Optimal costs of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis for men who have sex with men.

Jennie McKenney, Anders Chen, Karen W Hoover, Jane Kelly, David Dowdy, Parastu Sharifi, Patrick S Sullivan, Eli S Rosenberg
Author Information
  1. Jennie McKenney: Department of Epidemiology, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, United States of America. ORCID
  2. Anders Chen: Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.
  3. Karen W Hoover: Division of HIV/AIDS Prevention, National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and TB Prevention, CDC, Atlanta, Georgia, United States of America.
  4. Jane Kelly: HIV/AIDS Epidemiology Unit, Georgia Department of Public Health, Atlanta, Georgia, United States of America.
  5. David Dowdy: Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America.
  6. Parastu Sharifi: Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America.
  7. Patrick S Sullivan: Department of Epidemiology, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, United States of America.
  8. Eli S Rosenberg: Department of Epidemiology, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, United States of America.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: men who have sex with men (MSM) are disproportionately affected by HIV due to their increased risk of infection. Oral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is a highly effictive HIV-prevention strategy for MSM. Despite evidence of its effectiveness, PrEP uptake in the United States has been slow, in part due to its cost. As jurisdictions and health organizations begin to think about PrEP scale-up, the high cost to society needs to be understood.
METHODS: We modified a previously-described decision-analysis model to estimate the cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained, over a 1-year duration of PrEP intervention and lifetime time horizon. Using updated parameter estimates, we calculated: 1) the cost per QALY gained, stratified over 4 strata of PrEP cost (a function of both drug cost and provider costs); and 2) PrEP drug cost per year required to fall at or under 4 cost per QALY gained thresholds.
RESULTS: When PrEP drug costs were reduced by 60% (with no sexual disinhibition) to 80% (assuming 25% sexual disinhibition), PrEP was cost-effective (at <$100,000 per QALY averted) in all scenarios of base-case or better adherence, as long as the background HIV prevalence was greater than 10%. For PrEP to be cost saving at base-case adherence/efficacy levels and at a background prevalence of 20%, drug cost would need to be reduced to $8,021 per year with no disinhibition, and to $2,548 with disinhibition.
CONCLUSION: Results from our analysis suggest that PrEP drug costs need to be reduced in order to be cost-effective across a range of background HIV prevalence. Moreover, our results provide guidance on the pricing of generic emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate, in order to provide those at high risk for HIV an affordable prevention option without financial burden on individuals or jurisdictions scaling-up coverage.

References

  1. Med Care. 2008 Apr;46(4):349-56 [PMID: 18362813]
  2. Am J Epidemiol. 1999 Aug 1;150(3):306-11 [PMID: 10430236]
  3. Am J Kidney Dis. 2007 Sep;50(3):421-32 [PMID: 17720521]
  4. Sex Transm Dis. 2013 Mar;40(3):197-201 [PMID: 23403600]
  5. Lancet. 2012 Jul 28;380(9839):341-8 [PMID: 22819656]
  6. AIDS Behav. 2014 Sep;18(9):1712-21 [PMID: 24965676]
  7. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2011 Dec 2;60(47):1618-23 [PMID: 22129997]
  8. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2010 Aug;54(5):548-55 [PMID: 20512046]
  9. Lancet. 2016 Jan 2;387(10013):53-60 [PMID: 26364263]
  10. Ann Intern Med. 2012 Apr 17;156(8):541-50 [PMID: 22508731]
  11. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Apr 30;(4):CD009153 [PMID: 23633367]
  12. N Engl J Med. 2012 Aug 2;367(5):423-34 [PMID: 22784038]
  13. N Engl J Med. 2012 Aug 2;367(5):399-410 [PMID: 22784037]
  14. AIDS. 2014 Nov 28;28(18):2683-91 [PMID: 25493594]
  15. Sci Transl Med. 2012 Sep 12;4(151):151ra125 [PMID: 22972843]
  16. Ann Intern Med. 2015 Oct 20;163(8):589-97 [PMID: 26414147]
  17. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2010 Sep 24;59(37):1201-7 [PMID: 20864920]
  18. J Int Assoc Provid AIDS Care. 2013 May-Jun;12(3):208-16 [PMID: 23666450]
  19. Med Decis Making. 2002 Sep-Oct;22(5):417-30 [PMID: 12365484]
  20. Clin Infect Dis. 2015 Nov 15;61(10 ):1590-7 [PMID: 26270691]
  21. AIDS. 2014 Jun 19;28(10):1509-19 [PMID: 24809629]
  22. Lancet. 2012 Jul 28;380(9839):388-99 [PMID: 22819659]
  23. AIDS. 2008 Sep 12;22(14):1829-39 [PMID: 18753932]
  24. Sex Transm Dis. 2009 Aug;36(8):507-11 [PMID: 19455081]
  25. PLoS One. 2014 Oct 06;9(10):e108742 [PMID: 25285793]
  26. Clin Infect Dis. 2005 Jul 1;41(1):67-74 [PMID: 15937765]
  27. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2002;(1):CD003255 [PMID: 11869658]
  28. AIDS. 2009 Jun 1;23(9):1153-62 [PMID: 19417579]
  29. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2015 Jun 26;64(24):657-62 [PMID: 26110835]
  30. Clin Infect Dis. 2015 Nov 15;61(10 ):1601-3 [PMID: 26334052]
  31. N Engl J Med. 2011 Aug 11;365(6):493-505 [PMID: 21767103]
  32. N Engl J Med. 2010 Dec 30;363(27):2587-99 [PMID: 21091279]
  33. AIDS Behav. 2016 Jul;20(7):1461-9 [PMID: 25835463]
  34. AIDS. 2010 Mar 27;24(6):907-13 [PMID: 20139750]
  35. Sex Transm Infect. 1999 Feb;75(1):3-17 [PMID: 10448335]
  36. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2015 Nov 27;64(46):1291-5 [PMID: 26606148]
  37. J Infect Dis. 2012 Feb 1;205(3):358-65 [PMID: 22241800]
  38. Epidemiology. 2013 Jan;24(1):110-21 [PMID: 23222513]
  39. AIDS. 2010 Nov 13;24(17):2705-15 [PMID: 20859193]
  40. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2011 Oct 1;58(2):e51-2 [PMID: 21921730]
  41. Med Decis Making. 2002 Nov-Dec;22(6):475-81 [PMID: 12458977]
  42. Open AIDS J. 2012;6:98-107 [PMID: 23049658]
  43. Med Care. 2006 Nov;44(11):990-7 [PMID: 17063130]
  44. Kidney Int. 1996 Jul;50(1):235-42 [PMID: 8807593]
  45. Sex Transm Dis. 2010 Jun;37(6):399-405 [PMID: 20473245]
  46. Clin Infect Dis. 2009 Mar 15;48(6):806-15 [PMID: 19193111]
  47. AIDS Patient Care STDS. 2013 Oct;27(10):553-9 [PMID: 24053478]
  48. JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2016 Apr 21;2(1):e14 [PMID: 27227149]

Grants

  1. P30 AI094189/NIAID NIH HHS
  2. U38 PS004646/NCHHSTP CDC HHS

MeSH Term

Anti-HIV Agents
HIV Infections
Homosexuality, Male
Humans
Male
Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis

Chemicals

Anti-HIV Agents

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0PrEPcostperHIVdrugQALYcostsdisinhibitionmengainedreducedbackgroundprevalencesexMSMdueriskpre-exposureprophylaxisjurisdictionshigh4yearsexualcost-effectivebase-caseneedorderprovideINTRODUCTION:MendisproportionatelyaffectedincreasedinfectionOralhighlyeffictiveHIV-preventionstrategyDespiteevidenceeffectivenessuptakeUnitedStatesslowparthealthorganizationsbeginthinkscale-upsocietyneedsunderstoodMETHODS:modifiedpreviously-describeddecision-analysismodelestimatequality-adjustedlife-year1-yeardurationinterventionlifetimetimehorizonUsingupdatedparameterestimatescalculated:1stratifiedstratafunctionprovider2requiredfallthresholdsRESULTS:60%80%assuming25%<$100000avertedscenariosbetteradherencelonggreater10%savingadherence/efficacylevels20%$8021$2548CONCLUSION:ResultsanalysissuggestacrossrangeMoreoverresultsguidancepricinggenericemtricitabine/tenofovirdisoproxilfumarateaffordablepreventionoptionwithoutfinancialburdenindividualsscaling-upcoverageOptimal

Similar Articles

Cited By