The cost-effectiveness of preexposure prophylaxis for HIV prevention in the United States in men who have sex with men.

Jessie L Juusola, Margaret L Brandeau, Douglas K Owens, Eran Bendavid
Author Information
  1. Jessie L Juusola: Stanford University, California, USA. jjuusola@stanford.edu

Abstract

BACKGROUND: 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.
OBJECTIVE: To estimate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of PrEP in MSM in the United States.
DESIGN: Dynamic model of HIV transmission and progression combined with a detailed economic analysis.
DATA SOURCES: Published literature.
TARGET POPULATION: MSM aged 13 to 64 years in the United States.
TIME HORIZON: Lifetime.
PERSPECTIVE: Societal.
INTERVENTION: 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.
OUTCOME MEASURES: New HIV infections, discounted quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios.
RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS: 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.
RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS: 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%.
LIMITATION: 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.
CONCLUSION: 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.
PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institute on Drug Abuse, Department of Veterans Affairs, and National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

References

  1. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2010 Dec 15;55(5):572-81 [PMID: 20827218]
  2. N Engl J Med. 2001 Mar 15;344(11):817-23 [PMID: 11248159]
  3. Am J Public Health. 2003 Jun;93(6):926-32 [PMID: 12773357]
  4. Med Decis Making. 1993 Apr-Jun;13(2):89-102 [PMID: 8483408]
  5. AIDS Patient Care STDS. 2011 Feb;25(2):63-71 [PMID: 21284497]
  6. Lancet. 2008 Jul 26;372(9635):314-20 [PMID: 18657710]
  7. JAMA. 1997 Dec 17;278(23):2085-9 [PMID: 9403423]
  8. Med Care. 2011 Sep;49(9):848-56 [PMID: 21610542]
  9. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2006 Apr 15;41(5):632-41 [PMID: 16652038]
  10. JAMA. 2008 Aug 6;300(5):555-70 [PMID: 18677028]
  11. Med Care. 2006 Nov;44(11):990-7 [PMID: 17063130]
  12. AIDS. 2011 Sep 10;25(14):1779-87 [PMID: 21716076]
  13. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2008 Feb 1;47(2):241-7 [PMID: 18340656]
  14. AIDS. 2008 Sep 12;22(14):1829-39 [PMID: 18753932]
  15. J Infect Dis. 2005 May 1;191(9):1403-9 [PMID: 15809897]
  16. Ann Intern Med. 1996 Aug 15;125(4):257-64 [PMID: 8678387]
  17. AIDS Patient Care STDS. 2010 Nov;24(11):689-91 [PMID: 20863247]
  18. Ann Intern Med. 2011 Feb 1;154(3):174-80 [PMID: 21282697]
  19. N Engl J Med. 2010 Dec 30;363(27):2587-99 [PMID: 21091279]
  20. Sex Transm Dis. 1998 Aug;25(7):353-60 [PMID: 9713915]
  21. Arch Intern Med. 1996 Feb 26;156(4):394-404 [PMID: 8607724]
  22. Ann Intern Med. 2009 Dec 15;151(12):829-39 [PMID: 20008759]
  23. Ann Intern Med. 1997 Jun 15;126(12):946-54 [PMID: 9182471]
  24. Science. 1998 Jun 19;280(5371):1889-94 [PMID: 9632382]
  25. AIDS. 2004 Jun 18;18(9):1311-20 [PMID: 15362664]
  26. Clin Infect Dis. 2007 Apr 15;44(8):1115-22 [PMID: 17366461]
  27. Ann Intern Med. 2010 Dec 21;153(12):778-89 [PMID: 21173412]
  28. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2006 Dec 1;43(4):451-7 [PMID: 16980906]
  29. Curr HIV/AIDS Rep. 2010 Nov;7(4):201-9 [PMID: 20809218]
  30. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2005 Aug 1;39(4):446-53 [PMID: 16010168]
  31. PLoS Med. 2011 Mar;8(3):e1000423 [PMID: 21390264]
  32. N Engl J Med. 2005 Feb 10;352(6):586-95 [PMID: 15703423]
  33. Clin Infect Dis. 2009 Mar 15;48(6):806-15 [PMID: 19193111]
  34. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2009 Jan 1;50(1):77-83 [PMID: 19295337]
  35. Ann Intern Med. 2007 Apr 17;146(8):591-601 [PMID: 17438318]
  36. Ann Intern Med. 2001 Jan 2;134(1):25-9 [PMID: 11187417]
  37. Med Decis Making. 2006 Jul-Aug;26(4):410-20 [PMID: 16855129]
  38. Curr Infect Dis Rep. 2006 Mar;8(2):125-31 [PMID: 16524549]
  39. PLoS One. 2011;6(8):e17502 [PMID: 21826193]
  40. JAMA. 1998 Oct 7;280(13):1161-7 [PMID: 9777816]
  41. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2011 Jan 28;60(3):65-8 [PMID: 21270743]
  42. J Infect Dis. 2008 Sep 1;198(5):687-93 [PMID: 18662132]
  43. Infect Dis Clin North Am. 2000 Dec;14(4):809-25, v-vi [PMID: 11144640]
  44. Ann Intern Med. 2006 Dec 5;145(11):797-806 [PMID: 17146064]
  45. Vaccine. 2006 Feb 13;24(7):1035-43 [PMID: 16183177]
  46. Am J Med. 2000 Nov;109(7):568-76 [PMID: 11063959]
  47. Med Decis Making. 2002 Nov-Dec;22(6):475-81 [PMID: 12458977]
  48. AIDS. 2003 May 2;17(7):1029-38 [PMID: 12700453]
  49. N Engl J Med. 2005 Feb 10;352(6):570-85 [PMID: 15703422]
  50. Ann Intern Med. 2006 Sep 19;145(6):416-25 [PMID: 16983129]
  51. Vaccine. 2009 Aug 27;27(39):5402-10 [PMID: 19591796]
  52. N Engl J Med. 2011 Aug 11;365(6):493-505 [PMID: 21767103]
  53. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2006 Sep 22;55(RR-14):1-17; quiz CE1-4 [PMID: 16988643]
  54. Med Care. 2007 Jul;45(7):618-28 [PMID: 17571010]
  55. AIDS. 1995 Oct;9(10):1113-9 [PMID: 8519446]
  56. MMWR Surveill Summ. 2006 Jul 7;55(6):1-16 [PMID: 16826162]
  57. Natl Vital Stat Rep. 2007 Dec 28;56(9):1-39 [PMID: 18274319]
  58. J Urban Health. 2007 Mar;84(2):212-25 [PMID: 17295058]
  59. Public Health Rep. 2008 Nov-Dec;123 Suppl 3:51-62 [PMID: 19166089]
  60. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr Hum Retrovirol. 1997 Sep 1;16(1):54-62 [PMID: 9377126]
  61. Value Health. 2003 Mar-Apr;6(2):116-25 [PMID: 12641862]
  62. AIDS. 1999 May 28;13(8):963-9 [PMID: 10371178]
  63. AIDS. 2007 May 31;21(9):1185-97 [PMID: 17502729]
  64. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2004 Apr 15;35(5):526-36 [PMID: 15021318]
  65. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2010 Aug;54(5):548-55 [PMID: 20512046]
  66. N Engl J Med. 2000 Mar 30;342(13):921-9 [PMID: 10738050]
  67. Lancet. 2008 Jul 26;372(9635):293-9 [PMID: 18657708]
  68. J Infect Dis. 2004 May 15;189(10):1785-92 [PMID: 15122514]
  69. J Infect Dis. 2008 Feb 1;197(3):398-404 [PMID: 18248303]
  70. AIDS. 2002 Jul 26;16(11):1529-35 [PMID: 12131191]
  71. AIDS. 2006 Nov 14;20(17):2207-15 [PMID: 17086061]
  72. Lancet. 2008 Nov 22;372(9652):1806-7; author reply 1807 [PMID: 19027479]
  73. AIDS. 2006 Aug 1;20(12):1637-44 [PMID: 16868445]
  74. Health Aff (Millwood). 2004 Jul-Aug;23(4):176-83 [PMID: 15318578]
  75. Sex Transm Dis. 2010 Jun;37(6):399-405 [PMID: 20473245]
  76. Ann Intern Med. 2003 Jul 15;139(2):113-22 [PMID: 12859161]
  77. AIDS. 2007 Jul 31;21(12):1625-9 [PMID: 17630558]
  78. Qual Life Res. 2006 Feb;15(1):69-82 [PMID: 16411032]
  79. AIDS Behav. 2009 Dec;13(6):1054-60 [PMID: 19504178]

Grants

  1. K01 AI084582/NIAID NIH HHS
  2. R01 DA015612/NIDA NIH HHS
  3. K01-AI084582/NIAID NIH HHS
  4. R01-DA15612/NIDA NIH HHS

MeSH Term

Adolescent
Adult
Anti-Retroviral Agents
Chemoprevention
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Disease Progression
Epidemiologic Methods
HIV Infections
Health Care Costs
Homosexuality, Male
Humans
Incidence
Male
Mass Screening
Middle Aged
Prevalence
Quality of Life
Risk-Taking
Sensitivity and Specificity
United States
Young Adult

Chemicals

Anti-Retroviral Agents

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0MSMPrEPHIVperhigh-riskcost-effectivenesscostmenUnitedStatesinfectionscostsQALYgainedyearsgeneralpopulationinfection000billiontrialdailypreexposurechemoprophylaxispreventionsexriskestimatemodelreduceQALYsincrementalRESULTSOFANALYSIS:Initiating20%result20preventpreventedlessNationalInstituteBACKGROUND:recentrandomizedcontrolledshowedoraleffectiveCentersDiseaseControlPreventionrecentlyprovidedinterimguidancehighPreviousstudiesreachconsistentOBJECTIVE:effectivenessDESIGN:DynamictransmissionprogressioncombineddetailedeconomicanalysisDATASOURCES:PublishedliteratureTARGETPOPULATION:aged1364TIMEHORIZON:LifetimePERSPECTIVE:SocietalINTERVENTION:evaluatedassumed44%basisclinicalresultsOUTCOMEMEASURES:Newdiscountedquality-adjustedlife-yearsratiosBASE-CASEnewestimated13%gain550166$172091largerproportionincreasing$216480receivePreexposurecanimproveaverage5partnersyearapproximately$50Providing$75healthcare-relatedstatusquo$600compared$95$2millioncoverageSENSITIVITY$100antiretroviraldrugs$15efficacygreater75%LIMITATION:examininginvestigatorsmixlow-lackdatamixingpatternsCONCLUSION:substantialnumberexpensiveUsecomparesfavorablyinterventionsconsideredcost-effectiveannualexpenditures$4PRIMARYFUNDINGSOURCE:DrugAbuseDepartmentVeteransAffairsAllergyInfectiousDiseasesprophylaxis

Similar Articles

Cited By