Projected Life Expectancy for Adolescents With HIV in the US.

Importance: Life expectancy is a key measure of overall population health. Life expectancy estimates for youth with HIV in the US are needed in the current HIV care and treatment context to guide health policies and resource allocation. Objective: To compare life expectancy between 18-year-old youth with perinatally acquired HIV (PHIV), youth with nonperinatally acquired HIV (NPHIV), and youth without HIV. Design, Setting, and Participants: Using a US-focused adolescent-specific Monte Carlo state-transition HIV model, we simulated individuals from age 18 years until death. We estimated probabilities of HIV treatment and care engagement, HIV progression, clinical events, and mortality from observational cohorts and clinical trials for model input parameters. The simulated individuals were 18-year-old race and ethnicity-matched youth with PHIV, youth with NPHIV, and youth without HIV; 47%, 85%, and 50% were assigned male sex at birth, respectively. Individuals were categorized by US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-defined HIV acquisition risk: men who have sex with men, people who ever injected drugs, heterosexually active individuals at increased risk for HIV infection, or average risk for HIV infection. Distributions were 3%, 2%, 12%, and 83% for youth with PHIV and youth without HIV, and 80%, 6%, 14%, and 0% for youth with NPHIV, respectively. Among the simulated youth in this analysis, individuals were 61% Black, 24% Hispanic, and 15% White, respectively. Exposures: HIV status by timing of acquisition. Main Outcomes: Life expectancy loss for youth with PHIV and youth with NPHIV: difference between mean projected life expectancy under current and ideal HIV care scenarios compared with youth without HIV. Uncertainty intervals reflect varying adolescent HIV-related mortality inputs (95% CIs). Results: Compared with youth without HIV (life expectancy: male, 76.3 years; female, 81.7 years), male youth with PHIV and youth with NPHIV had projected life expectancy losses of 10.4 years (95% CI, 5.5-18.1) and 15.0 years (95% CI, 9.3-26.8); female youth with PHIV and youth with NPHIV had projected life expectancy losses of 11.8 years (95% CI, 6.4-20.2) and 19.5 years (95% CI, 13.8-31.6), respectively. When receiving ideal HIV care, life expectancy losses were projected to improve for youth with PHIV (male: 0.5 years [95% CI, 0.3-1.8]: female: 0.6 years [95% CI, 0.4-2.1]) but were projected to persist for youth with NPHIV (male: 6.0 years [95% CI, 5.0-9.1]; female: 10.4 years [95% CI, 9.4-13.6]). Conclusions: This adolescent-focused microsimulation modeling analysis projected that youth with HIV would have shorter life expectancy than youth without HIV. Projected differences were larger for youth with NPHIV compared with youth with PHIV. Differences in mortality by sex at birth, sexual behavior, and injection drug use contributed to lower projected life expectancy among youth with NPHIV. Interventions focused on HIV care and social factors are needed to improve life expectancy for youth with HIV in the US.

Projecting the Clinical and Economic Impacts of Changes to HIV Care Among Adolescents and Young Adults in the United States: Lessons From the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, many US youth with HIV (YHIV) used telehealth services; others experienced disruptions in clinic and antiretroviral therapy (ART) access. METHODS: Using the Cost-effectiveness of Preventing AIDS Complications (CEPAC)-Adolescent HIV microsimulation model, we evaluated 3 scenarios: 1) Clinic: in-person care; 2) Telehealth: virtual visits, without CD4 or viral load monitoring for 12 months, followed by return to usual care; and 3) Interruption: complete care interruption with no ART access or laboratory monitoring for 6 months (maximum clinic closure time), followed by return to usual care for 80%. We assigned higher 1-year retention (87% vs 80%) and lower cost/visit ($49 vs $56) for Telehealth vs Clinic. We modeled 2 YHIV cohorts with non-perinatal (YNPHIV) and perinatal (YPHIV) HIV, which differed by mean age (22 vs 16 years), sex at birth (85% vs 47% male), starting CD4 count (527/µL vs 635/µL), ART, mortality, and HIV-related costs. We projected life months (LMs) and costs/100 YHIV over 10 years. RESULTS: Over 10 years, LMs in Clinic and Telehealth would be similar (YNPHIV: 11 350 vs 11 360 LMs; YPHIV: 11 680 LMs for both strategies); costs would be $0.3M (YNPHIV) and $0.4M (YPHIV) more for Telehealth than Clinic. Interruption would be less effective (YNPHIV: 11 230 LMs; YPHIV: 11 620 LMs) and less costly (YNPHIV: $1.3M less; YPHIV: $0.2M less) than Clinic. Higher retention in Telehealth led to increased ART use and thus higher costs. CONCLUSIONS: Telehealth could be as effective as in-person care for some YHIV, at slightly increased cost. Short interruptions to ART and laboratory monitoring may have negative long-term clinical implications.

Daily Oral HIV Pre-exposure Prophylaxis Among Young Men Who Have Sex With Men in the United States: Cost-saving at Generic Drug Price.

BACKGROUND: Adherence and retention concerns raise questions about the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of oral HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) in young men who have sex with men (YMSM). METHODS: Using an adolescent-focused simulation model, we compared annual HIV screening alone with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine-based oral PrEP with every 3-month HIV screening in YMSM (aged 15-24) at increased risk of HIV. Data derived from published sources included: age-stratified HIV incidence/100 person-years (PY) on- or off-PrEP (0.6-10.1 or 0.4-6.4), PrEP retention at 6 years (28%), transmissions by HIV RNA level (0.0-78.4/100PY) and annual costs of antiretroviral therapy ($32 000-69 000), HIV care ($3100-34 600), and PrEP program/generic drug ($900/360). Outcomes included transmissions (percent of cohort infected), quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), costs ($), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios ($/QALY). We explored the sensitivity of findings to variation in HIV incidence and drug prices. RESULTS: Compared with annual screening alone, PrEP would increase QALYs (9.58 to 9.67), reduce new infections (37% to 30%), and decrease costs (by $5000) over 10 years. PrEP would remain cost-saving for HIV incidence off-PrEP ≥5.1/100PY or annual PrEP price ≤$1200. Over a lifetime horizon, PrEP would be cost-saving for HIV incidence off-PrEP ≥1.0/100PY, across all retention assumptions examined. PrEP would not be cost-effective at HIV incidence ≤0.1/100PY, regardless of drug price, due to programmatic costs. CONCLUSIONS: In US YMSM at increased risk of HIV, generic oral PrEP and every-3-month screening would be cost-saving compared with annual screening alone, even with high discontinuation and low adherence, over a range of HIV incidences.

Cost-effectiveness of broadly neutralizing antibodies for infant HIV prophylaxis in settings with high HIV burdens: a simulation modeling study.

Introduction: Approximately 130 000 infants acquire HIV annually despite global maternal antiretroviral therapy scale-up. We evaluated the potential clinical impact and cost-effectiveness of offering long-acting, anti-HIV broadly neutralizing antibody (bNAb) prophylaxis to infants in three distinct settings. Methods: We simulated infants in Côte d'Ivoire, South Africa, and Zimbabwe using the Cost-Effectiveness of Preventing AIDS Complications-Pediatric (CEPAC-P) model. We modeled strategies offering a three-bNAb combination in addition to WHO-recommended standard-of-care oral prophylaxis to infants: a) with known, WHO-defined high-risk HIV exposure at birth (HR-HIVE); b) with known HIV exposure at birth (HIVE); or c) with or without known HIV exposure (ALL). Modeled infants received 1-dose, 2-doses, or Extended (every 3 months through 18 months) bNAb dosing. Base case model inputs included 70% bNAb efficacy (sensitivity analysis range: 10-100%), 3-month efficacy duration/dosing interval (1-6 months), and $20/dose cost ($5-$100/dose). Outcomes included pediatric HIV infections, life expectancy, lifetime HIV-related costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs, in US$/year-of-life-saved [YLS], assuming a ≤50% GDP per capita cost-effectiveness threshold). Results: The base case model projects that bNAb strategies targeting HIVE and ALL infants would prevent 7-26% and 10-42% additional pediatric HIV infections, respectively, compared to standard-of-care alone, ranging by dosing approach. HIVE-Extended would be cost-effective (cost-saving compared to standard-of-care) in Côte d'Ivoire and Zimbabwe; ALL-Extended would be cost-effective in South Africa (ICER: $882/YLS). BNAb strategies targeting HR-HIVE infants would result in greater lifetime costs and smaller life expectancy gains than HIVE-Extended. Throughout most bNAb efficacies and costs evaluated in sensitivity analyses, targeting HIVE infants would be cost-effective in Côte d'Ivoire and Zimbabwe, and targeting ALL infants would be cost-effective in South Africa. Discussion: Adding long-acting bNAbs to current standard-of-care prophylaxis would be cost-effective, assuming plausible efficacies and costs. The cost-effective target population would vary by setting, largely driven by maternal antenatal HIV prevalence and postpartum incidence.

The Clinical Impact and Cost-Effectiveness of Clinic-Based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for People With HIV, Depression, and Virologic Failure in South Africa.

BACKGROUND: Depression affects 25%-30% of people with HIV (PWH) in the Republic of South Africa (RSA) and is associated with both antiretroviral therapy (ART) nonadherence and increased mortality. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of task-shifted, cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for PWH with diagnosed depression and virologic failure from a randomized trial in RSA. SETTING: RSA. METHODS: Using the Cost-Effectiveness of Preventing AIDS Complications model, we simulated both trial strategies: enhanced treatment as usual (ETAU) and ETAU plus CBT for ART adherence and depression (CBT-AD; 8 sessions plus 2 follow-ups). In the trial, viral suppression at 1 year was 20% with ETAU and 32% with CBT-AD. Model inputs included mean initial age (39 years) and CD4 count (214/µL), ART costs ($7.5-22/mo), and CBT costs ($29/session). We projected 5- and 10-year viral suppression, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), lifetime costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs: $/QALY [discounted 3%/yr]; cost-effectiveness threshold: ≤$2545/QALY [0.5× per capita GDP]). In sensitivity analyses, we determined how input parameter variation affected cost-effectiveness. RESULTS: Model-projected 5- and 10-year viral suppression were 18.9% and 8.7% with ETAU and 21.2% and 9.7% with CBT-AD, respectively. Compared with ETAU, CBT-AD would increase discounted life expectancy from 4.12 to 4.68 QALYs and costs from $6210/person to $6670/person (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio: $840/QALY). CBT-AD would remain cost-effective unless CBT-AD cost >$70/session and simultaneously improved 1-year viral suppression by ≤4% compared with ETAU. CONCLUSIONS: CBT for PWH with depression and virologic failure in RSA could improve life expectancy and be cost-effective. Such targeted mental health interventions should be integrated into HIV care.

Cost-effectiveness of broadly neutralizing antibody prophylaxis for HIV-exposed infants in sub-Saharan African settings.

INTRODUCTION: Infant HIV prophylaxis with broadly neutralizing anti-HIV antibodies (bNAbs) could provide long-acting protection against vertical transmission. We sought to estimate the potential clinical impact and cost-effectiveness of hypothetical bNAb prophylaxis programmes for children known to be HIV exposed at birth in three sub-Saharan African settings. METHODS: We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis using the CEPAC-Pediatric model, simulating cohorts of infants from birth through death in Côte d'Ivoire, South Africa and Zimbabwe. These settings were selected to reflect a broad range of HIV care cascade characteristics, antenatal HIV prevalence and budgetary constraints. We modelled strategies targeting bNAbs to only WHO-designated "high-risk" HIV-exposed infants (HR-HIVE) or to all HIV-exposed infants (HIVE). We compared four prophylaxis approaches within each target population: standard of care oral antiretroviral prophylaxis (SOC), and SOC plus bNAbs at birth (1-dose), at birth and 3 months (2-doses), or every 3 months throughout breastfeeding (Extended). Base-case model inputs included bNAb efficacy (60%/dose), effect duration (3 months/dose) and costs ($60/dose), based on published literature. Outcomes included paediatric HIV incidence and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) calculated from discounted life expectancy and lifetime HIV-related costs. RESULTS: The model projects that bNAbs would reduce absolute infant HIV incidence by 0.3-2.2% (9.6-34.9% relative reduction), varying by country, prophylaxis approach and target population. In all three settings, HR-HIVE-1-dose would be cost-saving compared to SOC. Using a 50% GDP per capita ICER threshold, HIVE-Extended would be cost-effective in all three settings with ICERs of $497/YLS in Côte d'Ivoire, $464/YLS in South Africa and $455/YLS in Zimbabwe. In all three settings, bNAb strategies would remain cost-effective at costs up to $200/dose if efficacy is ≥30%. If the bNAb effect duration were reduced to 1 month, the cost-effective strategy would become HR-HIVE-1-dose in Côte d'Ivoire and Zimbabwe and HR-HIVE-2-doses in South Africa. Findings regarding the cost-effectiveness of bNAb implementation strategies remained robust in sensitivity analyses regarding breastfeeding duration, maternal engagement in postpartum care, early infant diagnosis uptake and antiretroviral treatment costs. CONCLUSIONS: At current efficacy and cost estimates, bNAb prophylaxis for HIV-exposed children in sub-Saharan African settings would be a cost-effective intervention to reduce vertical HIV transmission.

Evaluation of four chemotherapy regimens for treatment of advanced AIDS-associated Kaposi sarcoma in Kenya: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: The most effective treatment for advanced AIDS-associated Kaposi sarcoma is paclitaxel or pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD); neither is routinely used in sub-Saharan Africa due to limited availability and high cost. We examined the clinical impact, costs, and cost-effectiveness of paclitaxel or PLD in Kenya, compared with etoposide or bleomycin-vincristine. METHODS: In this study, we use the Cost-Effectiveness of Preventing AIDS Complications (CEPAC)-International Model to project clinical outcomes and costs among people living with HIV and advanced Kaposi sarcoma on antiretroviral therapy. We compared four different treatment strategies: etoposide, bleomycin-vincristine, paclitaxel, or PLD. We derived cohort characteristics and costs from the Kenyan Academic Model for Providing Access to Healthcare network, and adverse events, efficacy, and mortality from clinical trials. We projected model outcomes over a lifetime and included life expectancy, per-person lifetime costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). We conducted budget impact analysis for 5-year total costs and did deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses to evaluate the effect of uncertainty in input parameters. FINDINGS: We found that paclitaxel would be more effective than bleomycin-vincristine and would increase life expectancy by 4·2 years per person. PLD would further increase life expectancy by 0·6 years per person. Paclitaxel would be the most cost-effective strategy (ICER US$380 per year-of-life-saved compared with bleomycin-vincristine) and would remain cost-effective across a range of scenarios. PLD would be cost-effective compared with paclitaxel if its price were reduced to $100 per cycle (base case $180 per cycle). Implementing paclitaxel instead of bleomycin-vincristine would save approximately 6400 life-years and would increase the overall 5-year Kenyan health-care costs by $3·7 million; increased costs would be primarily related to ongoing HIV care given improved survival. INTERPRETATION: Paclitaxel would substantially increase life expectancy and be cost-effective compared with bleomycin-vincristine for advanced AIDS-associated Kaposi sarcoma in Kenya and should be the standard of care. PLD would further improve survival and be cost-effective with a 44% price reduction. FUNDING: US National Institutes of Health and Massachusetts General Hospital. TRANSLATION: For the Swahili translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Cost-effectiveness of Coronavirus Disease 2019 Vaccination in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.

BACKGROUND: Despite the advent of safe and effective coronavirus disease 2019 vaccines, pervasive inequities in global vaccination persist. METHODS: We projected health benefits and donor costs of delivering vaccines for up to 60% of the population in 91 low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). We modeled a highly contagious (Re at model start, 1.7), low-virulence (infection fatality ratio [IFR], 0.32%) "Omicron-like" variant and a similarly contagious "severe" variant (IFR, 0.59%) over 360 days, accounting for country-specific age structure and healthcare capacity. Costs included vaccination startup (US$630 million) and per-person procurement and delivery (US$12.46/person vaccinated). RESULTS: In the Omicron-like scenario, increasing current vaccination coverage to achieve at least 15% in each of the 91 LMICs would prevent 11 million new infections and 120 000 deaths, at a cost of US$0.95 billion, for an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of US$670/year of life saved (YLS). Increases in vaccination coverage to 60% would additionally prevent up to 68 million infections and 160 000 deaths, with ICERs

The cost-effectiveness of a resilience-based psychosocial intervention for HIV prevention among MSM in India.

OBJECTIVE: MSM in India are at a high risk for HIV infection given psychosocial challenges, sexual orientation stress, and stigma. We examined the cost-effectiveness of a novel resilience-based psychosocial intervention for MSM in India. DESIGN: We parameterized a validated microsimulation model (CEPAC) with India-specific data and results from a randomized trial and examined two strategies for MSM: status quo HIV care ( SQ ), and a trial-based psychosocial intervention ( INT ) focused on building resilience to stress, improving mental health, and reducing condomless anal sex (CAS). METHODS: We projected lifetime clinical and economic outcomes for MSM without HIV initially. Intervention effectiveness, defined as reduction in self-reported CAS, was estimated at 38%; cost was $49.37/participant. We used a willingness-to-pay threshold of US$2100 (2019 Indian per capita GDP) per year of life saved (YLS) to define cost-effectiveness. We also assessed the 5-year budget impact of offering this intervention to 20% of Indian MSM. RESULTS: Model projections showed the intervention would avert 2940 HIV infections among MSM over 10 years. Over a lifetime horizon, the intervention was cost-effective (ICER = $900/YLS). Results were most sensitive to intervention effectiveness and cost; the intervention remained cost-effective under plausible ranges of these parameters. Offering this intervention in the public sector would require an additional US$28 M over 5 years compared with SQ . CONCLUSION: A resilience-based psychosocial intervention integrated with HIV risk reduction counseling among MSM in India would reduce HIV infections and be cost-effective. Programs using this approach should be expanded as a part of comprehensive HIV prevention in India.

Health Impact and Cost-Effectiveness of HIV Testing, Linkage, and Early Antiretroviral Treatment in the Botswana Combination Prevention Project.

BACKGROUND: The Botswana Combination Prevention Project tested the impact of combination prevention (CP) on HIV incidence in a community-randomized trial. Each trial arm had ∼55,000 people, 26% HIV prevalence, and 72% baseline ART coverage. Results showed intensive testing and linkage campaigns, expanded antiretroviral treatment (ART), and voluntary male medical circumcision referrals increased coverage and decreased incidence over ∼29 months of follow-up. We projected lifetime clinical impact and cost-effectiveness of CP in this population. SETTING: Rural and periurban communities in Botswana. METHODS: We used the Cost-Effectiveness of Preventing AIDS Complications model to estimate lifetime health impact and cost of (1) earlier ART initiation and (2) averting an HIV infection, which we applied to incremental ART initiations and averted infections calculated from trial data. We determined the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio [US$/quality-adjusted life-years (QALY)] for CP vs. standard of care. RESULTS: In CP, 1418 additional people with HIV initiated ART and an additional 304 infections were averted. For each additional person started on ART, life expectancy increased 0.90 QALYs and care costs increased by $869. For each infection averted, life expectancy increased 2.43 QALYs with $9200 in care costs saved. With CP, an additional $1.7 million were spent on prevention and $1.2 million on earlier treatment. These costs were mostly offset by decreased care costs from averted infections, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $79 per QALY. CONCLUSIONS: Enhanced HIV testing, linkage, and early ART initiation improve life expectancy, reduce transmission, and can be cost-effective or cost-saving in settings like Botswana.

Cost-effectiveness of Routine Provider-Initiated Testing and Counseling for Children With Undiagnosed HIV in South Africa.

BACKGROUND: We compared the cost-effectiveness of pediatric provider-initiated HIV testing and counseling (PITC) vs no PITC in a range of clinical care settings in South Africa. METHODS: We used the Cost-Effectiveness of Preventing AIDS Complications Pediatric model to simulate a cohort of children, aged 2-10 years, presenting for care in 4 settings (outpatient, malnutrition, inpatient, tuberculosis clinic) with varying prevalence of undiagnosed HIV (1.0%, 15.0%, 17.5%, 50.0%, respectively). We compared "PITC" (routine testing offered to all patients; 97% acceptance and 71% linkage to care after HIV diagnosis) with no PITC. Model outcomes included life expectancy, lifetime costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) from the health care system perspective and the proportion of children with HIV (CWH) diagnosed, on antiretroviral therapy (ART), and virally suppressed. We assumed a threshold of $3200/year of life saved (YLS) to determine cost-effectiveness. Sensitivity analyses varied the age distribution of children seeking care and costs for PITC, HIV care, and ART. RESULTS: PITC improved the proportion of CWH diagnosed (45.2% to 83.2%), on ART (40.8% to 80.4%), and virally suppressed (32.6% to 63.7%) at 1 year in all settings. PITC increased life expectancy by 0.1-0.7 years for children seeking care (including those with and without HIV). In all settings, the ICER of PITC vs no PITC was very similar, ranging from $710 to $1240/YLS. PITC remained cost-effective unless undiagnosed HIV prevalence was <0.2%. CONCLUSIONS: Routine testing improves HIV clinical outcomes and is cost-effective in South Africa if the prevalence of undiagnosed HIV among children exceeds 0.2%. These findings support current recommendations for PITC in outpatient, inpatient, tuberculosis, and malnutrition clinical settings.

Cost-Effectiveness of Long-Acting Injectable HIV Preexposure Prophylaxis in the United States : A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The HIV Prevention Trials Network (HPTN) 083 trial demonstrated the superiority of long-acting injectable cabotegravir (CAB-LA) compared with oral emtricitabine-tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (F/TDF) for HIV preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP). OBJECTIVE: To identify the maximum price premium (that is, greatest possible price differential) that society should be willing to accept for the additional benefits of CAB-LA over tenofovir-based PrEP among men who have sex with men and transgender women (MSM/TGW) in the United States. DESIGN: Simulation, cost-effectiveness analysis. DATA SOURCES: Trial and published data, including estimated HIV incidence (5.32, 1.33, and 0.26 per 100 person-years for off PrEP, generic F/TDF and branded emtricitabine-tenofovir alafenamide (F/TAF), and CAB-LA, respectively); 28% 6-year PrEP retention. Annual base-case drug costs: $360 and $16 800 for generic F/TDF and branded F/TAF. Fewer side effects with branded F/TAF versus generic F/TDF were assumed. TARGET POPULATION: 476 700 MSM/TGW at very high risk for HIV (VHR). TIME HORIZON: 10 years. PERSPECTIVE: Health care system. INTERVENTION: CAB-LA versus generic F/TDF or branded F/TAF for HIV PrEP. OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary transmissions, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), costs (2020 U.S. dollars), incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs; U.S. dollars per QALY), maximum price premium for CAB-LA versus tenofovir-based PrEP. RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS: Compared with generic F/TDF (or branded F/TAF), CAB-LA increased life expectancy by 28 000 QALYs (26 000 QALYs) among those at VHR. Branded F/TAF cost more per QALY gained than generic F/TDF compared with no PrEP. At 10 years, CAB-LA could achieve an ICER of at most $100 000 per QALY compared with generic F/TDF at a maximum price premium of $3700 per year over generic F/TDF (CAB-LA price <$4100 per year). RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS: In a PrEP-eligible population at high risk for HIV, rather than at VHR (n = 1 906 800; off PrEP incidence: 1.54 per 100 person-years), CAB-LA could achieve an ICER of at most $100 000 per QALY versus generic F/TDF at a maximum price premium of $1100 per year over generic F/TDF (CAB-LA price <$1500 per year). LIMITATION: Uncertain clinical and economic benefits of averting future transmissions. CONCLUSION: Effective oral PrEP limits the additional price society should be willing to pay for CAB-LA. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: FHI 360; Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development; National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; National Institute on Drug Abuse; the Reich HIV Scholar Award; and the Steve and Deborah Gorlin MGH Research Scholars Award.

Clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination in South Africa.

Low- and middle-income countries are implementing COVID-19 vaccination strategies in light of varying vaccine efficacies and costs, supply shortages, and resource constraints. Here, we use a microsimulation model to evaluate clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness of a COVID-19 vaccination program in South Africa. We varied vaccination coverage, pace, acceptance, effectiveness, and cost as well as epidemic dynamics. Providing vaccines to at least 40% of the population and prioritizing vaccine rollout prevented >9 million infections and >73,000 deaths and reduced costs due to fewer hospitalizations. Model results were most sensitive to assumptions about epidemic growth and prevalence of prior immunity to SARS-CoV-2, though the vaccination program still provided high value and decreased both deaths and health care costs across a wide range of assumptions. Vaccination program implementation factors, including prompt procurement, distribution, and rollout, are likely more influential than characteristics of the vaccine itself in maximizing public health benefits and economic efficiency.

Clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination in South Africa.

Low- and middle-income countries are implementing COVID-19 vaccination strategies in light of varying vaccine efficacies and costs, supply shortages, and resource constraints. Here, we use a microsimulation model to evaluate clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness of a COVID-19 vaccination program in South Africa. We varied vaccination coverage, pace, acceptance, effectiveness, and cost as well as epidemic dynamics. Providing vaccines to at least 40% of the population and prioritizing vaccine rollout prevented >9 million infections and >73,000 deaths and reduced costs due to fewer hospitalizations. Model results were most sensitive to assumptions about epidemic growth and prevalence of prior immunity to SARS-CoV-2, though the vaccination program still provided high value and decreased both deaths and health care costs across a wide range of assumptions. Vaccination program implementation factors, including prompt procurement, distribution, and rollout, are likely more influential than characteristics of the vaccine itself in maximizing public health benefits and economic efficiency.

Modeling Adherence Interventions Among Youth with HIV in the United States: Clinical and Economic Projections.

The Adolescent Medicine Trials Network for HIV/AIDS Interventions is evaluating treatment adherence interventions (AI) to improve virologic suppression (VS) among youth with HIV (YWH). Using a microsimulation model, we compared two strategies: standard-of-care (SOC) and a hypothetical 12-month AI that increased cohort-level VS in YWH in care by an absolute ten percentage points and cost $100/month/person. Projected outcomes included primary HIV transmissions, deaths and life-expectancy, lifetime HIV-related costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs, $/quality-adjusted life-year [QALY]). Compared to SOC, AI would reduce HIV transmissions by 15% and deaths by 12% at 12 months. AI would improve discounted life expectancy/person by 8 months at an added lifetime cost/person of $5,300, resulting in an ICER of $7,900/QALY. AI would be cost-effective at $2,000/month/person or with efficacies as low as a 1 percentage point increase in VS. YWH-targeted adherence interventions with even modest efficacy could improve life expectancy, prevent onward HIV transmissions, and be cost-effective.

RESUMEN: La Red de Ensayos Médicos sobre Adolescentes para Realizar Intervenciones sobre el VIH/SIDA está evaluando intervenciones de adherencia (IAs) al tratamiento para mejorar la supresión virológica (SV) entre los jóvenes con VIH (JCV). Usando un modelo de microsimulación, comparamos dos estrategias: cuidado convencional (CC) y una intervención de adherencia hipotética durando 12 meses que aumentaría la SV a nivel de cohorte entre JCV en tratamiento por 10 puntos de porcentuales y que costaría US$ 100/mes/persona. Resultados proyectados incluyeron transmisiones de VIH primarias, muertes y esperanza de vida, costos de por vida asociados con el VIH, y razones incrementales de costo-efectividad (RICEs, $/año de vida ajustado por la calidad [AVAC]). Comparado al CC, la IA reduciría transmisiones de VIH por 15% y muertes por 12% a los 12 meses. La IA mejoraría esperanza de vida descontada/persona por 8 meses a un costo de por vida adicional/persona de US$ 5.300, resultando en una RICE de US$ 7.900/AVAC. La IA sería costo-efectiva a un costo de US$ 2.000/mes/persona o si mejorara SV por al menos un punto porcentual. Intervenciones de adherencia dirigidas a jóvenes con una eficacia incluso modesta podrían mejorar esperanza de vida, prevenir transmisiones de VIH, y ser costo-efectivas.

Optimizing infant HIV diagnosis with additional screening at immunization clinics in three sub-Saharan African settings: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Uptake of early infant HIV diagnosis (EID) varies widely across sub-Saharan African settings. We evaluated the potential clinical impact and cost-effectiveness of universal maternal HIV screening at infant immunization visits, with referral to EID and maternal antiretroviral therapy (ART) initiation. METHODS: Using the CEPAC-Pediatric model, we compared two strategies for infants born in 2017 in Côte d'Ivoire (CI), South Africa (SA), and Zimbabwe: (1) existing EID programmes offering six-week nucleic acid testing (NAT) for infants with known HIV exposure (EID), and (2) EID plus universal maternal HIV screening at six-week infant immunization visits, leading to referral for infant NAT and maternal ART initiation (screen-and-test). Model inputs included published Ivoirian/South African/Zimbabwean data: maternal HIV prevalence (4.8/30.8/16.1%), current uptake of EID (40/95/65%) and six-week immunization attendance (99/74/94%). Referral rates for infant NAT and maternal ART initiation after screen-and-test were 80%. Costs included NAT ($24/infant), maternal screening ($10/mother-infant pair), ART ($5 to 31/month) and HIV care ($15 to 190/month). Model outcomes included mother-to-child transmission of HIV (MTCT) among HIV-exposed infants, and life expectancy (LE) and mean lifetime per-person costs for children with HIV (CWH) and all children born in 2017. We calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) using discounted (3%/year) lifetime costs and LE for all children. We considered two cost-effectiveness thresholds in each country: (1) the per-capita GDP ($1720/6380/2150) per year-of-life saved (YLS), and (2) the CEPAC-generated ICER of offering 2 versus 1 lifetime ART regimens (e.g. offering second-line ART; $520/500/580/YLS). RESULTS: With EID, projected six-week MTCT was 9.3% (CI), 4.2% (SA) and 5.2% (Zimbabwe). Screen-and-test decreased total MTCT by 0.2% to 0.5%, improved LE by 2.0 to 3.5 years for CWH and 0.03 to 0.07 years for all children, and increased discounted costs by $17 to 22/child (all children). The ICER of screen-and-test compared to EID was $1340/YLS (CI), $650/YLS (SA) and $670/YLS (Zimbabwe), below the per-capita GDP but above the ICER of 2 versus 1 lifetime ART regimens in all countries. CONCLUSIONS: Universal maternal HIV screening at immunization visits with referral to EID and maternal ART initiation may reduce MTCT, improve paediatric LE, and be of comparable value to current HIV-related interventions in high maternal HIV prevalence settings like SA and Zimbabwe.

Clinical Impact, Costs, and Cost-effectiveness of Expanded Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Testing in Massachusetts.

BACKGROUND: We projected the clinical and economic impact of alternative testing strategies on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) incidence and mortality in Massachusetts using a microsimulation model. METHODS: We compared 4 testing strategies: (1) hospitalized: polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing only for patients with severe/critical symptoms warranting hospitalization; (2) symptomatic: PCR for any COVID-19-consistent symptoms, with self-isolation if positive; (3) symptomatic + asymptomatic once: symptomatic and 1-time PCR for the entire population; and (4) symptomatic + asymptomatic monthly: symptomatic with monthly retesting for the entire population. We examined effective reproduction numbers (Re = 0.9-2.0) at which policy conclusions would change. We assumed homogeneous mixing among the Massachusetts population (excluding those residing in long-term care facilities). We used published data on disease progression and mortality, transmission, PCR sensitivity/specificity (70%/100%), and costs. Model-projected outcomes included infections, deaths, tests performed, hospital-days, and costs over 180 days, as well as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs, $/quality-adjusted life-year [QALY]). RESULTS: At Re = 0.9, symptomatic + asymptomatic monthly vs hospitalized resulted in a 64% reduction in infections and a 46% reduction in deaths, but required >66-fold more tests/day with 5-fold higher costs. Symptomatic + asymptomatic monthly had an ICER <$100 000/QALY only when Re ≥1.6; when test cost was ≤$3, every 14-day testing was cost-effective at all Re examined. CONCLUSIONS: Testing people with any COVID-19-consistent symptoms would be cost-saving compared to testing only those whose symptoms warrant hospital care. Expanding PCR testing to asymptomatic people would decrease infections, deaths, and hospitalizations. Despite modest sensitivity, low-cost, repeat screening of the entire population could be cost-effective in all epidemic settings.

Cost-effectiveness of Frequent HIV Screening Among High-risk Young Men Who Have Sex With Men in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Of new HIV infections in the US, 20% occur among young men who have sex with men (YMSM, ages 13-24), but >50% of YMSM with HIV are unaware of their status. Using Adolescent Medicine Trials Network for HIV/AIDS Interventions (ATN) data, we projected the clinical benefit and cost-effectiveness of frequent HIV screening among high-risk YMSM from age 15. METHODS: Using a mathematical simulation, we examined 3 screening strategies: Yearly, 6-monthly, and 3-monthly, each in addition to the Status quo (SQ, 0.7-10.3% screened/year, stratified by age). We used published data (YMSM-specific when available) including: HIV incidences (0.91-6.41/100PY); screen acceptance (80%), linkage-to-care/antiretroviral therapy (ART) initiation (76%), HIV transmission (0.3-86.1/100PY, by HIV RNA), monthly ART costs ($2290-$3780), and HIV per-screen costs ($38). Projected outcomes included CD4 count at diagnosis, primary HIV transmissions from ages 15-30, quality-adjusted life expectancy, costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs, $/quality-adjusted life-year saved [QALY]; threshold ≤$100 000/QALY). RESULTS: Compared to SQ, all strategies increased projected CD4 at diagnosis (296 to 477-515 cells/µL) and quality-adjusted life expectancy from age 15 (44.4 to 48.3-48.7 years) among YMSM acquiring HIV. Compared to SQ, all strategies increased discounted lifetime cost for the entire population ($170 800 to $178 100-$185 000/person). Screening 3-monthly was cost-effective (ICER: $4500/QALY) compared to SQ and reduced primary transmissions through age 30 by 40%. Results were most sensitive to transmission rates; excluding the impact of transmissions, screening Yearly was ≤$100 000/QALY (ICER: $70 900/QALY). CONCLUSIONS: For high-risk YMSM in the US, HIV screening 3-monthly compared to less frequent screening will improve clinical outcomes and be cost-effective.

College Campuses and COVID-19 Mitigation: Clinical and Economic Value.

BACKGROUND: Colleges in the United States are determining how to operate safely amid the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. OBJECTIVE: To examine the clinical outcomes, cost, and cost-effectiveness of COVID-19 mitigation strategies on college campuses. DESIGN: The Clinical and Economic Analysis of COVID-19 interventions (CEACOV) model, a dynamic microsimulation model, was used to examine alternative mitigation strategies. The CEACOV model tracks infections accrued by students and faculty, accounting for community transmissions. DATA SOURCES: Data from published literature were used to obtain parameters related to COVID-19 and contact-hours. TARGET POPULATION: Undergraduate students and faculty at U.S. colleges. TIME HORIZON: One semester (105 days). PERSPECTIVE: Modified societal. INTERVENTION: COVID-19 mitigation strategies, including social distancing, masks, and routine laboratory screening. OUTCOME MEASURES: Infections among students and faculty per 5000 students and per 1000 faculty, isolation days, tests, costs, cost per infection prevented, and cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS: Among students, mitigation strategies reduced COVID-19 cases from 3746 with no mitigation to 493 with extensive social distancing and masks, and further to 151 when laboratory testing was added among asymptomatic persons every 3 days. Among faculty, these values were 164, 28, and 25 cases, respectively. Costs ranged from about $0.4 million for minimal social distancing to about $0.9 million to $2.1 million for strategies involving laboratory testing ($10 per test), depending on testing frequency. Extensive social distancing with masks cost $170 per infection prevented ($49 200 per QALY) compared with masks alone. Adding routine laboratory testing increased cost per infection prevented to between $2010 and $17 210 (cost per QALY gained, $811 400 to $2 804 600). RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS: Results were most sensitive to test costs. LIMITATION: Data are from multiple sources. CONCLUSION: Extensive social distancing with a mandatory mask-wearing policy can prevent most COVID-19 cases on college campuses and is very cost-effective. Routine laboratory testing would prevent 96% of infections and require low-cost tests to be economically attractive. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institutes of Health.

Cost-effectiveness of public health strategies for COVID-19 epidemic control in South Africa: a microsimulation modelling study.

BACKGROUND: Health-care resource constraints in low-income and middle-income countries necessitate the identification of cost-effective public health interventions to address COVID-19. We aimed to develop a dynamic COVID-19 microsimulation model to assess clinical and economic outcomes and cost-effectiveness of epidemic control strategies in KwaZulu-Natal province, South Africa. METHODS: We compared different combinations of five public health interventions: health-care testing alone, where diagnostic testing is done only for individuals presenting to health-care centres; contact tracing in households of cases; isolation centres, for cases not requiring hospital admission; mass symptom screening and molecular testing for symptomatic individuals by community health-care workers; and quarantine centres, for household contacts who test negative. We calibrated infection transmission rates to match effective reproduction number (Re) estimates reported in South Africa. We assessed two main epidemic scenarios for a period of 360 days, with an Re of 1·5 and 1·2. Strategies with incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of less than US$3250 per year of life saved were considered cost-effective. We also did sensitivity analyses by varying key parameters (Re values, molecular testing sensitivity, and efficacies and costs of interventions) to determine the effect on clinical and cost projections. FINDINGS: When Re was 1·5, health-care testing alone resulted in the highest number of COVID-19 deaths during the 360-day period. Compared with health-care testing alone, a combination of health-care testing, contact tracing, use of isolation centres, mass symptom screening, and use of quarantine centres reduced mortality by 94%, increased health-care costs by 33%, and was cost-effective (ICER $340 per year of life saved). In settings where quarantine centres were not feasible, a combination of health-care testing, contact tracing, use of isolation centres, and mass symptom screening was cost-effective compared with health-care testing alone (ICER $590 per year of life saved). When Re was 1·2, health-care testing, contact tracing, use of isolation centres, and use of quarantine centres was the least costly strategy, and no other strategies were cost-effective. In sensitivity analyses, a combination of health-care testing, contact tracing, use of isolation centres, mass symptom screening, and use of quarantine centres was generally cost-effective, with the exception of scenarios in which Re was 2·6 and when efficacies of isolation centres and quarantine centres for transmission reduction were reduced. INTERPRETATION: In South Africa, strategies involving household contact tracing, isolation, mass symptom screening, and quarantining household contacts who test negative would substantially reduce COVID-19 mortality and would be cost-effective. The optimal combination of interventions depends on epidemic growth characteristics and practical implementation considerations. FUNDING: US National Institutes of Health, Royal Society, Wellcome Trust.