Cost analysis of HIV treatment and drug-related adverse events when fixed-dose combinations of antiretrovirals (FDCs) were stopped, versus continuation with FDCs

Adherence and clinical outcomes of HIV patients switching to a fixed-dose combination regimen

Background

The efficacy of antiretroviral therapy (ART) is monitored using clinical markers such as viral load (VL) and CD4 counts. Adherence to ART has been associated with viral suppression and improved clinical outcomes.

Objectives

To determine the relationship between adherence status with multiple-tablet regimens (MTR) and fixed-dose combination (FDC) regimens, to weight, CD4 count and VL of patients living with HIV.

Method

An observational, descriptive study was conducted on a closed cohort of patients living with HIV and attending a primary health care clinic in Northern Cape in South Africa between 01 January 2013 and 31 December 2015. Patients were on an MTR and changed to an FDC regimen. Adherence was measured using the medicine possession ratio (MPR).

Results

Statistically significant differences exist between the mean MPR of the 30-day (p = 0.0308) and 28-day supply (p < 0.0001) of the MTR when compared to FDC regimen. No statistically significant differences could be found between adherence and clinical outcomes such as weight, CD4 count and VL for either MTR or FDC regimens. The suppressed VL values measured for MTR were n = 299 (89.25%) and n = 415 (93.05%) for FDC regimen.

Conclusion

Adherence improved when patients were switched to FDC, but no statistically significant differences in clinical outcomes measured as weight, CD4 count and VL between adherence status and regimen type could be found.

Contribution

This study contributes to much-needed information about ART adherence and clinical outcomes (such as weight, CD4 count and VL) of adult HIV-positive patients in a public healthcare clinic in the Northern Cape, South Africa.

Costs Associated with Adverse Drug Reactions Among HIV/TB Patients in Thailand

Purpose

To assess the direct and indirect costs associated with adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in patients receiving treatment regimens for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection and tuberculosis (TB) in selected Thai hospitals.

Patients and Methods

This was a retrospective study conducted between October 2014 and September 2019 at three public hospitals in Thailand. Data were obtained from a medical database and spontaneous ADR reporting system of each study site. The out-of-pocket health payments and indirect costs were determined via interviewing. All costs were updated to 2021.

Results

A total of 432 eligible patients who experienced ADRs due to HIV and TB treatment, and 93 patients were interviewed to determine direct non-medical and indirect costs. The average direct medical cost for ADR was USD 5.65 for mild cases, USD 156.54 for moderate cases, and USD 1,242.45 for severe cases. For direct non-medical costs, the average cost per episode was USD 27.29 in mild ADR, USD 70.86 in moderate ADR and USD 270.66 in severe ADR. The indirect cost incurred in each mild, moderate and severe ADR was USD 41.86, USD 89.34, and USD 552.60, respectively. The Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS) had the highest management costs.

Conclusion

ADRs associated with anti-tuberculosis drugs and antiretroviral drugs seem to have a substantial economic impact from a societal perspective. These findings would be useful for increasing awareness and encouraging early avoidance of ADRs.

Past and future of HIV infection. A document based on expert opinion

HIV infection is now almost 40 years old. In this time, along with the catastrophe and tragedy that it has entailed, it has also represented the capacity of modern society to take on a challenge of this magnitude and to transform an almost uniformly lethal disease into a chronic illness, compatible with a practically normal personal and relationship life. This anniversary seemed an ideal moment to pause and reflect on the future of HIV infection, the challenges that remain to be addressed and the prospects for the immediate future. This reflection has to go beyond merely technical approaches, by specialized professionals, to also address social and ethical aspects. For this reason, the Health Sciences Foundation convened a group of experts in different aspects of this disease to discuss a series of questions that seemed pertinent to all those present. Each question was presented by one of the participants and discussed by the group. The document we offer is the result of this reflection.

Effectiveness and tolerability of dolutegravir and abacavir/lamivudine administered as two separate pills compared to their equivalent single-tablet regimen in a multicentre cohort in Spain

INTRODUCTION

We aimed to assess the effectiveness and tolerability of dolutegravir (DTG), abacavir (ABC) and lamivudine (3TC) administered as branded STR (DTG/ABC/3TC) or as two separate pills (DTG and either branded ABC/3TC [DTG+(ABC/3TC)b] or generic ABC/3TC [DTG+(ABC/3TC)g]).

METHODS

We included individuals from the multicentre cohort of the Spanish HIV/AIDS Research Network (CoRIS) who received DTG/ABC/3TC, DTG+(ABC/3TC)b or DTG+(ABC/3TC)g during 2015 to 2018. We used multivariable logistic regression to compare the proportion of antiretroviral-naïve individuals who achieved viral suppression (VS) (viral load ≤50 copies/mL) at 24 weeks of initiating with DTG+(ABC/3TC)b or DTG+(ABC/3TC)g versus DTG/ABC/3TC. We also calculated the proportion of virologically suppressed individuals who maintained VS at 24 weeks after switching from DTG/ABC/3TC to DTG+(ABC/3TC)g.

RESULTS

During the study period, 829, 68 and 47 treatment-naïve individuals started treatment with DTG/ABC/3TC, DTG+(ABC/3TC)b or DTG+(ABC/3TC)g respectively. The proportions of individuals who changed their regimens due to side effects during the first 24 weeks were 3.7%, 4.4% and 6.4% respectively (p = 0.646). We did not find significant differences in VS at 24 weeks among individuals starting with DTG+(ABC/3TC)b or DTG+(ABC/3TC)g compared to those initiating with DTG/ABC/3TC. Among 177 virologically suppressed individuals who switched from DTG/ABC/3TC to DTG+(ABC/3TC)g, 170 (96.0%) maintained VS at 24 weeks.

CONCLUSIONS

In naïve individuals, the effectiveness and tolerability at 24 weeks of DTG plus ABC/3TC administered as two separate pills, either as branded or generic ABC/3TC, was similar to the STR DTG/ABC/3TC. Switching the STR DTG/ABC/3TC to its separate components DTG+(ABC/3TC)g in virologically suppressed individuals did not seem to impair its effectiveness.

Understanding authorized generics-A review of the published clinical data

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVES

Despite the large body of evidence demonstrating equivalent efficacy and safety for branded drugs and their generic counterparts, some patients and providers have the perception that generics may be less safe and effective than branded agents. Authorized generics (AGs) are a category of generic drugs defined by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as being the same as the brand-name drug without the brand's name on the label and which may have minor differences, such as tablet or capsule markings for identification. Studies in which AGs are considered along with other generics may increase our understanding of factors that may influence perceptions about generics and shed light on areas where education may be impactful. The objectives of this paper are to provide information about AGs, review studies in which they have been evaluated and explore the role that AGs may fill in the individualized treatment of patients.

METHODS

A literature review was conducted on 30 September 2019 with follow-up search on 4 March 2020. The search was focussed on published papers and meeting abstracts that provided information on AGs with respect to medical and health outcomes of therapy as well as switching in individuals receiving branded, AG, or other generic agents. Information about patients' perceptions of generic medications and adherence to therapy was also included. Additional information, including relevant government sources, such as the FDA website and the Federal Trade Commission Report, was included as appropriate.

RESULTS

The literature specific to AGs is limited, but available data clearly highlight the importance of patient perception of generics as well as medication appearance as factors that may affect adherence and potentially more frequent switchbacks to branded agents from generics or AGs.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

To our knowledge, this is the first narrative review to provide a summary of the published evidence about AGs with respect to clinical and health outcomes and switching. There is a need for more research and education regarding the use of AGs in clinical practice if they are to become more recognized as a potential treatment choice for patients. Generic medications play an important role in the healthcare system, and AGs may be able to provide an option to meet the specific needs of individual patients.

Fixed dose drug combinations - are they pharmacoeconomically sound? Findings and implications especially for lower- and middle-income countries

Introduction: There are positive aspects regarding the prescribing of fixed dose combinations (FDCs) versus prescribing the medicines separately. However, these have to be balanced against concerns including increased costs and their irrationality in some cases. Consequently, there is a need to review their value among lower- and middle-income countries (LMICs) which have the greatest prevalence of both infectious and noninfectious diseases and issues of affordability.Areas covered: Review of potential advantages, disadvantages, cost-effectiveness, and availability of FDCs in high priority disease areas in LMICs and possible initiatives to enhance the prescribing of valued FDCs and limit their use where there are concerns with their value.Expert commentary: FDCs are valued across LMICs. Advantages include potentially improved response rates, reduced adverse reactions, increased adherence rates, and reduced costs. Concerns include increased chances of drug:drug interactions, reduced effectiveness, potential for imprecise diagnoses and higher unjustified prices. Overall certain FDCs including those for malaria, tuberculosis, and hypertension are valued and listed in the country's essential medicine lists, with initiatives needed to enhance their prescribing where currently low prescribing rates. Proposed initiatives include robust clinical and economic data to address the current paucity of pharmacoeconomic data. Irrational FDCs persists in some countries which are being addressed.

A meta-analysis comparing 48-week treatment outcomes of single and multi-tablet antiretroviral regimens for the treatment of people living with HIV

OBJECTIVES

To compare outcomes with single tablet regimens (STR) versus multi-tablet regimens (MTR) for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) treatment using published data.

DESIGN

Systematic review and random-effects meta-analysis of literature on approved and investigational HIV regimens.

METHODS

The research followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Single or un-blinded studies reporting a direct comparison between STR and MTR were eligible for the meta-analysis. Double-blinded studies were excluded due to lack of difference in pill burden between cohorts. The key outcomes of interest included: adherence rates/proportion meeting target, efficacy, safety/tolerability, non-clinical and economic outcomes.

RESULTS

After screening 63 full-text articles and posters, 14 studies were eligible for the meta-analysis. The analysis showed that patients taking STR had improved outcomes over those taking MTR. Patients were significantly more adherent regardless of daily dosing frequency (odds ratio [OR]: 1.96, p < 0.001) and were more likely to achieve virological suppression (relative risk [RR]: 1.05, p = 0.002). There was a trend toward a lower discontinuation risk in the STR cohort, together with reported higher therapy satisfaction, better symptom control, improved health status, reduced healthcare resource utilization and demonstrated cost-effectiveness compared to MTR. There were no differences in CD4 cell count increase (at 48 weeks) or safety outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this study confirm previously reported preliminary findings of the advantages of STR over MTR for HIV treatment in adherence, therapy continuation, viral suppression, tolerability, quality of life improvement, cost-effectiveness and healthcare resource utilization.

Meta-Analysis of Studies Comparing Single and Multi-Tablet Fixed Dose Combination HIV Treatment Regimens

Availability of a single source review of once-daily fixed-dose single tablet regimen (STR) and multiple tablet fixed-dose regimen (MTR) would optimally inform healthcare providers and policy makers involved in the management of population with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV).We conducted a meta-analysis of published literature to compare patient adherence, clinical, and cost outcomes of STR to MTR.Published literature in English between 2005 and 2014 was searched using Embase, PubMed (Medline in-process), and ClinicalTrials.Gov databases. Two-level screening was undertaken by 2 independent researchers to finalize articles for evidence synthesis. Adherence, efficacy, safety, tolerability, healthcare resource use (HRU), and costs were assessed comparing STR to MTR. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed and heterogeneity examined using meta-regression.Thirty-five articles were identified for qualitative evidence synthesis, of which 9 had quantifiable data for meta-analysis (4 randomized controlled trials and 5 observational studies). Patients on STR were significantly more adherent when compared to patients on MTR of any frequency (odds ratio [OR]: 2.37 [95% CI: 1.68, 3.35], P < 0.001; 4 studies), twice-daily MTR (OR: 2.53 [95% CI: 1.13, 5.66], P = 0.02; 2 studies), and once-daily MTR (OR: 1.81 [95% CI: 1.15, 2.84], P = 0.01; 2 studies). The relative risk (RR) for viral load suppression at 48 weeks was higher (RR: 1.09 [95% CI: 1.04, 1.15], P = .0003; 3 studies) while RR of grade 3 to 4 laboratory abnormalities was lower among patients on STR (RR: 0.68 [95% CI: 0.49, 0.94], P = 0.02; 2 studies). Changes in CD4 count at 48 weeks, any severe adverse events (SAEs), grade 3 to 4 AEs, mortality, and tolerability were found comparable between STR and MTR. Several studies reported significant reduction in HRU and costs among STR group versus MTR.Study depicted comparable tolerability, safety (All-SAE and Grade 3-4 AE), and mortality and fewer Grade 3 to 4 lab abnormalities and better viral load suppression and adherence among patients on FDC-containing STR versus MTR; literature depicted favorable HRU and costs for STRs.These findings may help decision makers especially in resource-poor settings to plan for optimal HIV disease management when the choice of both STRs and MTRs are available.

Economic Burden of HIV Antiretroviral Therapy Adverse Events in the United States

OBJECTIVE

To estimate health care costs associated with medical events identified as antiretroviral therapy (ART)-attributable adverse events (AEs).

METHODS

During September 2006 to June 2012, adults with ≥1 HIV International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification diagnosis code (042/V08), ≥1 claim for ART prescription (March 2007-June 2011; index date), and continuous health plan enrollment for ≥6 months pre- and ≥12 months postindex were included (IMS' PharMetrics Plus Health Plan Claims Database). Patients with events of interest/ART claim during preindex period or with pregnancy/hepatitis C virus diagnosis/hepatitis B virus/cancer/tuberculosis during the study period were excluded. Postindex medical events were defined as first diagnosis code of event with ART claim ≤60 days prior to start of the event.

RESULTS

Differences in median total all-cause health care costs observed for diabetes/insulin resistance management (US$14,547 median all-cause health care costs during time periods identified as diabetes/insulin resistance medical events versus US$11,237 without diabetes/insulin resistance events; P=.0021), lipid disorders (US$12,825 versus US$10,033; P=.0004), and renal disorders (US$1389 versus US$0; P<.0001).

DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION

Health care costs of ART AEs should be key consideration for payers/providers in HIV management.

Single-Tablet Regimens in HIV Therapy

Combined antiretroviral therapy (cART) has evolved considerably over the past decades leading to a better control of human immunodeficiency virus replication. Recently, regimens have evolved so as to simplify dosing frequency and reduce pill burden to improve adherence. Several national and international guidelines suggest antiretroviral (ARV) regimen simplification as a method of improving adherence. Decreased cART adherence has been associated with both patient-related factors and regimen-related factors. Adherence rates are statistically higher when simpler, once-daily (OD) regimens are combined with smaller daily regimen pill burdens. The avoidance of selective non-adherence, where a patient takes part of a regimen but not the full regimen, is a further potential benefit offered by single-tablet regimens (STRs). Simplification of cART has been associated with a better quality of life (QoL). Although tempered by other factors, better adherence, higher QoL and patients' preferences are all key points which might combine to assure long-lasting efficacy and durability of cART. All studies underlined the favorable tolerability profile of newer STRs. Three STRs are currently available. Tenofovir (TDF) plus emtricitabine (FTC)/efavirenz (EFV) was the first OD complete ARV regimen available as a STR. TDF plus FTC/rilpivirine is a second-generation STR. The most recently approved STR, TDF plus FTC/cobicistat/elvitegravir, is the first non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-based STR. All of them have shown excellent efficacy; safety and tolerability have been improved by more recent formulations. Several other STRs are anticipated both combining completely different drugs, abacavir (ABC) plus lamivudine (3TC)/dolutegravir, utilizing innovative formulations of older drugs, tenofovir alafenamide fumarate, or taking advance of bioequivalent drugs, lamivudine (3TC) plus ABC/EFV. The future challenge would be to develop completely alternative STRs (including for example protease inhibitors or new molecules) to extend the advantages of simplicity to heavily pre-treated individuals.

The financial and service implications of splitting fixed-dose antiretroviral drugs - a case study

In 2010/2011, regional commissioners withdrew payment for the fixed-dose combination Combivir, forcing a switch to component drugs. This was deemed clinically acceptable and annual savings of £44 k expected. We estimated the true costs of switching and examined patient outcomes. Information for 46 patients using Combivir was extracted from case notes for each clinical contact in the 12 months pre- and post-switch (clinician seen, tests, antiretrovirals). Post-switch care costs £93/patient more annually versus pre-switch (95% CI £424 to £609), yielding £4278/year more post-switch for all patients. Drug and pathology costs were more expensive post-switch and extra clinical visits required. None of these results were statistically significant. Forty-two per cent of patients switched directly or in the subsequent year to an alternative fixed-dose combination rather than generics. Costs in this group were significantly higher post-switch driven by drug cost. Six patients (13%) reported problems with the switch including confusion around dosing and new side effects. As less-expensive generic antiretroviral drugs become available, it may appear cheaper to switch from fixed-dose combinations to component drugs. However, the additional clinical costs involved may outweigh the initial cost savings of the drugs and switching may cause confusion for some patients, risking loss of adherence.

Systematic review and meta-analysis: Patient and programme impact of fixed-dose combination antiretroviral therapy

OBJECTIVES

To compare the advantages to patients and to programmes between fixed-dose combination (FDC) antiretroviral therapy and separate tablet regimens.

METHODS

Three electronic databases and two conference abstract sites were searched from inception to 01 March 2013 without geographical, language or date limits. Studies were included if they reported data on clinical outcomes, patient-reported outcomes and programme-related outcomes that could be related to pill burden for adult and adolescent patients on ART. For the primary outcomes of adherence and virological suppression, relative risks and 95% confidence intervals were calculated, and these were pooled using random effects meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies including information on 27,230 subjects were reviewed. Data from randomised trials showed better adherence among patients receiving FDCs than among patients who did not (relative risk 1.10, 95%CI 0.98-1.22); these findings were consistent with data from observational cohorts (RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.07-1.28). There was also a tendency towards greater virological suppression among patients receiving FDCs in randomised trials (RR 1.04, 95%CI 0.99-1.10) and observational cohort studies (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.97-1.18). In all studies reporting patient preference, FDCs were preferred. The overall quality of the evidence was rated as low.

CONCLUSIONS

Fixed-dose combinations appear to offer multiple advantages for programmes and patients, particularly with respect to treatment adherence.