Format

Send to

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
J Infect Dis. 2016 May 15;213(10):1523-31. doi: 10.1093/infdis/jiv523. Epub 2015 Dec 17.

Potential Clinical and Economic Value of Long-Acting Preexposure Prophylaxis for South African Women at High-Risk for HIV Infection.

Author information

1
Medical Practice Evaluation Center Division of Infectious Disease Division of General Internal Medicine Division of Infectious Disease, Brigham and Women's Hospital Harvard University Center for AIDS Research, Harvard Medical School.
2
Medical Practice Evaluation Center Division of General Internal Medicine.
3
Desmond Tutu HIV Centre, Institute of Infectious Disease and Molecular Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Cape Town, South Africa.
4
Medical Practice Evaluation Center Division of General Internal Medicine MGH Biostatistics Center, Massachusetts General Hospital Harvard University Center for AIDS Research, Harvard Medical School.
5
Center for Health Decision Science.
6
Medical Practice Evaluation Center Division of Infectious Disease Division of General Internal Medicine Harvard University Center for AIDS Research, Harvard Medical School Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health Department of Epidemiology, Boston University School of Public Health, Massachusetts.
7
Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, Connecticut.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

For young South African women at risk for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection, preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is one of the few effective prevention options available. Long-acting injectable PrEP, which is in development, may be associated with greater adherence, compared with that for existing standard oral PrEP formulations, but its likely clinical benefits and additional costs are unknown.

METHODS:

Using a computer simulation, we compared the following 3 PrEP strategies: no PrEP, standard PrEP (effectiveness, 62%; cost per patient, $150/year), and long-acting PrEP (effectiveness, 75%; cost per patient, $220/year) in South African women at high risk for HIV infection (incidence of HIV infection, 5%/year). We examined the sensitivity of the strategies to changes in key input parameters among several outcome measures, including deaths averted and program cost over a 5-year period; lifetime HIV infection risk, survival rate, and program cost and cost-effectiveness; and budget impact.

RESULTS:

Compared with no PrEP, standard PrEP and long-acting PrEP cost $580 and $870 more per woman, respectively, and averted 15 and 16 deaths per 1000 women at high risk for infection, respectively, over 5 years. Measured on a lifetime basis, both standard PrEP and long-acting PrEP were cost saving, compared with no PrEP. Compared with standard PrEP, long-acting PrEP was very cost-effective ($150/life-year saved) except under the most pessimistic assumptions. Over 5 years, long-acting PrEP cost $1.6 billion when provided to 50% of eligible women.

CONCLUSIONS:

Currently available standard PrEP is a cost-saving intervention whose delivery should be expanded and optimized. Long-acting PrEP will likely be a very cost-effective improvement over standard PrEP but may require novel financing mechanisms that bring short-term fiscal planning efforts into closer alignment with longer-term societal objectives.

KEYWORDS:

HIV; South Africa; cost-effectiveness; long-acting agents; preexposure prophylaxis

PMID:
26681778
PMCID:
PMC4837902
DOI:
10.1093/infdis/jiv523
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Silverchair Information Systems Icon for PubMed Central
    Loading ...
    Support Center