{"title":"The Price of Prevention: Cost Effectiveness of Biomedical HIV Prevention Strategies in South Africa.","authors":"Nishila Moodley, Glenda Gray, Melanie Bertram","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>South Africa has the highest global burden of human immunodefciency virus [HIV]. The study compared the cost-effectiveness of individual and combination HIV preventive strategies against the current rollout of ART and possible ART scale-up.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Adolescents attending South African schools in 2012 were included in the semi-Markov running annual cycles. The ART and HIV counseling and testing program [comparator] was weighed against the interventions [viz. HIV vaccine, a dual vaccine strategy [HIV and HPV vaccines], oral pre-exposure prophylaxis [PrEP] and voluntary medical male circumcision [VMMC]; and various combinations thereof. Quality-adjusted life years [QALY] determined changes in HIV associated mortality and infections averted. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analysis determined parameter uncertainty. Discount rates of 3% with a lifetime horizon [70 years] were applied.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Dual vaccination was highly cost-effective strategy [US$ 7 per QALY gained] and averted 29% of new HIV infections. VMMC [US$ 30 per QALY gained] proved more cost-effective than HIV vaccination alone [US$ 93 per QALY gained], though VMMC averted 6% more new infections than the HIV vaccine when considered among male participants. PrEP interventions were the least cost-effective with pharmaceutical and human resource spending driving the costs. Combined dual vaccination and VMMC strategies were a dominant intervention. Strategies involving PrEP were the least cost-effective.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>VMMC, HIV vaccination and dual vaccination strategies were more cost-effective than any PrEP strategies. A multi-intervention biomedical approach could avert considerable new HIV infections and present a cost-effective use of resources; particularly where large scale multi-interventional randomized controlled trials are absent.</p>","PeriodicalId":72627,"journal":{"name":"Clinical research in HIV/AIDS","volume":"3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5562157/pdf/nihms884981.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical research in HIV/AIDS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2016/11/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: South Africa has the highest global burden of human immunodefciency virus [HIV]. The study compared the cost-effectiveness of individual and combination HIV preventive strategies against the current rollout of ART and possible ART scale-up.
Methods: Adolescents attending South African schools in 2012 were included in the semi-Markov running annual cycles. The ART and HIV counseling and testing program [comparator] was weighed against the interventions [viz. HIV vaccine, a dual vaccine strategy [HIV and HPV vaccines], oral pre-exposure prophylaxis [PrEP] and voluntary medical male circumcision [VMMC]; and various combinations thereof. Quality-adjusted life years [QALY] determined changes in HIV associated mortality and infections averted. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analysis determined parameter uncertainty. Discount rates of 3% with a lifetime horizon [70 years] were applied.
Results: Dual vaccination was highly cost-effective strategy [US$ 7 per QALY gained] and averted 29% of new HIV infections. VMMC [US$ 30 per QALY gained] proved more cost-effective than HIV vaccination alone [US$ 93 per QALY gained], though VMMC averted 6% more new infections than the HIV vaccine when considered among male participants. PrEP interventions were the least cost-effective with pharmaceutical and human resource spending driving the costs. Combined dual vaccination and VMMC strategies were a dominant intervention. Strategies involving PrEP were the least cost-effective.
Conclusion: VMMC, HIV vaccination and dual vaccination strategies were more cost-effective than any PrEP strategies. A multi-intervention biomedical approach could avert considerable new HIV infections and present a cost-effective use of resources; particularly where large scale multi-interventional randomized controlled trials are absent.