Cargando…
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Lopinavir/Ritonavir Monotherapy Versus Standard Combination Antiretroviral Therapy in HIV-1 Infected Patients with Viral Suppression in France (ANRS 140 DREAM)
BACKGROUND: Protease inhibitor monotherapy is a simplified treatment strategy for virally suppressed HIV-positive patients that has the potential for cost savings, as fewer drugs are used than with combination therapy. However, evidence for its economic value is limited. OBJECTIVES: We assessed the...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer International Publishing
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6861410/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30968368 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s41669-019-0130-7 |
_version_ | 1783471350485090304 |
---|---|
author | Garay, Osvaldo Ulises Nishimwe, Marie Libérée Bousmah, Marwân-al-Qays Janah, Asmaa Girard, Pierre-Marie Chêne, Geneviève Moinot, Laetitia Sagaon-Teyssier, Luis Meynard, Jean-Luc Spire, Bruno Boyer, Sylvie |
author_facet | Garay, Osvaldo Ulises Nishimwe, Marie Libérée Bousmah, Marwân-al-Qays Janah, Asmaa Girard, Pierre-Marie Chêne, Geneviève Moinot, Laetitia Sagaon-Teyssier, Luis Meynard, Jean-Luc Spire, Bruno Boyer, Sylvie |
author_sort | Garay, Osvaldo Ulises |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Protease inhibitor monotherapy is a simplified treatment strategy for virally suppressed HIV-positive patients that has the potential for cost savings, as fewer drugs are used than with combination therapy. However, evidence for its economic value is limited. OBJECTIVES: We assessed the cost-effectiveness of lopinavir/ritonavir monotherapy followed by treatment intensification in case of viral load rebound versus combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) with efavirenz/emtricitabine/tenofovir in HIV-1 infected patients with viral suppression in the ANRS 140 DREAM trial. METHODS: DREAM was conducted in 36 French Hospitals between 2009 and 2013. For each treatment strategy, we estimated the unadjusted and multivariate-adjusted mean costs (in €, year 2010 values) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) per patient, as well as incremental costs and QALYs per patient. We then assessed uncertainty using the cost-effectiveness acceptability curve, scenario analyses and cost-effectiveness price-threshold (CEPT) analysis. RESULTS: In the base-case analysis considering 2009–2013 antiretroviral drug (ARV) prices, adjusted incremental costs and QALYs were − €3296 (95% confidence interval [CI] − 5202 to − 1391) and 0.006 (95% CI − 0.021 to 0.033), respectively, over 2 years, suggesting that monotherapy was cost-effective with a probability of 100% at various cost-effectiveness thresholds. In scenario analyses considering 2018 ARV prices, monotherapy remained cost-effective but with a lower probability (94% vs. 100% in the base-case analysis). The current price of cART would have to decrease by 34% to be cost-effective with a probability of 95%. CONCLUSION: Monotherapy appears to be cost-effective compared with cART for virologically suppressed HIV-positive patients in France. CEPT analysis is a useful tool to identify the preferred strategy to adopt given that ARV prices change rapidly. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT00946595. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s41669-019-0130-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6861410 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | Springer International Publishing |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-68614102019-12-03 Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Lopinavir/Ritonavir Monotherapy Versus Standard Combination Antiretroviral Therapy in HIV-1 Infected Patients with Viral Suppression in France (ANRS 140 DREAM) Garay, Osvaldo Ulises Nishimwe, Marie Libérée Bousmah, Marwân-al-Qays Janah, Asmaa Girard, Pierre-Marie Chêne, Geneviève Moinot, Laetitia Sagaon-Teyssier, Luis Meynard, Jean-Luc Spire, Bruno Boyer, Sylvie Pharmacoecon Open Original Research Article BACKGROUND: Protease inhibitor monotherapy is a simplified treatment strategy for virally suppressed HIV-positive patients that has the potential for cost savings, as fewer drugs are used than with combination therapy. However, evidence for its economic value is limited. OBJECTIVES: We assessed the cost-effectiveness of lopinavir/ritonavir monotherapy followed by treatment intensification in case of viral load rebound versus combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) with efavirenz/emtricitabine/tenofovir in HIV-1 infected patients with viral suppression in the ANRS 140 DREAM trial. METHODS: DREAM was conducted in 36 French Hospitals between 2009 and 2013. For each treatment strategy, we estimated the unadjusted and multivariate-adjusted mean costs (in €, year 2010 values) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) per patient, as well as incremental costs and QALYs per patient. We then assessed uncertainty using the cost-effectiveness acceptability curve, scenario analyses and cost-effectiveness price-threshold (CEPT) analysis. RESULTS: In the base-case analysis considering 2009–2013 antiretroviral drug (ARV) prices, adjusted incremental costs and QALYs were − €3296 (95% confidence interval [CI] − 5202 to − 1391) and 0.006 (95% CI − 0.021 to 0.033), respectively, over 2 years, suggesting that monotherapy was cost-effective with a probability of 100% at various cost-effectiveness thresholds. In scenario analyses considering 2018 ARV prices, monotherapy remained cost-effective but with a lower probability (94% vs. 100% in the base-case analysis). The current price of cART would have to decrease by 34% to be cost-effective with a probability of 95%. CONCLUSION: Monotherapy appears to be cost-effective compared with cART for virologically suppressed HIV-positive patients in France. CEPT analysis is a useful tool to identify the preferred strategy to adopt given that ARV prices change rapidly. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT00946595. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s41669-019-0130-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer International Publishing 2019-04-09 /pmc/articles/PMC6861410/ /pubmed/30968368 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s41669-019-0130-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. |
spellingShingle | Original Research Article Garay, Osvaldo Ulises Nishimwe, Marie Libérée Bousmah, Marwân-al-Qays Janah, Asmaa Girard, Pierre-Marie Chêne, Geneviève Moinot, Laetitia Sagaon-Teyssier, Luis Meynard, Jean-Luc Spire, Bruno Boyer, Sylvie Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Lopinavir/Ritonavir Monotherapy Versus Standard Combination Antiretroviral Therapy in HIV-1 Infected Patients with Viral Suppression in France (ANRS 140 DREAM) |
title | Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Lopinavir/Ritonavir Monotherapy Versus Standard Combination Antiretroviral Therapy in HIV-1 Infected Patients with Viral Suppression in France (ANRS 140 DREAM) |
title_full | Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Lopinavir/Ritonavir Monotherapy Versus Standard Combination Antiretroviral Therapy in HIV-1 Infected Patients with Viral Suppression in France (ANRS 140 DREAM) |
title_fullStr | Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Lopinavir/Ritonavir Monotherapy Versus Standard Combination Antiretroviral Therapy in HIV-1 Infected Patients with Viral Suppression in France (ANRS 140 DREAM) |
title_full_unstemmed | Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Lopinavir/Ritonavir Monotherapy Versus Standard Combination Antiretroviral Therapy in HIV-1 Infected Patients with Viral Suppression in France (ANRS 140 DREAM) |
title_short | Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Lopinavir/Ritonavir Monotherapy Versus Standard Combination Antiretroviral Therapy in HIV-1 Infected Patients with Viral Suppression in France (ANRS 140 DREAM) |
title_sort | cost-effectiveness analysis of lopinavir/ritonavir monotherapy versus standard combination antiretroviral therapy in hiv-1 infected patients with viral suppression in france (anrs 140 dream) |
topic | Original Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6861410/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30968368 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s41669-019-0130-7 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT garayosvaldoulises costeffectivenessanalysisoflopinavirritonavirmonotherapyversusstandardcombinationantiretroviraltherapyinhiv1infectedpatientswithviralsuppressioninfranceanrs140dream AT nishimwemarieliberee costeffectivenessanalysisoflopinavirritonavirmonotherapyversusstandardcombinationantiretroviraltherapyinhiv1infectedpatientswithviralsuppressioninfranceanrs140dream AT bousmahmarwanalqays costeffectivenessanalysisoflopinavirritonavirmonotherapyversusstandardcombinationantiretroviraltherapyinhiv1infectedpatientswithviralsuppressioninfranceanrs140dream AT janahasmaa costeffectivenessanalysisoflopinavirritonavirmonotherapyversusstandardcombinationantiretroviraltherapyinhiv1infectedpatientswithviralsuppressioninfranceanrs140dream AT girardpierremarie costeffectivenessanalysisoflopinavirritonavirmonotherapyversusstandardcombinationantiretroviraltherapyinhiv1infectedpatientswithviralsuppressioninfranceanrs140dream AT chenegenevieve costeffectivenessanalysisoflopinavirritonavirmonotherapyversusstandardcombinationantiretroviraltherapyinhiv1infectedpatientswithviralsuppressioninfranceanrs140dream AT moinotlaetitia costeffectivenessanalysisoflopinavirritonavirmonotherapyversusstandardcombinationantiretroviraltherapyinhiv1infectedpatientswithviralsuppressioninfranceanrs140dream AT sagaonteyssierluis costeffectivenessanalysisoflopinavirritonavirmonotherapyversusstandardcombinationantiretroviraltherapyinhiv1infectedpatientswithviralsuppressioninfranceanrs140dream AT meynardjeanluc costeffectivenessanalysisoflopinavirritonavirmonotherapyversusstandardcombinationantiretroviraltherapyinhiv1infectedpatientswithviralsuppressioninfranceanrs140dream AT spirebruno costeffectivenessanalysisoflopinavirritonavirmonotherapyversusstandardcombinationantiretroviraltherapyinhiv1infectedpatientswithviralsuppressioninfranceanrs140dream AT boyersylvie costeffectivenessanalysisoflopinavirritonavirmonotherapyversusstandardcombinationantiretroviraltherapyinhiv1infectedpatientswithviralsuppressioninfranceanrs140dream |