Does a significant reduction in malaria risk make lopinavir/ritonavir-based ART cost-effective for children with HIV in co-endemic, low-resource settings?

Effect of antiretroviral therapy on malaria incidence in HIV-infected Ugandan adults

INTRODUCTION

Using the data of a trial on cotrimoxazole (CTX) cessation, we investigated the effect of different antiretroviral therapy (ART) regimens on the incidence of clinical malaria.

METHODS

During the cotrimoxazole cessation trial (ISRCTN44723643), HIV-infected Ugandan adults with CD4 at least 250 cells/μl were randomized to receive either CTX prophylaxis or placebo and were followed for a median of 2.5 years. Blood slides for malaria microscopy were examined at scheduled visits and at unscheduled visits when the participant felt unwell. CD4 cell counts were done 6-monthly. Malaria was defined as fever with a positive blood slide. ART regimens were categorized as nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) only, non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI)-containing or protease inhibitor containing. Malaria incidence was calculated using random effects Poisson regression to account for clustering of events.

RESULTS

Malaria incidence in the three ART regimen groups was 9.9 (3.6-27.4), 9.3 (8.3-10.4), and 3.5 (1.6-7.6) per 100 person-years, respectively. Incidence on protease inhibitors was lower than that on the other regimens with the results just reaching significance (adjusted rate ratio 0.4, 95% confidence interval = 0.2-1.0, comparing with NNRTI regimens). Stratification by CTX/placebo use gave similar results, without evidence of an interaction between the effects of CTX/placebo use and ART regimen. There was no evidence of an interaction between ART regimen and CD4 cell count.

CONCLUSION

There was some evidence that protease inhibitor-containing ART regimens may be associated with a lower clinical malaria incidence compared with other regimens. This effect was not modified by CTX use or CD4 cell count. The antimalarial properties of protease inhibitors may have clinical and public health importance.

Pharmacokinetic Interactions Between Quinine and Lopinavir/Ritonavir in Healthy Thai Adults

This study aimed to investigate the pharmacokinetic interactions between quinine and lopinavir boosted with ritonavir (LPV/r) in healthy Thai adults (8 males and 12 females). Period 1 (day 1): subjects received a single oral dose of 600 mg quinine sulfate. Period 2: subjects received LPV/r (400/100 mg) twice daily. Period 3: subjects received a single quinine sulfate dose plus LPV/r twice a day. Intensive blood sampling was performed during each phase. Quinine AUC0-48h (area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time 0 to 48 hours), AUC0-∞ (area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time 0 to infinity), and Cmax (maximum concentration over the time-span specified), were 56%, 57%, and 47% lower, respectively, in the presence of LPV/r. 3-Hydroxyquinine AUC0-48h, AUC0-∞, and Cmax were significantly lower and the metabolite-to-parent ratio was significantly reduced. Lopinavir and ritonavir exposures were not significantly reduced with quinine coadministration, but Cmax of both drugs were significantly lower. The geometric mean ratio (GMR) and 90% CI of AUC0-48h, AUC0-∞, and Cmax for quinine, 3-hydroxyquinine, lopinavir, and ritonavir lay outside the bioequivalent range of 0.8-1.25. Drug treatments during all periods were generally well tolerated. The reduction in systemic exposure of quinine and 3-hydroxyquinine with concomitant LPV/r use raises concerns of suboptimal exposure. Studies in HIV/malaria coinfection patients are needed to determine the clinical impact to decide if any change to the quinine dose is warranted.

Cost-effectiveness of first-line antiretroviral therapy for HIV-infected African children less than 3 years of age

Background:

The International Maternal, Pediatric, and Adolescent Clinical Trials P1060 trial demonstrated superior outcomes for HIV-infected children less than 3 years old initiating antiretroviral therapy (ART) with lopinavir/ritonavir compared to nevirapine, but lopinavir/ritonavir is four-fold costlier.

Design/methods:

We used the Cost-Effectiveness of Preventing AIDS Complications (CEPAC)-Pediatric model, with published and P1060 data, to project outcomes under three strategies: no ART; first-line nevirapine (with second-line lopinavir/ritonavir); and first-line lopinavir/ritonavir (second-line nevirapine). The base-case examined South African children initiating ART at age 12 months; sensitivity analyses varied all key model parameters. Outcomes included life expectancy, lifetime costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios [ICERs; dollars/year of life saved ($/YLS)]. We considered interventions with ICERs less than 1× per-capita gross domestic product (South Africa: $7500)/YLS as ‘very cost-effective,’ interventions with ICERs below 3× gross domestic product/YLS as ‘cost-effective,’ and interventions leading to longer life expectancy and lower lifetime costs as ‘cost-saving’.

Results:

Projected life expectancy was 2.8 years with no ART. Both ART regimens markedly improved life expectancy and were very cost-effective, compared to no ART. First-line lopinavir/ritonavir led to longer life expectancy (28.8 years) and lower lifetime costs ($41 350/person, from lower second-line costs) than first-line nevirapine (27.6 years, $44 030). First-line lopinavir/ritonavir remained cost-saving or very cost-effective compared to first-line nevirapine unless: liquid lopinavir/ritonavir led to two-fold higher virologic failure rates or 15-fold greater costs than in the base-case, or second-line ART following first-line lopinavir/ritonavir was very ineffective.

Conclusions:

On the basis of P1060 data, first-line lopinavir/ritonavir leads to longer life expectancy and is cost-saving or very cost-effective compared to first-line nevirapine. This supports WHO guidelines, but increasing access to pediatric ART is critical regardless of the regimen used.

The epidemiological impact of HIV antiretroviral therapy on malaria in children

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study is to determine the epidemiological effectiveness of a first-line antiretroviral regimen with HIV protease inhibitor for preventing recurrent malaria in children under the range of HIV prevalence levels and malaria transmission intensities encountered in sub-Saharan Africa.

DESIGN

A dynamic model of malaria transmission was developed using clinical data on the protease inhibitor extended posttreatment prophylactic effect of the antimalarial treatment, artemether-lumefantrine, in addition to parameter estimates from the literature.

METHODS

To evaluate the benefits of HIV protease inhibitors on the health burden of recurrent malaria among children, we constructed a dynamic model of malaria transmission to both HIV-positive and HIV-negative children, parameterized by data from a recent clinical trial. The model was then evaluated under varying malaria transmission and HIV prevalence settings to determine the health benefits of HIV protease inhibitors in the context of artemether-lumefantrine treatment of malaria in children.

RESULTS

Comparing scenarios of low, intermediate and high newborn HIV prevalence, in a range of malaria transmission settings, our dynamic model predicts that artemether-lumefantrine with HIV protease inhibitor based regimens prevents 0.03-0.10, 5.2-13.0 and 25.5-65.8 annual incidences of malaria per 1000 children, respectively. In addition, HIV protease inhibitors save 0.002-0.006, 0.22-0.8, 1.04-4.3 disability-adjusted life-years per 1000 children annually. Considering only HIV-infected children, HIV protease inhibitors avert between 278 and 1043 annual incidences of malaria per 1000 children.

CONCLUSION

The use of HIV protease inhibitor based regimens as first-line antiretroviral therapy for HIV is an effective measure for reducing recurrent malaria among HIV-infected children in areas where HIV and malaria are coendemic, and artemether-lumefantrine is a first-line antimalarial.