model consisted of 13 states: No RHD, Undiagnosed Asymptomatic Borderline RHD, Diagnosed Asymptomatic Borderline RHD, Untreated Asymptomatic Definite RHD, Treated Asymptomatic Definite RHD, Untreated Mild Clinical RHD, Treated Mild Clinical RHD, Untreated Severe Clinical RHD, Treated Severe Clinical RHD, Surgery, Post-Surgery and Death. The initial distribution of the population over the different states was derived from primary echo screening data. Costs of the different states were derived from the Brazilian public health system database. Transition probabilities and utilities were derived from published studies. A discount rate of 3%/year was used. A cost-effectiveness threshold of $25,949.85 per Disability Adjusted Life Year (DALY) averted is used in concordance with the 3x GDP per capita threshold in 2015.ResultsRHD echo screening is cost-effective with an Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio of $10,148.38 per DALY averted. Probabilistic modelling shows that the intervention could be considered cost-effective in 70% of the iterations.ConclusionScreening for RHD with hand held echocardiographic machines in 11-year-old children in the target population is cost-effective in the Brazilian context.HighlightsA cost-effectiveness analysis showed that Rheumatic Heart Disease (RHD) echocardiographic screening utilizing handheld devices, performed by non-physicians with remote interpretation by telemedicine is cost-effective in a 30-year time horizon in Brazil.The model included primary data from the first large-scale RHD screening program in Brazilian underserved populations and costs from the Unified Health System (SUS), and suggests that the Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio of the intervention is considerably below the acceptable threshold for Brazil, even after a detailed sensitivity analysis.Considering the high prevalence of subclinical RHD in Brazil, and the significant economic burden posed by advanced disease, these data are important for the formulation of public policies and surveillance approaches.Cost-saving strategies first implemented in Brazil by the PROVAR study, such as task-shifting to non-physicians, computer-based training, routine use of affordable devices and telemedicine for remote diagnosis may help planning RHD control programs in endemic areas worldwide.
| S-EPMC7218764 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Sweden revised their cervical cancer screening program in 2017 to include cytology-based screening for women aged 23-29 years and primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing for women aged 30-64 years; however, alternative strategies may be preferred. To inform cervical cancer prevention policies for unvaccinated women, we evaluated the cost-effectiveness of alternative screening strategies, including the current Swedish guidelines. METHODS:We adapted a mathematical simulation model of HPV and cervical cancer to the Swedish context using primary epidemiologic data. We compared the cost-effectiveness of alternative screening strategies that varied by the age to start screening, the age to switch from cytology to HPV testing, HPV strategies not preceded by cytology, screening frequency, and management of HPV-positive/cytology-negative women. RESULTS:We found that the current Swedish guidelines were more costly and less effective than alternative primary HPV-based strategies. All cost-efficient strategies involved primary HPV testing not preceded by cytology for younger women. Given a cost-effectiveness threshold of €85,619 per quality-adjusted life year gained, the optimal strategy involved 5-yearly primary HPV-based screening for women aged 23-50 years and 10-yearly HPV-based screening for women older than age 50 years. CONCLUSIONS:Primary screening based on HPV alone may be considered for unvaccinated women for those countries with similar HPV burdens.
| S-EPMC7526933 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVES:The aim of this study is to compare the cost and benefit of four different cervical cancer screening strategies involving primary HPV 16/18 genotyping, hrHPV testing alone and cytology for detecting CIN2 +. METHODS:Economical analysis using Markov modeling approach to combine the epidemiological data from current population-based study of The National Cancer Institute of Thailand. A cohort of 100,000 hypothetical female population age 30-65 years was simulated in each strategy. The compared strategies are HPV 16/18 genotyping with reflexed cytology, hrHPV testing alone followed by colposcopy, Papanicolaou standard cytology and liquid based cytology followed by colposcopy. The interval of screening was 5 years' interval. The main outcomes were defined as a number of CIN2 + cases and cost per 100,000 women screening over 35 years. RESULTS:Model predictions indicated that, the most cost-effectiveness strategy is hrHPV testing alone by reducing cost and also increase CIN2 + detection rate. It identify an additional 130 cases and decrease cost by 46,950,840 THB (1,394,441 USD) per 100,000 women screened when compared to HPV 16/18 genotyping. Compared with cytology, hrHPV testing decrease cost by 51,279,781 THB (1,523,011 USD) and detected more 506 cases of CIN2 +. From sensitivity analysis, the cost of HPV testing, cost of colposcopy, incidence of HPV infection and sensitivity of cytology may affect the results. (1 USD = 33.67 Baht). CONCLUSION:The results of this cost-effectiveness analysis support the full scale implementation of HPV testing as a primary cervical cancer screening in Thailand.
| S-EPMC5633754 | biostudies-literature