Cost-effectiveness and budget effect of pre-exposure prophylaxis for HIV-1 prevention in Germany from 2018 to 2058.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: van de Vijver DAMC
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6381659 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Feb
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Cost-effectiveness and budget effect of pre-exposure prophylaxis for HIV-1 prevention in Germany from 2018 to 2058.
van de Vijver David A M C DAMC Richter Ann-Kathrin AK Boucher Charles A B CAB Gunsenheimer-Bartmeyer Barbara B Kollan Christian C Nichols Brooke E BE Spinner Christoph D CD Wasem Jürgen J Schewe Knud K Neumann Anja A
Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin 20190201 7
BackgroundPre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is a highly effective HIV prevention strategy for men-who-have-sex-with-men (MSM). The high cost of PrEP has until recently been a primary barrier to its use. In 2017, generic PrEP became available, reducing the costs by 90%.AimOur objective was to assess cost-effectiveness and costs of introducing PrEP in Germany.MethodsWe calibrated a deterministic mathematical model to the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) epidemic among MSM in Germany. PrEP was targ ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Antiretroviral therapy (ART) and oral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) are effective in reducing HIV transmission in heterosexual adults. The epidemiologic impact and cost-effectiveness of combined prevention approaches in resource-limited settings remain unclear.We develop a dynamic mathematical model of the HIV epidemic in South Africa's adult population. We assume ART reduces HIV transmission by 95% and PrEP by 60%. We model two ART strategies: scaling up access for those with CD4 counts ? 350 cells/?L (Guidelines) and for all identified HIV-infected individuals (Universal). PrEP strategies include use in the general population (General) and in high-risk individuals (Focused). We consider strategies where ART, PrEP, or both are scaled up to 100% of remaining eligible individuals yearly. We measure infections averted, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios over 20 years.Scaling up ART to 50% of eligible individuals averts 1,513,000 infections over 20 years (Guidelines) and 3,591,000 infections (Universal). Universal ART is the most cost-effective strategy at any scale ($160-$220/QALY versus comparable scale Guidelines ART expansion). General PrEP is costly and provides limited benefits beyond ART scale-up ($7,680/QALY to add 100% PrEP to 50% Universal ART). Cost-effectiveness of General PrEP becomes less favorable when ART is widely given ($12,640/QALY gained when added to 100% Universal ART). If feasible, Focused PrEP is cost saving or highly cost effective versus status quo and when added to ART strategies.Expanded ART coverage to individuals in early disease stages may be more cost-effective than current guidelines. PrEP can be cost-saving if delivered to individuals at increased risk of infection.
| S-EPMC4003813 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundExpanded HIV prevention options are needed to increase uptake of HIV prevention among women, especially in generalized epidemics. As the dapivirine vaginal ring moves forward through regulatory review and open-label extension studies, the potential public health impact and cost-effectiveness of this new prevention method are not fully known. We used mathematical modeling to explore the impact and cost-effectiveness of the ring in different implementation scenarios alongside scale-up of other HIV prevention interventions. Given the knowledge gaps about key factors influencing the ring's implementation, including potential uptake and delivery costs, we engaged in a stakeholder consultation process to elicit plausible parameter ranges and explored scenarios to identify the possible range of impact, cost, and cost-effectiveness.Methods and findingsWe used the Goals model to simulate scenarios of oral and ring pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) implementation among female sex workers and among other women ≤21 years or >21 years with multiple male partners, in Kenya, South Africa, Uganda, and Zimbabwe. In these scenarios, we varied antiretroviral therapy (ART) coverage, dapivirine ring coverage and ring effectiveness (encompassing efficacy and adherence) by risk group. Following discussions with stakeholders, the maximum level of PrEP coverage (oral and/or ring) considered in each country was equal to modern contraception use minus condom use in the two age groups. We assessed results for 18 years, from 2018 to 2035. In South Africa, for example, the HIV infections averted by PrEP (ring plus oral PrEP) ranged from 310,000 under the highest-impact scenario (including ART held constant at 2017 levels, high ring coverage, and 85% ring effectiveness) to 55,000 under the lowest-impact scenario (including ART reaching the UNAIDS 90-90-90 targets by 2020, low ring coverage, and 30% ring effectiveness). This represented a range of 6.4% to 2.2% of new HIV infections averted. Given our assumptions, the addition of the ring results in 11% to 132% more impact than oral PrEP alone. The cost per HIV infection averted for the ring ranged from US$13,000 to US$121,000.ConclusionsThis analysis offers a wide range of scenarios given the considerable uncertainty over ring uptake, consistency of use, and effectiveness, as well as HIV testing, prevention, and treatment use over the next two decades. This could help inform donors and implementers as they decide where to allocate resources in order to maximize the impact of the dapivirine ring in light of funding and implementation constraints. Better understanding of the cost and potential uptake of the intervention would improve our ability to estimate its cost-effectiveness and assess where it can have the most impact.
| S-EPMC6594614 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCost-effectiveness studies inform resource allocation, strategy, and policy development. However, due to their complexity, dependence on assumptions made, and inherent uncertainty, synthesising, and generalising the results can be difficult. We assess cost-effectiveness models evaluating expected health gains and costs of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) interventions.Methods and findingsWe conducted a systematic review comparing epidemiological and economic assumptions of cost-effectiveness studies using various modelling approaches. The following databases were searched (until January 2013): PubMed/Medline, ISI Web of Knowledge, Centre for Reviews and Dissemination databases, EconLIT, and region-specific databases. We included modelling studies reporting both cost and expected impact of a PrEP roll-out. We explored five issues: prioritisation strategies, adherence, behaviour change, toxicity, and resistance. Of 961 studies retrieved, 13 were included. Studies modelled populations (heterosexual couples, men who have sex with men, people who inject drugs) in generalised and concentrated epidemics from Southern Africa (including South Africa), Ukraine, USA, and Peru. PrEP was found to have the potential to be a cost-effective addition to HIV prevention programmes in specific settings. The extent of the impact of PrEP depended upon assumptions made concerning cost, epidemic context, programme coverage, prioritisation strategies, and individual-level adherence. Delivery of PrEP to key populations at highest risk of HIV exposure appears the most cost-effective strategy. Limitations of this review include the partial geographical coverage, our inability to perform a meta-analysis, and the paucity of information available exploring trade-offs between early treatment and PrEP.ConclusionsOur review identifies the main considerations to address in assessing cost-effectiveness analyses of a PrEP intervention--cost, epidemic context, individual adherence level, PrEP programme coverage, and prioritisation strategy. Cost-effectiveness studies indicating where resources can be applied for greatest impact are essential to guide resource allocation decisions; however, the results of such analyses must be considered within the context of the underlying assumptions made. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary.
| S-EPMC3595225 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPre-exposure prophylaxis with oral antiretroviral treatment (oral PrEP) for HIV-uninfected injection drug users (IDUs) is potentially useful in controlling HIV epidemics with a significant injection drug use component. We estimated the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of strategies for using oral PrEP in various combinations with methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) and antiretroviral treatment (ART) in Ukraine, a representative case for mixed HIV epidemics.Methods and findingsWe developed a dynamic compartmental model of the HIV epidemic in a population of non-IDUs, IDUs who inject opiates, and IDUs in MMT, adding an oral PrEP program (tenofovir/emtricitabine, 49% susceptibility reduction) for uninfected IDUs. We analyzed intervention portfolios consisting of oral PrEP (25% or 50% of uninfected IDUs), MMT (25% of IDUs), and ART (80% of all eligible patients). We measured health care costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), HIV prevalence, HIV infections averted, and incremental cost effectiveness. A combination of PrEP for 50% of IDUs and MMT lowered HIV prevalence the most in both IDUs and the general population. ART combined with MMT and PrEP (50% access) averted the most infections (14,267). For a PrEP cost of $950, the most cost-effective strategy was MMT, at $520/QALY gained versus no intervention. The next most cost-effective strategy consisted of MMT and ART, costing $1,000/QALY gained compared to MMT alone. Further adding PrEP (25% access) was also cost effective by World Health Organization standards, at $1,700/QALY gained. PrEP alone became as cost effective as MMT at a cost of $650, and cost saving at $370 or less.ConclusionsOral PrEP for IDUs can be part of an effective and cost-effective strategy to control HIV in regions where injection drug use is a significant driver of the epidemic. Where budgets are limited, focusing on MMT and ART access should be the priority, unless PrEP has low cost.
| S-EPMC3904940 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionAntiretroviral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for the prevention of HIV acquisition is cost-effective when delivered to those at substantial risk. Despite a high incidence of HIV infection among pregnant and breastfeeding women in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), a theoretical increased risk of preterm birth on PrEP could outweigh the HIV prevention benefit.MethodsWe developed a decision analytic model to evaluate a strategy of daily oral PrEP during pregnancy and breastfeeding in SSA. We approached the analysis from a health care system perspective across a lifetime time horizon. Model inputs were derived from existing literature and local sources. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of PrEP versus no PrEP was calculated in 2015 U.S. dollars per disability-adjusted life year (DALY) averted. We evaluated the effect of uncertainty in baseline estimates through one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.ResultsPrEP administered to pregnant and breastfeeding women in SSA was cost-effective. In a base case of 10,000 women, the administration of PrEP averted 381 HIV infections but resulted in 779 more preterm births. PrEP was more costly per person ($450 versus $117), but resulted in fewer disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) (3.15 versus 3.49). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $965/DALY averted was below the recommended regional threshold for cost-effectiveness of $6462/DALY. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses demonstrated robustness of the model.ConclusionsProviding PrEP to pregnant and breastfeeding women in SSA is likely cost-effective, although more data are needed about adherence and safety. For populations at high risk of HIV acquisition, PrEP may be considered as part of a broader combination HIV prevention strategy.
| S-EPMC5043081 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Adolescents are a critical population that is disproportionately impacted by the HIV epidemic. More than 2 million adolescents between the age group of 10 and 19 years are living with HIV, and millions are at risk of infection. HIV risks are considerably higher among girls, especially in high-prevalence settings such as eastern and southern Africa. In addition to girls, there are other vulnerable adolescent subgroups, such as teenagers, who use intravenous (IV) drugs, gay and bisexual boys, transgender youth, male sex workers, and people who fall into more than one of these categories. Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is a new intervention for people at high risk for acquiring HIV, with an estimated HIV incidence of >3%. Recent data from trials show evidence of the efficacy of PrEP as a powerful HIV prevention tool in high-risk populations, including men who have sex with men, HIV-1-serodiscordant heterosexual couples, and IV drug users. The reported efficacy in those trials of the daily use of oral tenofovir, alone or in combination with emtricitabine, to prevent HIV infection ranged from 44% to 75% and was heavily dependent on adherence. Despite the proven efficacy of PrEP in adult trials, concerns remain about its feasibility in real-life scenarios due to stigma, cost, and limited clinician experience with PrEP delivery. Recent studies are attempting to expand the inquiry into the efficacy of such HIV prophylaxis approaches in adolescent populations, but there are still many gaps in knowledge, and no country has yet approved it for use with adolescents. The aim of this review was to identify and summarize the evidence from studies on PrEP for adolescents. We have compiled and reviewed published studies focusing on safety, feasibility, adherence to therapeutics, self-perception, and legal issues related to PrEP in people aged between 10 and 24 years.
| S-EPMC5716324 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) with tenofovir and emtricitabine effectively prevents new HIV infections. The optimal scenario for implementing PrEP where most infections are averted at the lowest cost is unknown. We determined the impact of different PrEP strategies on averting new infections, prevalence, drug resistance and cost-effectiveness in Macha, a rural setting in Zambia.MethodsA deterministic mathematical model of HIV transmission was constructed using data from the Macha epidemic (antenatal prevalence 7.7%). Antiretroviral therapy is started at CD4<350 cells/mm(3). We compared the number of infections averted, cost-effectiveness, and potential emergence of drug resistance of two ends of the prioritization spectrum: prioritizing PrEP to half of the most sexually active individuals (5-15% of the total population), versus randomly putting 40-60% of the total population on PrEP.ResultsPrioritizing PrEP to individuals with the highest sexual activity resulted in more infections averted than a non-prioritized strategy over ten years (31% and 23% reduction in new infections respectively), and also a lower HIV prevalence after ten years (5.7%, 6.4% respectively). The strategy was very cost-effective at $323 per quality adjusted life year gained and appeared to be both less costly and more effective than the non-prioritized strategy. The prevalence of drug resistance due to PrEP was as high as 11.6% when all assumed breakthrough infections resulted in resistance, and as low as 1.3% when 10% of breakthrough infections resulted in resistance in both our prioritized and non-prioritized scenarios.ConclusionsEven in settings with low test rates and treatment retention, the use of PrEP can still be a useful strategy in averting infections. Our model has shown that PrEP is a cost-effective strategy for reducing HIV incidence, even when adherence is suboptimal and prioritization is imperfect.
| S-EPMC3601101 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundLong-acting injectable antiretrovirals such as rilpivirine (RPV) could promote adherence to preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) prevention. However, the cost-effectiveness of injectable PrEP is unclear.MethodsWe constructed a dynamic model of the heterosexual HIV epidemic in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa, and analyzed scenarios of RPV PrEP scale-up for combination HIV prevention in comparison with a reference scenario without PrEP. We estimated new HIV infections, life-years and costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), over 10-year and lifetime horizons, assuming a societal perspective.ResultsCompared with no PrEP, unprioritized scale-up of RVP PrEP covering 2.5%-15% of adults prevented up to 9% of new infections over 10 years. HIV prevention doubled (17%) when the same coverage was prioritized to 20- to 29-year-old women, costing $10 880-$19 213 per infection prevented. Prioritization of PrEP to 80% of individuals at highest behavioral risk achieved comparable prevention (4%-8%) at <1% overall coverage, costing $298-$1242 per infection prevented. Over lifetime, PrEP scale-up among 20- to 29-year-old women was very cost-effective (<$1600 per life-year gained), dominating unprioritized PrEP, while risk prioritization was cost-saving. PrEP's 10-year impact decreased by almost 50% with increases in ICERs (up to 4.2-fold) in conservative base-case analysis. Sensitivity analysis identified PrEP's costs, efficacy, and reliability of delivery as the principal drivers of uncertainty in PrEP's cost-effectiveness, and PrEP remained cost-effective under the assumption of universal access to second-line antiretroviral therapy.ConclusionsCompared with no PrEP, prioritized scale-up of RPV PrEP in KwaZulu-Natal could be very cost-effective or cost-saving, but suboptimal PrEP would erode benefits and increase costs.
| S-EPMC4967601 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionAlthough pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP.) is an efficacious HIV prevention strategy, its preventive benefit has not been shown among young women in sub-Saharan Africa, likely due to non-adherence. Adherence may be improved with the use of injectable long-acting PrEP methods currently being developed. We hypothesize that providing long-acting PrEP to women using injectable contraceptives, the most frequently used contraceptive method in South Africa, could improve adherence to PrEP, result in a reduction of new HIV infections, and be a relatively easy-to-reach target population. In this modelling study, we assessed the epidemiological impact and cost-effectiveness of providing long-acting PrEP to injectable contraceptive users in Limpopo, South Africa.MethodsWe developed a deterministic mathematical model calibrated to the HIV epidemic in Limpopo. Long-acting PrEP was provided to 50% of HIV negative injectable contraceptive users in 2018 and scaled-up over two years. We estimated the number of HIV infections that could be averted by 2030 and the drug price of long-acting PrEP for which this intervention would be cost-effective over a time horizon of 40 years, from a healthcare payer perspective. In the base-case scenario we assumed long-acting PrEP is 75% effective in preventing HIV infections and 85% of infected individuals are on antiretroviral drug therapy (ART) by 2030. In sensitivity analyses we adjusted PrEP effectiveness and ART coverage. Costs between $519 and $1119 per disability-adjusted life-year (DALY) averted were considered potentially cost-effective, and <$519 as cost-effective.ResultsWithout long-acting injectable PrEP, 224,000 (interquartile range 176,000 to 271,000) new infections will occur by 2030; use of long-acting injectable PrEP could prevent 21,000 (17,000 to 26,000) or 9.8% (8.9% to 10.6%) new HIV infections by 2030 (including 6000 (4000 to 7000) in men). Long-acting PrEP would prevent 34,000 (29,000 to 39,000) or 12,000 (8000 to 15,000) at 75% and 95% ART coverage by 2030 respectively. To be considered potentially cost-effective the annual long-acting PrEP drug price should be <$16, and/or ART coverage remains at <85% in 2030.ConclusionsProviding long-acting PrEP to injectable contraceptive users in Limpopo is only potentially cost-effective when long-acting PrEP drug prices are low. If low prices are not feasible, providing long-acting PrEP only to women at high risk of HIV infection will become important.
| S-EPMC6922023 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) has emerged as a promising strategy for preventing the transmission of HIV. Although only one formulation is currently approved for PrEP, research into both new compounds and new delivery systems for PrEP regimens offer intriguing challenges from the perspective of pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic modeling. This review aims to provide an overview the current modeling landscape for HIV PrEP, focused on PK/PD and QSP models relating to antiretroviral agents. Both current PrEP treatments and new compounds that show promise as PrEP agents are highlighted, as well as models of uncommon administration routes, predictions based on models of mechanism of action and viral dynamics, and issues related to adherence to therapy. The spread of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) remains one of the foremost global health concerns. In the absence of a vaccine, other prophylactic strategies have been developed to prevent HIV transmission. One approach, known as pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), allows HIV-negative individuals who are at high risk of exposure to the virus, be it through an HIV-positive sexual partner or through the shared use of drug injection equipment, to substantially reduce the risk of developing an HIV infection. PrEP is a relatively recent approach to combating the HIV epidemic, with the only currently approved treatment being Truvada, a daily oral antiretroviral (ARV) therapy initially indicated in the treatment of active HIV-1 infections, but approved for HIV PrEP in 2012. Although PrEP therapy has consistently demonstrated high efficacy in preventing HIV infection, this efficacy is dependent on patient adherence to the prescribed treatment regimen. This can present a significant problem in low- and middle-income countries, which may lack the infrastructure to provide sufficient access to PrEP medication to maintain daily dosing regimens. Furthermore, while the conventional approach has generally been to advocate for continuous administration akin to regimens used for viral suppression in infected patients, there has been some discussion of whether a better treatment paradigm might be to push for PrEP therapy primarily during those known periods of heightened exposure risk, while relying on post-exposure prophylaxis regimens to prevent infection after unanticipated exposures during low-risk periods. These considerations have led to a push for the development of long-duration and on-demand PrEP formulations, including subdermal and subcutaneous implants, slow-release intramuscular depot injections, vaginal and rectal antimicrobial gels, and intravaginal rings and dissolving films. PrEP therapy is a quickly evolving field, with a variety of antiretroviral compounds and formulations under investigation. This review aims to report on notable drugs and formulations from a pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) modeling perspective. Given the nature of PrEP as a preventive therapy designed for long-term use, clinical trials for PrEP therapies can last for months or even years, particularly in the case of long-duration formulations. Furthermore, in contrast to antiretroviral trials in infected patients, pharmacodynamic endpoints in PrEP therapies are difficult to quantify, as the primary endpoint for efficacy is generally the rate of seroconversion. Computational modeling approaches offer flexible and powerful tools to provide insight into drug behavior in clinical settings, and can ultimately reduce the time, expense, and patient burden incurred in the development of PrEP therapies.
| S-EPMC7005100 | biostudies-literature