PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently approved the use of tenofovir-emtricitabine for pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for HIV prevention. PrEP is also being investigated in clinical trials as a component of HIV prevention in resource-limited settings. Cost-effectiveness models are useful in identifying health programs with the greatest societal value and projecting long-term program impacts. This review examines six recent studies of the cost-effectiveness of PrEP for preventing HIV transmission in the USA and South Africa. RECENT FINDINGS: Studies used both individual-level and population-level transmission models. PrEP was found to be a cost-effective HIV-prevention intervention in high-risk MSM with HIV incidence at least 2% in the USA (<US$100 000 per quality-adjusted life year) and in young women in South Africa (cost per life year <GDP per capita). Results were sensitive to the cost and efficacy of PrEP and to assumptions about HIV testing and access to treatment in the absence of PrEP. SUMMARY: Future cost effectiveness studies should consider PrEP implementation issues (uptake in high-risk versus low-risk groups, duration on PrEP, adherence), budget impact, and the role of PrEP as part of combination HIV-prevention strategies including expanded testing and treatment access.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently approved the use of tenofovir-emtricitabine for pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for HIV prevention. PrEP is also being investigated in clinical trials as a component of HIV prevention in resource-limited settings. Cost-effectiveness models are useful in identifying health programs with the greatest societal value and projecting long-term program impacts. This review examines six recent studies of the cost-effectiveness of PrEP for preventing HIV transmission in the USA and South Africa. RECENT FINDINGS: Studies used both individual-level and population-level transmission models. PrEP was found to be a cost-effective HIV-prevention intervention in high-risk MSM with HIV incidence at least 2% in the USA (<US$100 000 per quality-adjusted life year) and in young women in South Africa (cost per life year <GDP per capita). Results were sensitive to the cost and efficacy of PrEP and to assumptions about HIV testing and access to treatment in the absence of PrEP. SUMMARY: Future cost effectiveness studies should consider PrEP implementation issues (uptake in high-risk versus low-risk groups, duration on PrEP, adherence), budget impact, and the role of PrEP as part of combination HIV-prevention strategies including expanded testing and treatment access.
Authors: Xiao Zang; Emanuel Krebs; Linwei Wang; Brandon D L Marshall; Reuben Granich; Bruce R Schackman; Julio S G Montaner; Bohdan Nosyk Journal: Pharmacoeconomics Date: 2019-10 Impact factor: 4.981
Authors: Susan P Buchbinder; David V Glidden; Albert Y Liu; Vanessa McMahan; Juan V Guanira; Kenneth H Mayer; Pedro Goicochea; Robert M Grant Journal: Lancet Infect Dis Date: 2014-03-07 Impact factor: 25.071
Authors: Juan V Guanira; Teri Leigler; Esper Kallas; Mauro Schechter; Usha Sharma; David Glidden; Robert M Grant Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2014-11-05 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: Jason Kessler; Julie E Myers; Kimberly A Nucifora; Nana Mensah; Christopher Toohey; Amin Khademi; Blayne Cutler; Scott Braithwaite Journal: AIDS Date: 2014-11-28 Impact factor: 4.177
Authors: Gina M Wingood; Anna Rubtsova; Ralph J DiClemente; David Metzger; Michael Blank Journal: J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr Date: 2013-06-01 Impact factor: 3.731
Authors: Aditya S Khanna; John A Schneider; Nicholson Collier; Jonathan Ozik; Rodal Issema; Angela di Paola; Abigail Skwara; Arthi Ramachandran; Jeannette Webb; Russell Brewer; William Cunningham; Charles Hilliard; Santhoshini Ramani; Kayo Fujimoto; Nina Harawa Journal: AIDS Date: 2019-10-01 Impact factor: 4.177