Costs and cost-effectiveness analysis of 2015 GESIDA/Spanish AIDS National Plan recommended guidelines for initial antiretroviral therapy in HIV-infected adults

Durability of first-line antiretroviral regimens in the era of integrase inhibitors: a cohort of HIV-positive individuals in Spain, 2014-2015

BACKGROUND

We compared time to treatment change (TC), viral suppression (VS) and change in CD4⁺ T-cell counts of first-line antiretroviral regimens (ART).

METHODS

We analysed HIV treatment-naive adults from the Cohort of the Spanish HIV/AIDS Research Network (CoRIS) initiating the most commonly used ART regimens from September 2014 to November 2015. We used proportional hazards models on the sub-distribution hazard to estimate sub-distribution hazard ratios (sHR) for time to TC, logistic regression to estimate odds ratios (ORs) for VS (viral load <50 copies/ml), and linear regression to assess mean differences in CD4⁺ T-cell changes from ART initiation.

RESULTS

Among 960 individuals, tenofovir (TDF)/emtricitabine (FTC)/rilpivirine (RPV) was the most frequently prescribed regimen (24.2%), followed by elvitegravir (EVG)/cobicistat (COBI)/TDF/FTC (22.8%), abacavir (ABC)/lamivudine (3TC)/dolutegavir (DTG; 17.4%), TDF/FTC+darunavir/ritonavir (DRV/r) or darunavir/cobicistat (DRV/c; 12.1%), TDF/FTC/efavirenz (EFV; 8.8%), TDF/FTC+raltegravir (RAL; 7.7%) and TDF/FTC+DTG (7.0%). Initiating ART with TDF/FTC+DRV/r or DRV/c (adjusted sHR: 2.96; 95% CI: 1.44, 6.08), TDF/FTC/EFV (2.18; 0.98, 4.82), TDF/FTC+RAL (2.37; 1.08, 5.22) and TDF/FTC+DTG (6.34; 3.18, 12.64) was associated with a higher risk of TC compared to ABC/3TC/DTG. At 24 weeks, VS was lower in TDF/FTC+DRV/r or DRV/c (adjusted OR: 0.37, 95% CI: 0.18, 0.74) compared with ABC/3TC/DTG, and CD4⁺ T-cell increase was lower in patients initiating with TDF/FTC/RPV (adjusted mean difference: -75.9, 95% CI: -130.6, -21.2) compared with those who did with ABC/3TC/DTG.

CONCLUSIONS

Time to TC, VS and change in CD4⁺ T-cell counts varies by initial regimen. These differences may be useful for making decision when initiating ART.

Reasons for noncompliance with the national guidelines for initial antiretroviral therapy of HIV-infected patients in Spain, 2010-2015

INTRODUCTION

Our aims were to investigate the adherence to national guidelines of initial antiretroviral therapy (ART) in the Spanish multicenter CoRIS cohort during the years 2010-2015, to identify the reasons for the prescription of nonrecommended treatments, and to explore the role of institutional constraints to guideline compliance.

METHODS

ART regimens were classified as recommended, alternative or nonrecommended according to the guidelines. Physicians were asked the reasons for prescribing nonrecommended regimens. Factors associated with the prescription of non recommended regimens were assessed using multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

During the study period, 586 (10.7%) of 5479 patients who started ART were given a regimen not recommended in the guidelines. The most frequent reasons for prescribing nonrecommended regimens were: enrolment in clinical trials (43.3%), comorbidities and/or interactions (10.2%), pregnancy (8.7%), and cost (7.7%). Among 37 participating centers, 16 (43%), treating 3561 patients, reported limitations related with the cost of ART, and 20 (54%), treating 1365 patients, reported restrictions for prescribing at least one recommended antiretroviral. In multivariable analysis, a higher risk of receiving nonrecommended regimens was associated with male gender, HIV acquisition by heterosexual transmission, low viral loads, initiation of treatment during the years 2011 to 2015, and initiation of treatment in a center with restricted access to at least one antiretroviral drug.

CONCLUSIONS

Compliance to clinical guidelines was high. A high proportion of centres reported cost limitations for ART or restricted access to at least one recommended antiretroviral drug, with a significant impact on the choice of initial regimens.

Economic and epidemiologic impact of guidelines for early ART initiation irrespective of CD4 count in Spain

INTRODUCTION

Emerging data suggest that early antiretroviral therapy (ART) could reduce serious AIDS and non-AIDS events and deaths but could also increase costs. In January 2016, the Spanish guidelines were updated to recommend ART at any CD4 count. However, the epidemiologic and economic impacts of early ART initiation in Spain remain unclear.

METHODS

The Johns Hopkins HIV Economic-Epidemiologic Mathematical Model (JHEEM) was utilized to estimate costs, transmissions, and outcomes in Spain over 20 years. We compared implementation of guidelines for early ART initiation to a counterfactual scenario deferring ART until CD4-counts fall below 350 cells/mm3. We additionally studied the impact of early ART initiation in combination with improvements to HIV screening, care linkage and engagement.

RESULTS

Early ART initiation (irrespective of CD4-count) is expected to avert 20,100 [95% Uncertainty Range (UR) 11,100-83,000] new HIV cases over the next two decades compared to delayed ART (28% reduction), at an incremental health system cost of €1.05 billion [€0.66 - €1.63] billion, and an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of €29,700 [€13,700 - €41,200] per QALY gained. Projected ICERs declined further over longer time horizon; e.g., an ICER of €12,691 over 30 years. Furthermore, the impact of early ART initiation was potentiated by improved HIV screening among high-risk individuals, averting an estimated 41,600 [23,200-172,200] HIV infections (a 58% decline) compared to delayed ART.

CONCLUSIONS

Recommendations for ART initiation irrespective of CD4-counts are cost-effective and could avert > 30% of new cases in Spain. Improving HIV diagnosis can amplify this impact.

Short-term cost and efficiency analysis of raltegravir versus atazanavir/ritonavir or darunavir/ritonavir for treatment-naive adults with HIV-1 infection in Spain

INTRODUCTION

The AIDS Clinical Trial Group (ACTG) 5257 clinical trial showed that raltegravir (RAL) was superior to atazanavir/ritonavir (ATV/r) and darunavir/ritonavir (DRV/r), when used in combination with emtricitabine/tenofovir DF (FTC/TDF), in a 96-week composite endpoint combining virologic efficacy and tolerability for treatment-naive adults with HIV-1 infection. This study aimed to estimate the efficiency associated with these three regimens in Spain.

METHODS

An economic model was developed to estimate costs for antiretroviral drugs, adverse event management, and HIV care for individuals initiating first-line therapy. Antiretroviral drug costs were based on hospital costs with mandatory discounts applied. Adverse event management costs and HIV care costs were obtained from published sources and inflated to 2015 euros. Head-to-head efficacy and safety data (discontinuation rates, mean CD4 cell-count changes, adverse event incidence) up to 96 weeks for each regimen were obtained from the clinical trial. The efficiency of each regimen, as measured by the cost per successfully treated patient (i.e. on first-line therapy for 96 weeks), was estimated and examined in sensitivity analyses. All cost outcomes were discounted at 3.0% annually.

RESULTS

Total costs per successfully treated patient were €22,377 for RAL, €26,629 for ATV/r, and €23,928 for DRV/r. These results were found to be robust in sensitivity analyses.

DISCUSSION

RAL has the lowest cost per successfully treated patient when compared with DRV/r and ATV/r, each used in combination with FTC/TDF, for treatment-naive adults with HIV-1 infection in Spain. This economic evidence complements the clinical benefits of RAL reported in the ACTG 5257 clinical trial.

Costs and cost-efficacy analysis of the 2017 GESIDA/Spanish National AIDS Plan recommended guidelines for initial antiretroviral therapy in HIV-infected adults

INTRODUCTION

GESIDA and the Spanish National AIDS Plan panel of experts have recommended preferred (PR), alternative (AR) and other regimens (OR) for antiretroviral therapy (ART) as initial therapy in HIV-infected patients for 2017. The objective of this study was to evaluate the costs and the efficiency of initiating treatment with PR and AR.

METHODS

Economic assessment of costs and efficiency (cost-efficacy) based on decision tree analyses. Efficacy was defined as the probability of reporting a viral load <50copies/mL at week 48, in an intention-to-treat analysis. Cost of initiating treatment with an ART regimen was defined as the costs of ART and its consequences (adverse effects, changes of ART regimen and drug resistance studies) during the first 48 weeks. The payer perspective (National Health System) was applied considering only differential direct costs: ART (official prices), management of adverse effects, resistance studies and HLA B*5701 screening. The setting was Spain and the costs correspond to those of 2017. A deterministic sensitivity analysis was conducted, building three scenarios for each regimen: base case, most favourable and least favourable.

RESULTS

In the base case scenario, the cost of initiating treatment ranged from 6882 euro for TFV/FTC/RPV (AR) to 10,904 euros for TFV/FTC+RAL (PR). The efficacy varied from 0.82 for TFV/FTC+DRV/p (AR) to 0.92 for TAF/FTC/EVG/COBI (PR). The efficiency, in terms of cost-efficacy, ranged from 7923 to 12,765 euros per responder at 48 weeks, for ABC/3TC/DTG (PR) and TFV/FTC+RAL (PR), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Considering ART official prices, the most efficient regimen was ABC/3TC/DTG (PR), followed by TFV/FTC/RPV (AR) and TAF/FTC/EVG/COBI (PR).

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.

Costs and cost-efficacy analysis of the 2016 GESIDA/Spanish AIDS National Plan recommended guidelines for initial antiretroviral therapy in HIV-infected adults

INTRODUCTION

GESIDA and the AIDS National Plan panel of experts suggest preferred (PR), alternative (AR), and other regimens (OR) for antiretroviral treatment (ART) as initial therapy in HIV-infected patients for the year 2016. The objective of this study is to evaluate the costs and the efficacy of initiating treatment with these regimens.

METHODS

Economic assessment of costs and efficiency (cost/efficacy) based on decision tree analyses. Efficacy was defined as the probability of reporting a viral load <50copies/mL at week 48 in an intention-to-treat analysis. Cost of initiating treatment with an ART regimen was defined as the costs of ART and its consequences (adverse effects, changes of ART regimen, and drug resistance studies) during the first 48 weeks. The payer perspective (National Health System) was applied, only taking into account differential direct costs: ART (official prices), management of adverse effects, studies of resistance, and HLA B*5701 testing. The setting is Spain and the costs correspond to those of 2016. A sensitivity deterministic analysis was conducted, building three scenarios for each regimen: base case, most favourable, and least favourable.

RESULTS

In the base case scenario, the cost of initiating treatment ranges from 4663 Euros for 3TC+LPV/r (OR) to 10,894 Euros for TDF/FTC+RAL (PR). The efficacy varies from 0.66 for ABC/3TC+ATV/r (AR) and ABC/3TC+LPV/r (OR), to 0.89 for TDF/FTC+DTG (PR) and TDF/FTC/EVG/COBI (AR). The efficiency, in terms of cost/efficacy, ranges from 5280 to 12,836 Euros per responder at 48 weeks, for 3TC+LPV/r (OR), and RAL+DRV/r (OR), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Despite the overall most efficient regimen being 3TC+LPV/r (OR), among the PR and AR, the most efficient regimen was ABC/3TC/DTG (PR). Among the AR regimes, the most efficient was TDF/FTC/RPV.