Dual treatment with lopinavir–ritonavir plus lamivudine versus triple treatment with lopinavir–ritonavir plus lamivudine or emtricitabine and a second nucleos(t)ide reverse transcriptase inhibitor for maintenance of HIV-1 viral suppression (OLE): a randomised, open-label, non-inferiority trial

Association of Risk of Viremia, Immunosuppression, Serious Clinical Events, and Mortality With Increasing Age in Perinatally Human Immunodeficiency Virus-Infected Youth

IMPORTANCE

As perinatally human immunodeficiency virus-infected youth (PHIVY) in the United States grow older and more treatment experienced, clinicians need updated information about the association of age, CD4 cell count, viral load (VL), and antiretroviral (ARV) drug use with risk of opportunistic infections, key clinical events, and mortality to understand patient risks and improve care.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the incidence or first occurrence during follow-up of key clinical events (including Centers for Disease Control and Prevention stage B [CDC-B] and stage C [CDC-C] events) and mortality among PHIVY stratified by age, CD4 cell count, and VL and ARV status.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Combining data from the Pediatric HIV/AIDS Cohort Study (PHACS) Adolescent Master Protocol and International Maternal Pediatric Adolescent AIDS Clinical Trials (IMPAACT) P1074 multicenter cohort studies (March 2007 through April 2015), we estimated event rates during person-time spent in key strata of age (7-12, 13-17, and 18-30 years), CD4 cell count (<200, 200-499, and ≥500/μL), and a combined measure of VL and ARV status (VL <400 or ≥400 copies/mL; ARV therapy or no ARV therapy). A total of 1562 participants in the PHACS Adolescent Master Protocol and IMPAACT P1074 were eligible, and 1446 PHIVY from 41 ambulatory sites in the 12 US states, including Puerto Rico were enrolled. The dates of analysis were March 2015 through January 2017.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Clinical event rates stratified by person-time in age, CD4 cell count, and VL and ARV categories.

RESULTS

A total of 1446 PHIVY participated in the study (mean [SD] age, 14.6 [4.6] years; 759 female [52.5%]; 953 black [65.9%]). During a mean (SD) follow-up of 4.9 (1.3) years, higher incidences of CDC-B events, CDC-C events, and mortality were observed as participants aged. Older PHIVY (aged 13-17 and 18-30 years) spent more time with a VL of 400 copies/mL or more and with a CD4 cell count of less than 200/µL compared with 7- to 12-year-old participants (30% and 44% vs 22% of person-time with a VL≥400 copies/mL; 5% and 18% vs 2% of person-time with CD4 cell count <200/µL; P < .001 for each comparison). We observed higher rates of CDC-B events, CDC-C events, bacterial infections, and mortality at lower CD4 cell counts, as expected. The mortality rate among older PHIVY was 6 to 12 times that among the general US population. Higher rates of sexually transmitted infections were also observed at lower CD4 cell counts after adjusting for age.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Older PHIVY were at increased risk of viremia, immunosuppression, CDC-B events, CDC-C events, and mortality. Interventions to improve ARV therapy adherence and optimize models of care for PHIVY as they age are urgently needed to improve long-term outcomes among PHIVY.

Lamivudine/dolutegravir dual therapy in HIV-infected, virologically suppressed patients

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the applicability of dual treatments based on integrase inhibitors. We explored the combination of lamivudine + dolutegravir as an option when switching from standard cART in virologically suppressed patients.

METHODS

In this prospective cohort we enrolled patients previously switched to 3TC + DTG who were 18 years or older, with no previous resistance mutations to the used drugs, having a HIV-RNA <50 copies/ml for 6 months or longer, negative for HBsAg and on a stable (>6 months) cART.

RESULTS

Ninety-four individuals were included. They were mostly men (77.7%) with a mean age of 53 years. They presented 159 co-morbidities including cardiovascular, bone, hepatic, kidney, and CNS diseases. Because of these pathologies, they took 207 non-ARV drugs (mean 2.2 per patient). Median duration of viral suppression was 77.5 months (IQR 61). All subjects were prospectively followed up to week 24 and all remained on dual therapy during the whole period. Neither virological failure, nor viral blip was detected. The median CD4 count rose from 658 cells/mcl (IQR 403) to 724 cells/mcl (IQR 401) (P = 0.006) without a significant (P = 0.44) change in the CD4/CD8 ratio. A significant (P < 0.0001) increment of median creatinine from 0.87 mg/dl (IQR 0.34) to 0.95 mg/dl (IQR 0.29) was observed in the first 2 months but thereafter leveled on these values (1.00 mg/dl; IQR 0.35) (P = 0.111 compared to 2 months). The lipid profile slightly improved. The daily cost of cART was significantly (P < 0.0001) reduced of 6.89 euros (SD 6.10).

DISCUSSION

Switching to a dual cART regimen based on lamivudine + dolutegravir maintains virological efficacy up to week 24, and is associated to slight improvements of the immunologic and metabolic status. The strategy allows to freely using concomitant medications for associated pathologies. The dual therapy is less expensive in economic terms.

CONCLUSION

Although still limited evidence exists, a dolutegravir-based dual therapy in combination with lamivudine shows promising results to be confirmed in larger controlled trials.

Economic impact of optimising antiretroviral treatment in human immunodeficiency virus-infected adults with suppressed viral load in Spain, by implementing the grade A-1 evidence recommendations of the 2015 GESIDA/National AIDS Plan

INTRODUCTION

The objective of this study is to estimate the economic impact associated with the optimisation of triple antiretroviral treatment (ART) in patients with undetectable viral load according to the recommendations from the GeSIDA/PNS (2015) Consensus and their applicability in the Spanish clinical practice.

METHODS

A pharmacoeconomic model was developed based on data from a National Hospital Prescription Survey on ART (2014) and the A-I evidence recommendations for the optimisation of ART from the GeSIDA/PNS (2015) consensus. The optimisation model took into account the willingness to optimise a particular regimen and other assumptions, and the results were validated by an expert panel in HIV infection (Infectious Disease Specialists and Hospital Pharmacists). The analysis was conducted from the NHS perspective, considering the annual wholesale price and accounting for deductions stated in the RD-Law 8/2010 and the VAT.

RESULTS

The expert panel selected six optimisation strategies, and estimated that 10,863 (13.4%) of the 80,859 patients in Spain currently on triple ART, would be candidates to optimise their ART, leading to savings of €15.9M/year (2.4% of total triple ART drug cost). The most feasible strategies (>40% of patients candidates for optimisation, n=4,556) would be optimisations to ATV/r+3TC therapy. These would produce savings between €653 and €4,797 per patient per year depending on baseline triple ART.

CONCLUSION

Implementation of the main optimisation strategies recommended in the GeSIDA/PNS (2015) Consensus into Spanish clinical practice would lead to considerable savings, especially those based in dual therapy with ATV/r+3TC, thus contributing to the control of pharmaceutical expenditure and NHS sustainability.

Atherogenic properties of LDL particles after switching from Truvada or Kivexa plus lopinavir/r to lamivudine plus lopinavir/r: OLE-MET substudy

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to determine the impact of tenofovir or abacavir discontinuation on low-density lipoprotein (LDL) phenotype and lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A2 (Lp-PLA2) activity in HIV-infected patients treated with lopinavir/ritonavir plus 2 nucleos(t)ide reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTI).

METHODS

Multicenter, open-label study. Patients were randomized to continue with lopinavir/ritonavir plus 2 NRTI (triple therapy) or to switch to lopinavir/ritonavir plus lamivudine (dual therapy). LDL phenotype (by gradient gel electrophoresis) and Lp-PLA2 (by 2-thio-PAF) were determined at baseline and week 48.

RESULTS

Forty-four patients included (triple therapy n = 19, dual therapy n = 25): men 63.6%, age 41.5 years (25-61), Framingham score 4.9% (0.2-22). Tenofovir was part of the regimen in 28 (63.6%) patients. Dual therapy patients were younger (p = 0.013) and had lower baseline apolipoprotein A1 (p = 0.029). At week 48, there were no changes in standard lipid measurements, except ApoA1/Apo B, which increased in dual therapy (p = 0.038) with no differences between arms. At week 48, no change in LDL phenotype was found in either arm. No changes in total Lp-PLA2 activity or the relative distribution of LDL and HDL particles were found at week 48 in either arm.

CONCLUSIONS

Discontinuing the third nucleos(t)ide, mainly tenofovir and abacavir, in a lopinavir/ritonavir-containing regimen was not associated with a deleterious effect on LDL phenotype nor in Lp-PLA2 activity.

Two-Drug Treatment Approaches in HIV: Finally Getting Somewhere?

The advent of combination antiretroviral therapy (ART) has significantly decreased AIDS-related morbidity and mortality. Nevertheless, the benefits of ART are only realized through adherence to lifelong treatment. Though contemporary antiretroviral (ARV) drugs have fewer adverse effects in comparison to older ARV drugs, many agents are associated with negative or unknown long-term effects. There is increasing evidence that two-drug (dual-therapy) regimens may be an effective alternative to the currently recommended three-drug (triple-therapy) regimens. In this review, we provide a comprehensive and critical review of recently completed and ongoing trials of dual-therapy regimens in treatment-naïve and treatment-experienced HIV-1-infected patients. We also review current HIV/AIDS society recommendations regarding dual therapy as well as future therapeutic possibilities.

Profile of once-daily darunavir/cobicistat fixed-dose combination for the treatment of HIV/AIDS

Efficacy is the main objective of antiretroviral treatment and adherence is one of the cornerstones to achieve it. For this reason, treatment simplification is of key importance with regard to antiretroviral regimens. Rezolsta® (darunavir/cobicistat) is the first fixed-dose combination containing a protease inhibitor approved for HIV treatment. This coformulation includes darunavir, a protease inhibitor that has shown its efficacy and safety in naïve and treatment-experienced patients, and cobicistat, the new pharmacokinetic enhancer that is expected to replace ritonavir. Bioequivalence between ritonavir and cobicistat as darunavir boosters has been shown in studies involving healthy volunteers. Furthermore, efficacy and safety of darunavir/cobicistat observed in phase III studies, including naïve and pretreated patients without darunavir-associated resistance mutations, are comparable to historical data of darunavir/ritonavir 800/100 mg once-daily formulation. Adverse events with darunavir/cobicistat are scarce and mild, and basically include skin reactions and gastrointestinal disturbances. Although small increases in plasma creatinine are expected in patients receiving cobicistat due to the inhibition of creatinine transporters in kidney tubules, actual glomerular filtrate rate remains unaltered. Cobicistat does not have an inducer effect on metabolic pathways and shows much more selective inhibition than ritonavir. Therefore, isoenzyms different from CYP3A4 are supposed to be less affected by cobicistat, and thus fewer drug–drug interactions are expected.

Modifying Antiretroviral Therapy in Virologically Suppressed HIV-1-Infected Patients

HIV-1-infected patients with suppressed plasma viral loads often require changes to their antiretroviral (ARV) therapy to manage drug toxicity and intolerance, to improve adherence, and to avoid drug interactions. In patients who have never experienced virologic failure while receiving ARV therapy and who have no evidence of drug resistance, switching to any of the acceptable US Department of Health and Human Services first-line therapies is expected to maintain virologic suppression. However, in virologically suppressed patients with a history of virologic failure or drug resistance, it can be more challenging to change therapy while still maintaining virologic suppression. In these patients, it may be difficult to know whether the discontinuation of one of the ARVs in a suppressive regimen constitutes the removal of a key regimen component that will not be adequately supplanted by one or more substituted ARVs. In this article, we review many of the clinical scenarios requiring ARV therapy modification in patients with stable virologic suppression and outline the strategies for modifying therapy while maintaining long-term virologic suppression.

Less-drug regimen including atazanavir in maintenance treatment of HIV infection: how, who, when, why?

For many patients living with HIV-1, the efficacy of combined ART (cART) has made the infection turn to a chronic disease. Because cART is associated with a risk of long-term toxicity, switching patients with virological success to another therapy remains a major issue. Studies undertaken and published over recent years have shown that switching patients exhibiting virological suppression to less-drug regimens (LDR) is a possible option of maintenance strategy. The use of ritonavir-boosted PIs (PI/r) as the backbone of LDR-based maintenance therapy is consistent with their virological potency and a high genetic barrier of resistance. Atazanavir is the most documented PI/r regarding maintenance in dual therapy, with favourable results in terms of virological suppression, tolerance improvement and absence of emergence of mutations. Furthermore, atazanavir is the only commonly prescribed PI that can be used after withdrawal of ritonavir, with maintenance of virological suppression whatever the backbone of associated NRTIs. Based on clinical studies, and taking into account the characteristics of the patients included, one may consider that for any patient with a virological suppression on cART for at least 12 months, with the nadir CD4 >100 cells/mm³ and an absence of encephalitis, an LDR-based maintenance therapy including atazanavir can be considered. Cumulative genotypes must be available to make sure that the LDR will not jeopardize future therapeutic options. The final decision regarding the most appropriate LDR must be guided by the objectives shared by the physician and his/her patient.

Clinical challenges in HIV/AIDS: Hints for advancing prevention and patient management strategies

Acquired immune deficiency syndrome has been one of the most devastating epidemics of the last century. The current estimate for people living with the HIV is 36.9 million. Today, despite availability of potent and safe drugs for effective treatment, lifelong therapy is required for preventing HIV re-emergence from a pool of latently infected cells. However, recent evidence show the importance to expand HIV testing, to offer antiretroviral treatment to all infected individuals, and to ensure retention through all the cascade of care. In addition, circumcision, pre-exposure prophylaxis, and other biomedical tools are now available for included in a comprehensive preventive package. Use of all the available tools might allow cutting the HIV transmission in 2030. In this article, we review the status of the epidemic, the latest advances in prevention and treatment, the concept of treatment as prevention and the challenges and opportunities for the HIV cure agenda.

Antiretroviral Drugs for Treatment and Prevention of HIV Infection in Adults: 2016 Recommendations of the International Antiviral Society-USA Panel

IMPORTANCE

New data and therapeutic options warrant updated recommendations for the use of antiretroviral drugs (ARVs) to treat or to prevent HIV infection in adults.

OBJECTIVE

To provide updated recommendations for the use of antiretroviral therapy in adults (aged ≥18 years) with established HIV infection, including when to start treatment, initial regimens, and changing regimens, along with recommendations for using ARVs for preventing HIV among those at risk, including preexposure and postexposure prophylaxis.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

A panel of experts in HIV research and patient care convened by the International Antiviral Society-USA reviewed data published in peer-reviewed journals, presented by regulatory agencies, or presented as conference abstracts at peer-reviewed scientific conferences since the 2014 report, for new data or evidence that would change previous recommendations or their ratings. Comprehensive literature searches were conducted in the PubMed and EMBASE databases through April 2016. Recommendations were by consensus, and each recommendation was rated by strength and quality of the evidence.

FINDINGS

Newer data support the widely accepted recommendation that antiretroviral therapy should be started in all individuals with HIV infection with detectable viremia regardless of CD4 cell count. Recommended optimal initial regimens for most patients are 2 nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) plus an integrase strand transfer inhibitor (InSTI). Other effective regimens include nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors or boosted protease inhibitors with 2 NRTIs. Recommendations for special populations and in the settings of opportunistic infections and concomitant conditions are provided. Reasons for switching therapy include convenience, tolerability, simplification, anticipation of potential new drug interactions, pregnancy or plans for pregnancy, elimination of food restrictions, virologic failure, or drug toxicities. Laboratory assessments are recommended before treatment, and monitoring during treatment is recommended to assess response, adverse effects, and adherence. Approaches are recommended to improve linkage to and retention in care are provided. Daily tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine is recommended for use as preexposure prophylaxis to prevent HIV infection in persons at high risk. When indicated, postexposure prophylaxis should be started as soon as possible after exposure.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Antiretroviral agents remain the cornerstone of HIV treatment and prevention. All HIV-infected individuals with detectable plasma virus should receive treatment with recommended initial regimens consisting of an InSTI plus 2 NRTIs. Preexposure prophylaxis should be considered as part of an HIV prevention strategy for at-risk individuals. When used effectively, currently available ARVs can sustain HIV suppression and can prevent new HIV infection. With these treatment regimens, survival rates among HIV-infected adults who are retained in care can approach those of uninfected adults.

Week 96 efficacy and safety of darunavir/ritonavir monotherapy vs. darunavir/ritonavir with two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors in the PROTEA trial

OBJECTIVES

PROTEA is a randomized controlled trial to assess the efficacy and safety of darunavir/ritonavir (DRV/r) monotherapy as an alternative to triple therapy.

METHODS

Patients fully suppressed on first-line antiretrovirals (viral load < 50 HIV-1 RNA copies/mL) were switched to DRV/r 800/100 mg once daily, either as monotherapy (n = 137) or with two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) (n = 136). Treatment failure was HIV-1 RNA level ≥ 50 copies/mL at week 96 or discontinuation of study treatment [Food and Drug Administration (FDA) snapshot algorithm].

RESULTS

Patients were mainly male and white, with mean age 44 years. In the primary efficacy analysis, the percentage of patients with HIV-1 RNA < 50 copies/mL by week 96 [intent to treat (ITT)] was lower in the DRV/r monotherapy arm (103 of 137 patients; 75%) than in the triple therapy arm (116 of 136 patients; 85%) [difference -10.1%; 95% confidence interval (CI) -19.5, -0.7%]. In the switch-included analysis, monotherapy was noninferior to triple therapy. In a post hoc analysis, for patients with nadir CD4 count ≥ 200 cells/μL, rates of HIV-1 RNA suppression were 82 of 96 patients (85%) in the DRV/r monotherapy arm and 88 of 106 patients (83%) in the triple therapy arm. No treatment-emergent primary protease inhibitor mutations were detected in either arm. The frequency of adverse events was similar in the two arms; however, one patient in the monotherapy arm was hospitalized with HIV encephalitis and elevated cerebrospinal fluid HIV-1 RNA.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, in patients with HIV-1 RNA < 50 copies/mL at baseline, switching to DRV/r monotherapy showed lower efficacy vs. triple therapy at week 96 in the primary ITT switch-equals-failure analysis, particularly in patients with CD4 counts < 200 cells/μL.

Dutrebis (lamivudine and raltegravir) for use in combination with other antiretroviral products for the treatment of HIV-1 infection

Raltegravir and lamivudine have been part of highly active therapy regimens throughout the past years of antiretroviral therapy. A fixed-dose, single-tablet regimen comprising a non-poloxamer formulation of the integrase inhibitor raltegravir and the transcriptase inhibitor lamivudine (raltegravir/lamivudine; Dutrebis(®)) has been recently licensed for the treatment of HIV-1 infection. In several Phase I pharmacokinetic studies, one Dutrebis (150 mg lamivudine/300 mg raltegravir) fixed-dose combination tablet showed a higher bioavailability but comparable lamivudine and 400 mg raltegravir poloxamer exposures. Thus, the co-administration of raltegravir together with lamivudine created a potent, effective, well-tolerated antiretroviral combination, which could be more convenient for the patient. However, the disadvantage of twice a day administration, and the existence of other fixed-dose combinations limit its widespread clinical use. This article reviews pharmacokinetics data and appraises their potential use in current and future HIV therapy.

Improvement of BMD after Switching from Lopinavir/R Plus Two Nucleos(T)ide Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors to Lopinavir/R Plus Lamivudine: OLE-LIP Substudy

OBJECTIVE

To compare 48-week changes in bone mineral density (BMD) and body fat distribution between patients continuing lopinavir/ritonavir and two NRTIs and those switching to lopinavir/ritonavir and lamivudine.

METHODS

Substudy of a randomized, open-label, multicenter OLE study was carried out. Adult HIV-infected patients with <50 copies/mL for ≥6 months were randomized (1:1) to continue lopinavir/ritonavir and two NRTIs or switching to lopinavir/ritonavir and lamivudine. Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) was performed at baseline and after 48 weeks to measure bone composition and body fat distribution in both the groups.

RESULTS

Forty-one patients (dual-therapy, n = 23; triple-therapy, n = 18) of 239, who received at least one dose of study medication, completed the study: median age, 42 years, 71% male, 73% Caucasian. At week 48, total BMD increased by 1.04% (95% CI, 0.06 to 2.01%) among patients switching to dual-therapy, whereas no significant changes occurred in patients maintaining triple-therapy. Dual-therapy and older age were independently associated with total BMD increase. Among patients discontinuing tenofovir-DF, a significant increase was seen in total BMD (1.43; 95% CI, -0.04 to 2.91) and total hip (1.33%; 95% CI, 0.44 to 2.22%). A non-statistically significant decrease in femoral and spinal BMD was observed in patients who discontinued abacavir and in those continuing triple-therapy. Regarding fat distribution, no significant changes were seen in both the treatment groups.

DISCUSSION

BMD increased following switching to lopinavir/ritonavir plus lamivudine in HIV-infected patients on suppressive triple-therapy with lopinavir/ritonavir and two NRTIs including tenofovir-DF.

Choice of antiretroviral drugs for continued treatment scale-up in a public health approach: what more do we need to know?

INTRODUCTION

There have been several important developments in antiretroviral treatment in the past two years. Randomized clinical trials have been conducted to evaluate a lower dose of efavirenz (400 mg once daily). Integrase inhibitors such as dolutegravir have been approved for first-line treatment. A new formulation of tenofovir (alafenamide) has been developed and has shown equivalent efficacy to tenofovir in randomized trials. Two-drug combination treatments have been evaluated in treatment-naïve and -experienced patients. The novel pharmacokinetic booster cobicistat has been compared to ritonavir in terms of pharmacokinetics, efficacy and safety. The objective of this commentary is to assess recent developments in antiretroviral drug treatment to determine whether new treatments should be included in new international guidelines.

DISCUSSION

The use of first-line treatment with tenofovir and efavirenz at the standard 600 mg once-daily dose should remain the first-choice standard of care treatment. Evidence supporting a switch to efavirenz 400 mg once daily or integrase inhibitors is sufficient to consider these drugs as alternative first-line options, but more data are needed on their use in pregnant women and people with TB co-infection. The use of new formulations of tenofovir is currently too preliminary to justify immediate adoption and scale-up across HIV programmes in low- and middle-income countries. The evidence supporting use of two-drug combinations is not considered strong enough to justify changed recommendations from use of standard triple drug combinations. Cobicistat does not offer significant safety advantages over ritonavir as a pharmacokinetic booster.

CONCLUSIONS

For continued scale-up of antiretroviral treatment in low- and middle-income countries, use of first-line triple combinations including efavirenz 600 mg once daily is supported by the largest evidence base. Additional studies are underway to evaluate new treatments in key populations, and these results may justify changes to these recommendations.

Backbones versus core agents in initial ART regimens: one game, two players

The advances seen in ART during the last 30 years have been outstanding. Treatment has evolved from the initial use of single agents as monotherapy. The ability to use HIV RNA as a surrogate marker for clinical outcomes allowed the more rapid evaluation of new therapies. This led to the understanding that triple-drug regimens, including a core agent (an NNRTI or a boosted PI) and two NRTIs, are optimal. These combinations have demonstrated continued improvements in their efficacy and toxicity as initial therapy. However, the need for pharmacokinetic boosting, with potential drug-drug interactions, or residual issues of efficacy or toxicity have persisted for some agents. Most recently, integrase strand transfer inhibitors, particularly dolutegravir, have shown unparalleled safety and efficacy and are currently the core agents of choice. Regimens that included only core agents or only backbone agents have not been as successful as combined therapy in antiretroviral-naive patients. It appears that at least one NRTI is needed for optimal performance and lamivudine and emtricitabine may be the ideal candidates. Several studies are ongoing of agents with longer dosing intervals, lower cost and new NRTI-saving strategies to address unmet needs.

The Cost-effectiveness and Budget Impact of 2-Drug Dolutegravir-Lamivudine Regimens for the Treatment of HIV Infection in the United States

BACKGROUND

Recommended human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) treatment regimens in the United States contain 3 antiretroviral agents, costing >$30 000/person/year. Pilot studies are evaluating the efficacy of dual therapy with dolutegravir (DTG) and lamivudine (3TC). We examined the potential cost-effectiveness and budget impact of DTG + 3TC regimens in the United States.

METHODS

Using a mathematical model, we projected the clinical and economic outcomes of antiretroviral therapy (ART)-naive patients under 4 strategies: (1) no ART (for modeling comparison); (2) 2-drug: initial regimen of DTG + 3TC; (3) induction-maintenance: 48-week induction regimen of 3 drugs (DTG/abacavir [ABC]/3TC), followed by DTG + 3TC maintenance if virologically suppressed; and (4) standard of care: 3-drug regimen of DTG/ABC/3TC. Strategy-dependent model inputs, varied widely in sensitivity analyses, included 48-week virologic suppression (88%-93%), subsequent virologic failure (0.1%-0.6%/month), and Medicaid-discounted ART costs ($15 200-$39 600/year). A strategy was considered cost-effective if its incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was <$100 000/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY).

RESULTS

The 3 ART strategies had the same 5-year survival rates (90%). The ICER was $22 500/QALY for induction-maintenance and >$500 000/QALY for standard of care. Two-drug was the preferred strategy only when DTG + 3TC 48-week virologic suppression rate exceeded 90%. With 50% uptake of either induction-maintenance or 2-drug for ART-naive patients, cost savings totaled $550 million and $800 million, respectively, within 5 years; savings reached >$3 billion if 25% of currently suppressed patients were switched to DTG + 3TC maintenance.

CONCLUSIONS

Should DTG + 3TC demonstrate high rates of virologic suppression, this regimen will be cost-effective and would save >$500 million in ART costs in the United States over 5 years.