Dataset Information

Cost-Effectiveness of HIV Preexposure Prophylaxis for People Who Inject Drugs in the United States.

ABSTRACT: Background:The total population health benefits and costs of HIV preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for people who inject drugs (PWID) in the United States are unclear. Objective:To evaluate the cost-effectiveness and optimal delivery conditions of PrEP for PWID. Design:Empirically calibrated dynamic compartmental model. Data Sources:Published literature and expert opinion. Target Population:Adult U.S. PWID. Time Horizon:20 years and lifetime. Intervention:PrEP alone, PrEP with frequent screening (PrEP+screen), and PrEP+screen with enhanced provision of antiretroviral therapy (ART) for individuals who become infected (PrEP+screen+ART). All scenarios are considered at 25% coverage. Outcome Measures:Infections averted, deaths averted, change in HIV prevalence, discounted costs (in 2015 U.S. dollars), discounted quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. Results of Base-Case Analysis:PrEP+screen+ART dominates other strategies, averting 26 700 infections and reducing HIV prevalence among PWID by 14% compared with the status quo. Achieving these benefits costs $253 000 per QALY gained. At current drug prices, total expenditures for PrEP+screen+ART could be as high as $44 billion over 20 years. Results of Sensitivity Analysis:Cost-effectiveness of the intervention is linear in the annual cost of PrEP and is dependent on PrEP drug adherence, individual transmission risks, and community HIV prevalence. Limitation:Data on risk stratification and achievable PrEP efficacy levels for U.S. PWID are limited. Conclusion:PrEP with frequent screening and prompt treatment for those who become infected can reduce HIV burden among PWID and provide health benefits for the entire U.S. population, but, at current drug prices, it remains an expensive intervention both in absolute terms and in cost per QALY gained. Primary Funding Source:National Institute on Drug Abuse.

SUBMITTER: Bernard CL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5118181 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Cost-Effectiveness of HIV Preexposure Prophylaxis for People Who Inject Drugs in the United States.

Bernard Cora L CL Brandeau Margaret L ML Humphreys Keith K Bendavid Eran E Holodniy Mark M Weyant Christopher C Owens Douglas K DK Goldhaber-Fiebert Jeremy D JD

Annals of internal medicine 20160426 1

<h4>Background</h4>The total population health benefits and costs of HIV preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for people who inject drugs (PWID) in the United States are unclear.<h4>Objective</h4>To evaluate the cost-effectiveness and optimal delivery conditions of PrEP for PWID.<h4>Design</h4>Empirically calibrated dynamic compartmental model.<h4>Data sources</h4>Published literature and expert opinion.<h4>Target population</h4>Adult U.S. PWID.<h4>Time horizon</h4>20 years and lifetime.<h4>Interventi ...[more]

PMID: 27110953

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe HIV Prevention Trials Network (HPTN) 083 trial demonstrated the superiority of long-acting injectable cabotegravir (CAB-LA) compared with oral emtricitabine-tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (F/TDF) for HIV preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP).ObjectiveTo identify the maximum price premium (that is, greatest possible price differential) that society should be willing to accept for the additional benefits of CAB-LA over tenofovir-based PrEP among men who have sex with men and transgender women (MSM/TGW) in the United States.DesignSimulation, cost-effectiveness analysis.Data sourcesTrial and published data, including estimated HIV incidence (5.32, 1.33, and 0.26 per 100 person-years for off PrEP, generic F/TDF and branded emtricitabine-tenofovir alafenamide (F/TAF), and CAB-LA, respectively); 28% 6-year PrEP retention. Annual base-case drug costs: $360 and $16 800 for generic F/TDF and branded F/TAF. Fewer side effects with branded F/TAF versus generic F/TDF were assumed.Target population476 700 MSM/TGW at very high risk for HIV (VHR).Time horizon10 years.PerspectiveHealth care system.InterventionCAB-LA versus generic F/TDF or branded F/TAF for HIV PrEP.Outcome measuresPrimary transmissions, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), costs (2020 U.S. dollars), incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs; U.S. dollars per QALY), maximum price premium for CAB-LA versus tenofovir-based PrEP.Results of base-case analysisCompared with generic F/TDF (or branded F/TAF), CAB-LA increased life expectancy by 28 000 QALYs (26 000 QALYs) among those at VHR. Branded F/TAF cost more per QALY gained than generic F/TDF compared with no PrEP. At 10 years, CAB-LA could achieve an ICER of at most $100 000 per QALY compared with generic F/TDF at a maximum price premium of $3700 per year over generic F/TDF (CAB-LA price <$4100 per year).Results of sensitivity analysisIn a PrEP-eligible population at high risk for HIV, rather than at VHR (n = 1 906 800; off PrEP incidence: 1.54 per 100 person-years), CAB-LA could achieve an ICER of at most $100 000 per QALY versus generic F/TDF at a maximum price premium of $1100 per year over generic F/TDF (CAB-LA price <$1500 per year).LimitationUncertain clinical and economic benefits of averting future transmissions.ConclusionEffective oral PrEP limits the additional price society should be willing to pay for CAB-LA.Primary funding sourceFHI 360; Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development; National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; National Institute on Drug Abuse; the Reich HIV Scholar Award; and the Steve and Deborah Gorlin MGH Research Scholars Award.

Project description:AimsTo examine the cost-effectiveness of hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment of people who inject drugs (PWID), combined with medication-assisted treatment (MAT) and syringe-service programs (SSP), to tackle the increasing HCV epidemic in the United States.DesignHCV transmission and disease progression models with cost-effectiveness analysis using a health-care perspective.SettingRural Perry County, KY (PC) and urban San Francisco, CA (SF), USA. Compared with PC, SF has a greater proportion of PWID with access to MAT or SSP. HCV treatment of PWID is negligible in both settings.ParticipantsPWID data were collected between 1998 and 2015 from Social Networks Among Appalachian People, U Find Out, Urban Health Study and National HIV Behavioral Surveillance System studies.Interventions and comparatorThree intervention scenarios modeled: baseline-existing SSP and MAT coverage with HCV screening and treatment with direct-acting antiviral for ex-injectors only as per standard of care; intervention 1-scale-up of SSP and MAT without changes to treatment; and intervention 2-scale-up as intervention 1 combined with HCV screening and treatment for current PWID.MeasurementsIncremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) and uncertainty using cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. Benefits were measured in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs).FindingsFor both settings, intervention 2 is preferred to intervention 1 and the appropriate comparator for intervention 2 is the baseline scenario. Relative to baseline, for PC intervention 2 averts 1852 more HCV infections, increases QALYS by 3095, costs $21.6 million more and has an ICER of $6975/QALY. For SF, intervention 2 averts 36 473 more HCV infections, increases QALYs by 7893, costs $872 million more and has an ICER of $11 044/QALY. The cost-effectiveness of intervention 2 was robust to several sensitivity analysis.ConclusionsHepatitis C screening and treatment for people who inject drugs, combined with medication-assisted treatment and syringe-service programs, is a cost-effective strategy for reducing hepatitis C burden in the United States.

Project description:A recent randomized, controlled trial showed that daily oral preexposure chemoprophylaxis (PrEP) was effective for HIV prevention in men who have sex with men (MSM). The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recently provided interim guidance for PrEP in MSM at high risk for HIV. Previous studies did not reach a consistent estimate of its cost-effectiveness.To estimate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of PrEP in MSM in the United States.Dynamic model of HIV transmission and progression combined with a detailed economic analysis.Published literature.MSM aged 13 to 64 years in the United States.Lifetime.Societal.PrEP was evaluated in both the general MSM population and in high-risk MSM and was assumed to reduce infection risk by 44% on the basis of clinical trial results.New HIV infections, discounted quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios.Initiating PrEP in 20% of MSM in the United States would reduce new HIV infections by an estimated 13% and result in a gain of 550,166 QALYs over 20 years at a cost of $172,091 per QALY gained. Initiating PrEP in a larger proportion of MSM would prevent more infections but at an increasing cost per QALY gained (up to $216,480 if all MSM receive PrEP). Preexposure chemoprophylaxis in only high-risk MSM can improve cost-effectiveness. For MSM with an average of 5 partners per year, PrEP costs approximately $50,000 per QALY gained. Providing PrEP to all high-risk MSM for 20 years would cost $75 billion more in health care-related costs than the status quo and $600,000 per HIV infection prevented, compared with incremental costs of $95 billion and $2 million per infection prevented for 20% coverage of all MSM.PrEP in the general MSM population would cost less than $100,000 per QALY gained if the daily cost of antiretroviral drugs for PrEP was less than $15 or if PrEP efficacy was greater than 75%.When examining PrEP in high-risk MSM, the investigators did not model a mix of low- and high-risk MSM because of lack of data on mixing patterns.PrEP in the general MSM population could prevent a substantial number of HIV infections, but it is expensive. Use in high-risk MSM compares favorably with other interventions that are considered cost-effective but could result in annual PrEP expenditures of more than $4 billion.National Institute on Drug Abuse, Department of Veterans Affairs, and National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

Dataset Information

Cost-Effectiveness of HIV Preexposure Prophylaxis for People Who Inject Drugs in the United States.

Publications

Cost-Effectiveness of HIV Preexposure Prophylaxis for People Who Inject Drugs in the United States.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets