Impacto presupuestario de una combinación a dosis fija de efavirenz-emtricitabina-tenofovir para tratamiento de pacientes infectados por el virus de la inmunodeficiencia humana tipo 1

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.

Budget impact analysis of medicines: updated systematic review and implications

This evaluation determines whether published studies to date meet the key characteristics identified for budget impact analyses (BIA) for medicines, accomplished through a systematic review and assessment against identified key characteristics. Studies from 2001-2015 on 'budget impact analysis' with 'drug' interventions were assessed, selected based on their titles/abstracts and full texts, and their characteristics checked according to key criteria. Out of 1,984 studies, 92 were subsequently identified for review. Of these, 95% were published in Europe and the USA. 2012 saw the largest number of publications (16%) with a decline thereafter. 48% met up to 7 out of the 9 key characteristics. Only 22% stated no conflict of interest. The results indicate low adherence to the key characteristics that should be considered for BIAs and strong conflict of interest. This is an issue since BIAs can be of fundamental importance in managing the entry of new medicines including reimbursement decisions.

[Analysis of adherence and efficiency when replacing an antiretroviral therapy with efavirenz-emtricitabine-tenofovir in a single daily dose]

OBJECTIVE

To analyse whether the change of antiretroviral therapy to efavirenz/emtricitabine/tenofovir in a single daily dose (EETu) increases adherence and maintains effectiveness, and establish the cost increase caused by the change.

METHODS

An observational, retrospective, and intra-subject study, performed in the outpatient dispensing unit. The study period was 1 year (6 months before and 6 months after the change). Computer dispensing records and days of hospitalisation during the study period were reviewed, and the difference in treatment adherence calculated. To determine the effectiveness of treatment, viral load and CD4 lymphocytes data before and after the change were reviewed. The cost before and after treatment for each patient was determined, and therefore the annual cost increase and the incremental cost per patient.

RESULTS

The study included 127 patients. The difference in adherence was 0.6%. The percentage of poor adherence was 35.4% and 40.9% before and after the treatment change, respectively. The levels of CD4 lymphocytes and viral load did not change significantly with treatment. The economic analysis revealed an annual increase of 25,374.60 and €199.80 per patient.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of EETu did not improve the control of HIV infection in terms of effectiveness and adherence, and resulted in increased economic costs. Therefore, its choice as antiretroviral treatment will have to be based on criteria other than those described above.