Association between Child Tax Credit advance payments and food insufficiency in households experiencing economic shocks.

The COVID-19 pandemic brought increases in economic shocks due to poor health and lost employment, which reduced economic well-being, especially in households with children. The American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 expanded Child Tax Credit (CTC) payments to include eligibility for the lowest income households, boosted benefit levels, and provided monthly advance payments to households with children. Using Census Household Pulse Survey respondent data from January 2021 to July 2022, we evaluated the association between these advance CTC monthly payments and food insufficiency among households with children experiencing health- or employment-related economic shocks (defined as missed work due to COVID-19/other illness or COVID-19-related employer closure/layoff/furlough). Using a triple difference design, we found that the advance CTC was associated with greater reductions in food insufficiency among households with children experiencing economic shocks both compared with households without children and with households with children not experiencing economic shocks. Permanently expanding the advance CTC could create resilience to economic shocks during disease outbreaks, climate disasters, and recessions.

Out-of-pocket spending and health care utilization associated with initiation of different medications for opioid use disorder: Findings from a national commercially insured cohort.

INTRODUCTION: Buprenorphine and naltrexone are effective medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD). Naltrexone requires complete detoxification from opioids before initiation while buprenorphine does not, which leads to a differential clinical induction challenge. Few studies have evaluated economic costs associated with MOUD initiation. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis using the 2014-2019 Merative MarketScan database. We included individuals diagnosed with opioid use, abuse, or dependence from 2014 to 2019 who initiated one of three MOUD types: 1) buprenorphine, 2) extended-release naltrexone, or 3) oral naltrexone. We calculated total and monthly out-of-pocket spending, for overall and MOUD-specific claims, for the three months prior through three months after MOUD initiation. We also calculated utilization of detoxification, inpatient, and outpatient services monthly over this period. RESULTS: Our cohort included 27,133 individuals; 19,536, 1886, and 5711 initiated buprenorphine, extended-release naltrexone, and oral naltrexone, respectively. Individuals who initiated naltrexone had the highest out-of-pocket spending over the study period. MOUD-specific spending did not contribute substantially to total out-of-pocket spending. Difference in overall spending by MOUD type was driven by a subset of individuals who initiated naltrexone and had very high out-of-pocket spending in the month prior to MOUD initiation. In this month, mean monthly out-of-pocket spending for high-spenders (above 90th percentile within MOUD type category) was $5734 (95 % confidence interval [CI]: $5181-$6286) and $4622 (95 % CI: $4161-$5082) for those who initiated oral and extended-release naltrexone, respectively, compared with $1852 (95 % CI: $1754-$1950) for those who initiated buprenorphine. In the month prior to MOUD initiation, those who initiated naltrexone also had higher detoxification, inpatient, and outpatient episode/visit frequency. In the month prior to initiation, 28.8 % (95 % CI: 27.7 %-30.0 %) and 25.5 % (95 % CI: 23.6 %-27.5 %) of individuals who initiated oral and extended-release naltrexone had detoxification episodes, compared with 9.7 % (95 % CI: 9.3 %-10.1 %) of those who initiated buprenorphine. CONCLUSION: Findings suggest that individuals who initiated naltrexone utilized more intensive health services, including detoxification, in the period prior to MOUD initiation, resulting in significantly higher out-of-pocket spending. Out-of-pocket spending is a patient-centered outcome reflecting potential patient burden. Our results should be considered as part of the shared decision-making process between patients and providers when choosing treatment for OUD.

Cost-effectiveness of point-of-care versus centralised, laboratory-based nucleic acid testing for diagnosis of HIV in infants: a systematic review of modelling studies.

BACKGROUND: Point-of-care (POC) nucleic acid testing for diagnosis of HIV in infants facilitates earlier initiation of antiretroviral therapy (ART) than with centralised (standard-of-care, SOC) testing, but can be more expensive. We evaluated cost-effectiveness data from mathematical models comparing POC with SOC to provide global policy guidance. METHODS: In this systematic review of modelling studies, we searched PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database, Econlit, and conference abstracts, combining terms for "HIV" + "infant"/"early infant diagnosis" + "point-of-care" + "cost-effectiveness" + "mathematical models", without restrictions from database inception to July 15, 2022. We selected reports of mathematical cost-effectiveness models comparing POC with SOC for HIV diagnosis in infants younger than 18 months. Titles and abstracts were independently reviewed, with full-text review for qualifying articles. We extracted data on health and economic outcomes and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for narrative synthesis. The primary outcomes of interest were ICERs (comparing POC with SOC) for ART initiation and survival of children living with HIV. FINDINGS: Our search identified 75 records through database search. 13 duplicates were excluded, leaving 62 non-duplicate articles. 57 records were excluded and five were reviewed in full text. One article was excluded as it was not a modelling study, and four qualifying studies were included in the review. These four reports were from two mathematical models from two independent modelling groups. Two reports used the Johns Hopkins model to compare POC with SOC for repeat early infant diagnosis testing in the first 6 months in sub-Saharan Africa (first report, simulation of 25 000 children) and Zambia (second report, simulation of 7500 children). In the base scenario, POC versus SOC increased probability of ART initiation within 60 days of testing from 19% to 82% (ICER per additional ART initiation range US$430-1097; 9-month cost horizon) in the first report; and from 28% to 81% in the second ($23-1609, 5-year cost horizon). Two reports compared POC with SOC for testing at 6 weeks in Zimbabwe using the Cost-Effectiveness of Preventing AIDS Complications-Paediatric model (simulation of 30 million children; lifetime horizon). POC increased life expectancy and was considered cost-effective compared with SOC (ICER $711-850 per year of life saved in HIV-exposed children). Results were robust throughout sensitivity and scenario analyses. In most scenarios, platform cost-sharing (co-use with other programmes) resulted in POC being cost-saving compared with SOC. INTERPRETATION: Four reports from two different models suggest that POC is a cost-effective and potentially cost-saving strategy for upscaling of early infant testing compared with SOC. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Unitaid, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, WHO, and Massachusetts General Hospital Research Scholars.

Association of the Expiration of Child Tax Credit Advance Payments With Food Insufficiency in US Households.

Importance: Advance Child Tax Credit (CTC) monthly payments administered to more than 35 million households with children in the US between July and December 2021 were associated with a substantial decrease in food insufficiency. These monthly payments expired in January 2022 after Congress failed to extend the policy, and the subsequent impact on food insufficiency is currently unknown. Objective: To assess whether the expiration of monthly CTC payments in January 2022 was associated with changes in food insufficiency in US households with children. Design, Setting, and Participants: This study used repeated cross-sectional, nationally representative data from multiple waves of the Household Pulse Survey, conducted by the US Census Bureau. Online data collection occurred from July 21, 2021, to July 11, 2022, and data analysis was performed in July 2022. Exposures: The first missed advance CTC payment on January 15, 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was unadjusted prevalence of household food insufficiency. Event study specification was used to estimate the association between the expiration of the CTC payments and household food insufficiency with the exposure of being in a household with children present. Results: The sample (592 044 respondents, representing households with and without children, for a weighted population size of 123 350 770 individuals) was majority female (362 286 individuals [51.3%]) and non-Hispanic White (425 497 individuals [62.2%]), and a plurality of respondents (248 828 [48.3%]) were aged 25 to 44 years at the time of the survey. During the survey wave just before CTC expiration (reference wave, December 29, 2021, to January 10, 2022), unadjusted household food insufficiency was 12.7% among households with children. In late January and early February 2022, following the first missed CTC monthly payment, 13.6% of households with children reported food insufficiency, increasing to 16.0% by late June and early July 2022. The event study specification estimated a 3.2 percentage point increase (95% CI, 1.4-5.0 percentage points; P < .001) in food insufficiency by the most recent wave available after the first missed CTC payment (June 29 to July 11, 2022) among households with children compared with the reference wave, a 25% increase. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this study suggest that there was an increase in food insufficiency among households with children after they stopped receiving monthly CTC payments. Given the well-documented associations between inability to afford food and poor health outcomes across the life span, Congress should consider swift action to reinstate this policy.

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 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.

Insurance coverage and financing landscape for HIV treatment and prevention in the USA.

In 2010, the US health insurance system underwent one of its most substantial transformations with the passage of the Affordable Care Act, which increased coverage for millions of people in the USA, including those with and at risk of HIV. Even so, the system of HIV care and prevention services in the USA is a complex patchwork of payers, providers, and financing mechanisms. People with HIV are primarily covered by Medicaid, Medicare, private insurance, or a combination of these; many get care through other programmes, particularly the Ryan White HIV/AIDS Program, which serves as the nation's safety net for people with HIV who remain uninsured or underinsured but offers modest to no support for prevention services. While uninsurance has drastically declined over the past decade, the USA trails other high-income countries in key HIV-specific metrics, including rates of viral suppression. In this paper in the Series, we provide an overview of the coverage and financing landscape for HIV treatment and prevention in the USA, discuss how the Affordable Care Act has changed the domestic health-care system, examine the major programmes that provide coverage and services, and identify remaining challenges.

Cost-effectiveness of a Novel Lipoarabinomannan Test for Tuberculosis in Patients With Human Immunodeficiency Virus.

BACKGROUND: A novel urine lipoarabinomannan assay (FujiLAM) has higher sensitivity and higher cost than the first-generation AlereLAM assay. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of FujiLAM for tuberculosis testing among hospitalized people with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), irrespective of symptoms. METHODS: We used a microsimulation model to project clinical and economic outcomes of 3 testing strategies: (1) sputum Xpert MTB/RIF (Xpert), (2) sputum Xpert plus urine AlereLAM (Xpert+AlereLAM), (3) sputum Xpert plus urine FujiLAM (Xpert+FujiLAM). The modeled cohort matched that of a 2-country clinical trial. We applied diagnostic yields from a retrospective study (yields for Xpert/Xpert+AlereLAM/Xpert+FujiLAM among those with CD4 <200 cells/µL: 33%/62%/70%; among those with CD4 ≥200 cells/µL: 33%/35%/47%). Costs of Xpert/AlereLAM/FujiLAM were US$15/3/6 (South Africa) and $25/3/6 (Malawi). Xpert+FujiLAM was considered cost-effective if its incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (US$/year-of-life saved) was <$940 (South Africa) and <$750 (Malawi). We varied key parameters in sensitivity analysis and performed a budget impact analysis of implementing FujiLAM countrywide. RESULTS: Compared with Xpert+AlereLAM, Xpert+FujiLAM increased life expectancy by 0.2 years for those tested in South Africa and Malawi. Xpert+FujiLAM was cost-effective in both countries. Xpert+FujiLAM for all patients remained cost-effective compared with sequential testing and CD4-stratified testing strategies. FujiLAM use added 3.5% (South Africa) and 4.7% (Malawi) to 5-year healthcare costs of tested patients, primarily reflecting ongoing HIV treatment costs among survivors. CONCLUSIONS: FujiLAM with Xpert for tuberculosis testing in hospitalized people with HIV is likely to increase life expectancy and be cost-effective at the currently anticipated price in South Africa and Malawi. Additional studies should evaluate FujiLAM in clinical practice settings.

Strengthening Existing Laboratory-Based Systems vs. Investing in Point-of-Care Assays for Early Infant Diagnosis of HIV: A Model-Based Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.

BACKGROUND: To improve early infant HIV diagnosis (EID) programs, options include replacing laboratory-based tests with point-of-care (POC) assays or investing in strengthened systems for sample transport and result return. SETTING: We used the CEPAC-Pediatric model to examine clinical benefits and costs of 3 EID strategies in Zimbabwe for infants 6 weeks of age. METHODS: We examined (1) laboratory-based EID (LAB), (2) strengthened laboratory-based EID (S-LAB), and (3) POC EID (POC). LAB/S-LAB and POC assays differed in sensitivity (LAB/S-LAB 100%, POC 96.9%) and specificity (LAB/S-LAB 99.6%, POC 99.9%). LAB/S-LAB/POC algorithms also differed in: probability of result return (79%/91%/98%), time until result return (61/53/1 days), probability of initiating antiretroviral therapy (ART) after positive result (52%/71%/86%), and total cost/test ($18.10/$30.47/$30.71). We projected life expectancy (LE) and average lifetime per-person cost for all HIV-exposed infants. We calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) from discounted (3%/year) LE and costs in $/year-of-life saved (YLS), defining cost effective as an ICER <$580/YLS (reflecting programs providing 2 vs. 1 ART regimens). In sensitivity analyses, we varied differences between S-LAB and POC in result return probability, result return time, ART initiation probability, and cost. RESULTS: For infants who acquired HIV, LAB/S-LAB/POC led to projected one-year survival of 67.3%/69.9%/75.6% and undiscounted LE of 21.74/22.71/24.49 years. For all HIV-exposed infants, undiscounted LE was 63.35/63.38/63.43 years, at discounted lifetime costs of $200/220/240 per infant. In cost-effectiveness analysis, S-LAB was an inefficient use of resources; the ICER of POC vs. LAB was $830/YLS. CONCLUSIONS: Current EID programs will attain greater benefit from investing in POC EID rather than strengthening laboratory-based systems.

Estimating the Cost of Point-of-Care Early Infant Diagnosis in a Program Setting: A Case Study Using Abbott m-PIMA and Cepheid GeneXpert IV in Zimbabwe.

BACKGROUND: Point-of-care early infant diagnosis (POC EID) increases access to HIV test results and shortens time to result-return and antiretroviral therapy initiation, as compared to central laboratory-based EID. However, to scale-up POC EID, governments need more information about programmatic costs. METHODS: We evaluated POC EID costs from a health systems perspective. Our primary analysis assessed the Abbott m-PIMA and 2 versions of the Cepheid GeneXpert IV platforms-with a solar battery or gel battery-used in Zimbabwe, with instrument purchase. We also included the following 2 scenarios with zero upfront equipment purchase: (1) m-PIMA using a reagent rental model, with an all-inclusive price when the buyer commits to an average testing volume, and (2) GeneXpert IV, reflecting contexts where GeneXpert is already in place for tuberculosis diagnosis or HIV viral load monitoring. We collected data from project expenditures, observations of health workers, and from government salary scales. We calculated cost per EID test based on number of EID tests performed on each machine per day. RESULTS: The cost per successfully completed test was $44.55 for m-PIMA with platform purchase and $25.89 for m-PIMA reagent rental. Costs for GeneXpert IV with platform purchase were $25.70 using a solar battery, $25.29 using a gel battery, and $23.85 under a scenario assuming no equipment costs. In our primary analyses, materials costs comprised 73%-74% total costs, equipment 14%-20%, labor 5%-8%, training 1%, facility upgrades 1%, and monitoring 1%. CONCLUSIONS: As countries consider scaling up POC EID, these data are important for budgeting and planning.

Comparative Pricing of Branded Tenofovir Alafenamide-Emtricitabine Relative to Generic Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate-Emtricitabine for HIV Preexposure Prophylaxis: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.

Background: Tenofovir alafenamide-emtricitabine (F/TAF) was recently approved as a noninferior and potentially safer option than tenofovir disoproxil fumarate-emtricitabine (F/TDF) for HIV preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) in the United States. Objective: To estimate the greatest possible clinical benefits and economic savings attributable to the improved safety profile of F/TAF and the maximum price payers should be willing to pay for F/TAF over generic F/TDF. Design: Cost-effectiveness analysis. Data Sources: Published literature on F/TDF safety (in persons with and those without HIV) and the cost and quality-of-life effects of fractures and end-stage renal disease (ESRD). Target Population: Age-stratified U.S. men who have sex with men (MSM) using PrEP. Time Horizon: Five years. Perspective: Health care sector. Intervention: Preexposure prophylaxis with F/TAF versus F/TDF. Outcome Measures: Fractures averted, cases of ESRD averted, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) saved, costs, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), and maximum justifiable price for F/TAF compared with generic F/TDF. Results of Base-Case Analysis: Over a 5-year horizon, compared with F/TDF, F/TAF averted 2101 fractures and 25 cases of ESRD for the 123 610 MSM receiving PrEP, with an ICER of more than $7 million per QALY. At a 50% discount for generic F/TDF ($8300 per year) and a societal willingness to pay up to $100 000 per QALY, the maximum fair price for F/TAF was $8670 per year. Results of Sensitivity Analysis: Among persons older than 55 years, the ICER for F/TAF remained more than $3 million per QALY and the maximum permissible fair price for F/TAF was $8970 per year. Results were robust to alternative time horizons and PrEP-using population sizes. Limitation: Intermittent use and on-demand PrEP were not considered. Conclusion: In the presence of a generic F/TDF alternative, the improved safety of F/TAF is worth no more than an additional $370 per person per year. Primary Funding Source: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institute on Drug Abuse, National Institute of Mental Health, and Massachusetts General Hospital Executive Committee on Research.