Desimplification to multi-tablet antiretroviral regimens in human immunodeficiency virus-type 1 infected adults: A cohort study

De-simplifying antiretroviral therapy from a single-tablet to a two-tablet regimen: Acceptance, patient-reported outcomes, and cost savings in a multicentre study

BACKGROUND

Antiretroviral therapy (ART), which is increasingly used by people with HIV, accounts for significant care costs, particularly because of single-tablet regimens (STRs). This study explored de-simplification to a two-tablet regimen (TTR) for cost reduction. The objectives of this study were: (1) acceptance of de-simplification, (2) patient-reported outcomes, and (3) cost savings.

METHODS

All individuals on Triumeq®, Atripla® or Eviplera® in five HIV clinics in the Netherlands were eligible. Healthcare providers informed individuals of this study. After inclusion, individuals were free to de-simplify. An electronic questionnaire was sent to assess study acceptance, adherence, quality of life (SF12) and treatment satisfaction (HIVTSQ). After 3 and 12 months, questionnaires were repeated. Cost savings were calculated using Dutch drug prices.

RESULTS

In total, 283 individuals were included, of whom 55.5% agreed to de-simplify their ART, with a large variability between treatment centres: 41.1-74.2%. Individuals who were willing to de-simplify tended to be older, had a longer history of HIV diagnosis, and used more co-medication than those who preferred to remain on an STR regimen. Patient-reported outcomes, including quality of life and treatment satisfaction, showed no significant difference between people with HIV who switched to a TTR and those who remained on an STR regimen. Furthermore, we observed a 17.8% reduction in drug costs in our cohort of people with HIV who were initially on an STR.

CONCLUSIONS

De-simplification from an STR to a TTR within the Dutch healthcare setting has been demonstrated as feasible, leads to significant cost reductions and should be discussed with every eligible person with HIV in the Netherlands.

Negative impact of a health insurer-mandated de-simplification from a single-tablet regimen to a two-tablet regimen

OBJECTIVES

Antiretroviral therapy (ART) accounts for a considerable proportion of HIV care expenses. In June 2021, a Dutch healthcare insurer implemented a mandatory policy to de-simplify branded RPV/TDF/FTC (Eviplera) into a two-tablet regimen containing rilpivirine (Edurant) and generic TDF/FTC as part of cost-saving measures. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the acceptance of this policy, the trends in ART dispensation, and cost developments.

DESIGN

A retrospective database study.

METHODS

In this study, medication dispensation data were obtained from the Dutch Foundation for Pharmaceutical Statistics (SFK). This database covers 98% of all medication dispensations from Dutch pharmacies including people with HIV who receive ART. We received pseudonymized data exclusively from individuals insured by the insurer for the years 2020-2022. Costs were calculated using Dutch drug prices for each year.

RESULTS

In June 2021, 128 people with HIV were on branded RPV/TDF/FTC. Following the policy implementation, 59 (46%) had switched to RPV + generic TDF/FTC, but after 1.5 years, only 17 of 128 individuals (13%) used the proposed two-tablet regimen. The other 111/128 used RPV/TDF/FTC with prescriptions for 'medical necessity' ( n  = 29), switched to RPV/TAF/FTC ( n  = 51), or other ART ( n  = 31). Despite expectations of cost-savings, costs increased from €72 988 in May 2021 to €75 649 in May 2022.

CONCLUSION

A mandatory switch from an STR to a TTR in people with HIV proved unsuccessful, marked by low acceptance, and increased costs after 1 year. This underscores the necessity of incorporating patient and prescriber involvement in changing medication policies.

Use of Generic Antiretroviral Drugs and Single-Tablet Regimen De-Simplification for the Treatment of HIV Infection in Spain

The present study sought to describe the use of generic drugs and single-tablet regimen (STR) de-simplification for the treatment of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection among 41 hospitals from the cohort of the Spanish HIV/AIDS Research Network (CoRIS). In June 2018, we collected information on when generic antiretroviral drugs (ARVs) were introduced in the different hospitals, how the decisions to use them were made, and how the information was provided to the patients. Most of the nine available generic ARVs in Spain by June 2018 had been introduced in at least 85% of the participating hospitals, except for zidovudine (AZT)/lamivudine (3TC) and AZT. The time difference between the effective marketing date of each generic ARV and its first dispensing date in the hospitals was much shorter for the more recently approved generic ARV since the year 2017. However, only up to 20% of the hospitals de-simplified efavirenz (EFV)/tenofovir disoproxil (TDF)/emtricitabine (FTC), dolutegravir (DTG)/abacavir (ABC)/3TC, and rilpivirine (RPV)/TDF/FTC (to generic EFV+TDF/FTC, DTG+generic ABC/3TC, and RPV+generic TDF/FTC, respectively), whereas the generic STR EFV/TDF/FTC was introduced in 87.8% of the centers. The median times between the date of effective marketing of generic TDF/FTC and the date of de-simplification of EFV/TDF/FTC and RPV/TDF/FTC were 723 [interquartile range (IQR): 369-1,119] and 234 (IQR: 142-264) days, respectively; this time was 155 (IQR: 28-287) days for de-simplification of DTG/ABC/3TC. In conclusion, despite the widespread use of generic ARVs, STRs de-simplification was only undertaken in <20% of the hospitals. There was wide variability in the timing of the introduction of each generic ARV after they were available in the market.

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.