Predicted effects of the introduction of long-acting injectable cabotegravir pre-exposure prophylaxis in sub-Saharan Africa: a modelling study.

BACKGROUND: Long-acting injectable cabotegravir pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is recommended by WHO as an additional option for HIV prevention in sub-Saharan Africa, but there is concern that its introduction could lead to an increase in integrase-inhibitor resistance undermining treatment programmes that rely on dolutegravir. We aimed to project the health benefits and risks of cabotegravir-PrEP introduction in settings in sub-Saharan Africa. METHODS: With HIV Synthesis, an individual-based HIV model, we simulated 1000 setting-scenarios reflecting both variability and uncertainty about HIV epidemics in sub-Saharan Africa and compared outcomes for each with and without cabotegravir-PrEP introduction. PrEP use is assumed to be risk-informed and to be used only in 3-month periods (the time step for the model) when having condomless sex. We consider three groups at risk of integrase-inhibitor resistance emergence: people who start cabotegravir-PrEP after (unknowingly) being infected with HIV, those who seroconvert while on PrEP, and those with HIV who have residual cabotegravir drugs concentrations during the early tail period after recently stopping PrEP. We projected the outcomes of policies of cabotegravir-PrEP introduction and of no introduction in 2022 across 50 years. In 50% of setting-scenarios we considered that more sensitive nucleic-acid-based HIV diagnostic testing (NAT), rather than regular antibody-based HIV rapid testing, might be used to reduce resistance risk. For cost-effectiveness analysis we assumed in our base case a cost of cabotegravir-PrEP drug to be similar to oral PrEP, resulting in a total annual cost of USD$144 per year ($114 per year and $264 per year considered in sensitivity analyses), a cost-effectiveness threshold of $500 per disability-adjusted life years averted, and a discount rate of 3% per year. FINDINGS: Reflecting our assumptions on the appeal of cabotegravir-PrEP, its introduction is predicted to lead to a substantial increase in PrEP use with approximately 2·6% of the adult population (and 46% of those with a current indication for PrEP) receiving PrEP compared with 1·5% (28%) without cabotegravir-PrEP introduction across 20 years. As a result, HIV incidence is expected to be lower by 29% (90% range across setting-scenarios 6-52%) across the same period compared with no introduction of cabotegravir-PrEP. In people initiating antiretroviral therapy, the proportion with integrase-inhibitor resistance after 20 years is projected to be 1·7% (0-6·4%) without cabotegravir-PrEP introduction but 13·1% (4·1-30·9%) with. Cabotegravir-PrEP introduction is predicted to lower the proportion of all people on antiretroviral therapy with viral loads less than 1000 copies per mL by 0·9% (-2·5% to 0·3%) at 20 years. For an adult population of 10 million an overall decrease in number of AIDS deaths of about 4540 per year (-13 000 to -300) across 50 years is predicted, with little discernible benefit with NAT when compared with standard antibody-based rapid testing. AIDS deaths are predicted to be averted with cabotegravir-PrEP introduction in 99% of setting-scenarios. Across the 50-year time horizon, overall HIV programme costs are predicted to be similar regardless of whether cabotegravir-PrEP is introduced (total mean discounted annual HIV programme costs per year across 50 years is $151·3 million vs $150·7 million), assuming the use of standard antibody testing. With antibody-based rapid HIV testing, the introduction of cabotegravir-PrEP is predicted to be cost-effective under an assumed threshold of $500 per disability-adjusted life year averted in 82% of setting-scenarios at the cost of $144 per year, in 52% at $264, and in 87% at $114. INTERPRETATION: Despite leading to increases in integrase-inhibitor drug resistance, cabotegravir-PrEP introduction is likely to reduce AIDS deaths in addition to HIV incidence. Long-acting cabotegravir-PrEP is predicted to be cost-effective if delivered at similar cost to oral PrEP with antibody-based rapid HIV testing. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases of the National Institutes of Health.

Assessment of minority frequency pretreatment HIV drug-resistant variants in pregnant women and associations with virologic non-suppression at term.

OBJECTIVE: To assess in ART-naïve pregnant women randomized to efavirenz- versus raltegravir-based ART (IMPAACT P1081) whether pretreatment drug resistance (PDR) with minority frequency variants (<20% of individual's viral quasispecies) affects antiretroviral treatment (ART)-suppression at term. DESIGN: A case-control study design compared PDR minority variants in cases with virologic non-suppression (plasma HIV RNA >200 copies/mL) at delivery to randomly selected ART-suppressed controls. METHODS: HIV pol genotypes were derived from pretreatment plasma specimens by Illumina sequencing. Resistance mutations were assessed using the HIV Stanford Database, and the proportion of cases versus controls with PDR to their ART regimens was compared. RESULTS: PDR was observed in 7 participants (11.3%; 95% CI 4.7, 21.9) and did not differ between 21 cases and 41 controls (4.8% vs 14.6%, p = 0.4061). PDR detected only as minority variants was less common (3.2%; 95% CI 0.2, 11.7) and also did not differ between groups (0% vs. 4.9%; p = 0.5447). Cases' median plasma HIV RNA at delivery was 347c/mL, with most (n = 19/22) showing progressive diminution of viral load but not ≤200c/mL. Among cases with viral rebound (n = 3/22), none had PDR detected. Virologic non-suppression at term was associated with higher plasma HIV RNA at study entry (p<0.0001), a shorter duration of ART prior to delivery (p<0.0001), and randomization to efavirenz- (versus raltegravir-) based ART (p = 0.0085). CONCLUSIONS: We observed a moderate frequency of PDR that did not significantly contribute to virologic non-suppression at term. Rather, higher pretreatment plasma HIV RNA, randomization to efavirenz-based ART, and shorter duration of ART were associated with non-suppression. These findings support early prenatal care engagement of pregnant women and initiation of integrase inhibitor-based ART due to its association with more rapid suppression of plasma RNA levels. Furthermore, because minority variants appeared infrequent in ART-naïve pregnant women and inconsequential to ART-suppression, testing for minority variants may be unwarranted.

Pharmacovigilance of antiretroviral dolutegravir in the state of Paraná

The aim of this study was to investigate adverse reactions to Dolutegravir, a drug recently made available by the Unified Health System (SUS) for treating HIV infections. The frequency, severity and sex distribution of adverse reactions to Dolutegravir were identified over the first 18 months of its availability in users in the state of Paraná. Information was obtained through the pharmacovigilance questionnaire prepared by the Ministry of Health, accessed through the Logistics Control System for Medicines(SICLOM). During the study period, dolutegravirwas dispensed to 9,865 patients in the state. However, 9,207 users (93.3%) answered the pharmacovigilance questionnaire. Among them, 1.75% reported 279 adverse reactions. This population was composed mainly of male people (69.57%), in the ratio of 2.29 men for each woman, white (67.08%), aged between 20 and 29 years (26.71%), single (45.34%) and with education between 8 and 11 years of study (41.61%). Gastrointestinal (36.92%) and nervous system (14.34%) disorders were the most prevalent. 77.78% adverse reactions were considered non-serious by users. It can be concluded that dolutegravirhad a low prevalence of adverse reactions in users in the state of Paraná, demonstrating to be safe for use by the population in therapy against HIV, in accordance with clinical trials.

Dolutegravir in Mexico for special populations: A cost analysis perspective.

Integrase strand-transfer inhibitors (INSTI) are the latest class of antiretrovirals registered in Mexico. They include raltegravir (RAL), elvitegravir/cobicistat (EVG/c), dolutegravir (DTG) and bictegravir (BIC). Along with international guidelines, Mexico adopted the use of INSTI about two years ago as initial antiretroviral therapy (ART). This is partially due to the increase in the pre-treatment resistance to non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTI), mainly efavirenz (EFV). Furthermore, INSTI depict greater efficacy, safety and less drug-drug interactions than NNRTI and protease inhibitors (PI). DTG is a second generation INSTI with a high barrier to resistance. It is recommended in international and national guidelines in a wide variety of clinical scenarios for persons living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) (PLWHIV), including treatment-naïve, first-line NNRTI treatment failure, simplification switch in suppressed patients, pregnancy, women with childbearing potential, adolescents and children over 6 years of age. DTG is mostly metabolized by the liver UDP-glucuronosyltransferase, and exhibits low drug-drug interactions overall; on the other hand, it has an extremely low renal elimination, therefore may be used in PLWHIV with advanced kidney disease without dose modification. Tuberculosis is a common coinfection in Mexico that requires rifampin-based anti-tuberculosis therapy, which requires increasing DTG to double dosing (50 mg BID). In Mexico, DTG-based regimens are likely to be cost-effective in many scenarios, given its acquisition costs and the particularities of the HIV population and associated clinical conditions, including a relatively high proportion of the following: i) new HIV diagnoses presenting at acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) stage; ii) high rate of tuberculosis coinfection; iii) frequent first-line NNRTI treatment failures; and iv) relatively high proportion of infected children and adolescents.

The potential role of long-acting injectable cabotegravir-rilpivirine in the treatment of HIV in sub-Saharan Africa: a modelling analysis.

BACKGROUND: The use of a combination of the integrase inhibitor, cabotegravir, and the non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor, rilpivirine, in a long-acting injectable form is being considered as an antiretroviral treatment option for people with HIV in sub-Saharan Africa. We aimed to model the effects of injectable cabotegravir-rilpivirine to help to inform its potential effectiveness and cost-effectiveness under different possible policies for its introduction. METHODS: We used an existing individual-based model of HIV to predict the effects of introducing monthly injections of cabotegravir-rilpivirine for people with HIV in low-income settings in sub-Saharan Africa. We evaluated policies in the context of 1000 setting scenarios that reflected characteristics of HIV epidemics and programmes in sub-Saharan Africa. We compared three policies for introduction of injectable cabotegravir-rilpivirine with continued use of dolutegravir-based oral regimens for: all individuals on antiretroviral therapy (ART); individuals with a recently measured viral load of more than 1000 copies per mL (signifying poor adherence to oral drugs, and often associated with drug resistance); and individuals with a recently measured viral load of less than 1000 copies per mL (a group with a lower prevalence of pre-existing drug resistance). We also did cost-effectiveness analysis, taking a health system perspective over a 10 year period, with 3% discounting of disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) and costs. A cost-effectiveness threshold of US$500 per DALY averted was used to establish if a policy was cost-effective. FINDINGS: In our model, all policies involving the introduction of injectable cabotegravir-rilpivirine were predicted to lead to an increased proportion of people with HIV on ART, increased viral load suppression, and decreased AIDS-related mortality, with lesser benefits in people with a recently measured viral load of less than 1000 copies per mL. Its introduction is also predicted to lead to increases in resistance to integrase inhibitors and non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors if introduced in all people with HIV on ART or in those with a recently measured viral load of less than 1000 copies per mL, but to a lesser extent if introduced in people with more than 1000 copies per mL due to concentration of its use in people less adherent to oral therapy. Consistent with the effect on AIDS-related mortality, all approaches to the introduction of injectable cabotegravir-rilpivirine are predicted to avert DALYs. Assuming a cost of $120 per person per year, use of this regimen in people with a recently measured viral load of more than 1000 copies per mL was borderline cost-effective (median cost per DALY averted across setting scenarios $404). The other approaches considered for its use are unlikely to be cost-effective unless the cost per year of injectable cabotegravir-rilpivirine is considerably reduced. INTERPRETATION: Our modelling suggests that injectable cabotegravir-rilpivirine offers potential benefits; however, to be a cost-effective option, its introduction might need to be carefully targeted to individuals with HIV who might otherwise have suboptimal adherence to ART. As data accumulate from trials and implementation studies, such findings can be incorporated into the model to better inform on the full consequences of policy alternatives. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, including through the HIV Modelling Consortium (OPP1191655).

Changes in neurocognitive assessment scores after initiating dolutegravir- versus elvitegravir-based antiretroviral therapy.

This prospective cohort study enrolled people living with HIV initiating antiretroviral therapy (ART) containing the integrase inhibitors, dolutegravir (DTG) or elvitegravir (EVG) and administered the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) at baseline and again after approximately six months to compare changes in MoCA scores. The proportion of patients found to have cognitive impairment, as indicated by a MoCA score <26/30, on each agent were also compared and comparisons were made between changes in each domain assessed by the MoCA (visuospatial/executive, naming, attention, language, abstraction, delayed recall, and orientation). Thirty-five evaluable participants were enrolled, 18 on DTG and 17 on EVG. The median [interquartile range(IQR)] age was 44 (32 to 54) years, 63% were male, 57% were African American. The median (IQR) MoCA score at baseline was 25 (23 to 27) with no difference between groups (p=0.249). The median (IQR) change in MoCA score was 0 (-1 to 2) for DTG and 1 (0 to 3) for EVG (p = 0.183). Of those on DTG, 8 (44%) had MoCA scores <26 on follow-up compared to 11 (65%) on EVG (p = 0.229). There were no significant differences in changes in any of the individual MoCA domains.

Raltegravir use and outcomes among children and adolescents living with HIV in the IeDEA global consortium.

INTRODUCTION: As integrase inhibitors become available in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), they offer the potential to expand extremely limited treatment options available to children and adolescents. In LMICs, only small numbers have used raltegravir, primarily as part of third-line regimens. Using data from the IeDEA global consortium, we aimed to describe the characteristics of children on raltegravir-containing regimens and their outcomes. METHODS: We included data from 1994 to 2017 from children (age <18 years), from East and Southern Africa, Asia and South America, who received cART regimens containing raltegravir for ≥90 days. We describe their characteristics at raltegravir start, and their immunological and virological outcomes. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: In total, 62 children were included, with median age at raltegravir initiation of 14.3 years (IQR 11.2 to 15.8) and median CD4 count of 276 cells/µL (IQR 68 to 494). Among 40 (65%) with drug resistance testing prior to raltegravir, 71% were resistant to at least one protease inhibitor (PI), and 32% had high-level resistance to at least one drug class. Most (n = 50; 81%) received raltegravir as part of third-line cART following PI-based regimens, and were on regimens containing four or more drugs (n = 47, 76%). By database closure, median duration on raltegravir was 2.0 years (IQR 0.8 to 3.0), 1 (1.6%) patient had died, 6 (9.7%) were lost to follow-up and 21 (34%) had discontinued raltegravir. Among 15 patients reporting reasons for stopping raltegravir, six discontinued because it was no longer available. Within one year of starting raltegravir, among 53 patients with VL measures, 40 (75%) had VL < 1000 copies/mL, and among 54 with a reported CD4 count, 45 (83%) and 36 (67%) were ≥350 and ≥500 cells/µL, respectively, with median CD4 count increasing to 517.5 cells/µL (IQR 288 to 810). CONCLUSIONS: Among children in LMICs, the initial use of raltegravir has been primarily for post PI-based cART. We found good virological and immunological outcomes despite frequent prior triple-class failure and high levels of drug resistance. Both access to raltegravir and long-term adherence to regimens with large pill-burdens remain challenging. Policies which promote earlier access to new drugs and simplify daily regimens for children and adolescents in LMICs are needed.

Clinical Impact and Cost-effectiveness of Genotype Testing at Human Immunodeficiency Virus Diagnosis in the United States.

BACKGROUND: US guidelines recommend genotype testing at human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) diagnosis ("baseline genotype") to detect transmitted drug resistance (TDR) to nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTIs), nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs), and protease inhibitors. With integrase strand inhibitor (INSTI)-based regimens now recommended as first-line antiretroviral therapy (ART), the of baseline genotypes is uncertain. METHODS: We used the Cost-effectiveness of Preventing AIDS Complications model to examine the clinical impact and cost-effectiveness of baseline genotype compared to no baseline genotype for people starting ART with dolutegravir (DTG) and an NRTI pair. For people with no TDR (83.8%), baseline genotype does not alter regimen selection. Among people with transmitted NRTI resistance (5.8%), baseline genotype guides NRTI selection and informs subsequent ART after adverse events (DTG AEs, 14%). Among people with transmitted NNRTI resistance (7.2%), baseline genotype influences care only for people with DTG AEs switching to NNRTI-based regimens. The 48-week virologic suppression varied (40%-92%) depending on TDR. Costs included $320/genotype and $2500-$3000/month for ART. RESULTS: Compared to no baseline genotype, baseline genotype resulted in <1 additional undiscounted quality-adjusted life-day (QALD), cost an additional $500/person, and was not cost-effective (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio: $420 000/quality-adjusted life-year). In univariate sensitivity analysis, clinical benefits of baseline genotype never exceeded 5 QALDs for all newly diagnosed people with HIV. Baseline genotype was cost-effective at current TDR prevalence only under unlikely conditions, eg, DTG-based regimens achieving ≤50% suppression of transmitted NRTI resistance. CONCLUSIONS: With INSTI-based first-line regimens in the United States, baseline genotype offers minimal clinical benefit and is not cost-effective.

Assessment of antiretroviral third agent virologic durability after initiation of first antiretroviral regimen.

Information on the virologic durability of modern antiretroviral regimens is important to clinicians. We aimed to describe virologic durability of first-line integrase strand transfer inhibitor (INSTI)-, nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI)-, or protease inhibitor (PI)-based antiretroviral regimens. This was a retrospective study of antiretroviral-naïve patients that initiated first-line antiretroviral regimens with two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors and an INSTI, NNRTI, or PI between January 2006 and June 2016. The outcome was time to virologic failure, which was assessed by Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and Cox regression models. There were 780 patients (median age = 37 years [interquartile range (IQR) = 30-45], 93.3% male, 56.2% Caucasian, median HIV duration = 1.8 years [IQR = 0.4-5.4], baseline log10 viral load [VL]=4.6 [IQR = 4.1-5.1], and baseline CD4+ cell count = 320 cells/µl [IQR = 217-440]). In total, 189/780 were on a third agent INSTI, 339/780 on a third agent NNRTI, and 252/780 on a third agent PI. Kaplan-Meier survival probability revealed longer time to virologic failure for INSTI, followed by NNRTI then PI (p < 0.001). Multivariable Cox regression revealed that being on an INSTI regimen (aHR = 0.27; 95%CI = 0.18-0.41) or NNRTI regimen (aHR = 0.64; 95%CI = 0.47-0.87) versus PI regimen, frequent VL testing (per year), (aHR = 0.64; 95%CI = 0.47-0.87), and duration of ART (aHR = 0.22; 95%CI = 0.17-0.30) (years) were inversely associated with time to virologic failure, and log10 of baseline VL (aHR = 1.94; 95%CI = 1.58-2.39 per log10) increased risk. Virologic failure was delayed and virologic durability prolonged for INSTI- compared to NNRTI- and PI-based regimens, supporting current antiretroviral therapy guidelines.

Assessment of drug interaction potential between the HCV direct-acting antiviral agents elbasvir/grazoprevir and the HIV integrase inhibitors raltegravir and dolutegravir.

BACKGROUND: Elbasvir/grazoprevir is a once-daily fixed-dose combination therapy for the treatment of chronic HCV infection, including HCV/HIV coinfection. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the pharmacokinetic interaction of elbasvir and grazoprevir with raltegravir or dolutegravir. METHODS: Three open-label trials in healthy adult participants were conducted. In the raltegravir trials, participants received a single dose of raltegravir 400 mg, a single dose of elbasvir 50 mg or grazoprevir 200 mg, and raltegravir with either elbasvir or grazoprevir. In the dolutegravir trial, participants received a single dose of dolutegravir 50 mg alone or co-administered with once-daily elbasvir 50 mg and grazoprevir 200 mg. RESULTS: The raltegravir AUC0-∞ geometric mean ratio (GMR) (90% CI) was 1.02 (0.81-1.27) with elbasvir and 1.43 (0.89-2.30) with grazoprevir. Dolutegravir AUC0-∞ GMR (90% CI) was 1.16 (1.00-1.34) with elbasvir and grazoprevir. The elbasvir AUC0-∞ GMR (90% CI) was 0.81 (0.57-1.17) with raltegravir and 0.98 (0.93-1.04) with dolutegravir. The grazoprevir AUC0-24 GMR (90% CI) was 0.89 (0.72-1.09) with raltegravir and 0.81 (0.67-0.97) with dolutegravir. CONCLUSIONS: Elbasvir or grazoprevir co-administered with raltegravir or dolutegravir resulted in no clinically meaningful drug-drug interactions and was generally well tolerated. These results support the assertion that no dose adjustments for elbasvir, grazoprevir, raltegravir or dolutegravir are needed for co-administration in HCV/HIV-coinfected people.

Cost-Effectiveness of Dolutegravir as a First-Line Treatment Option in the HIV-1-Infected Treatment-Naive Patients in Russia.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the cost effectiveness of dolutegravir + abacavir/lamivudine (DTG + ABC/3TC) compared with raltegravir + abacavir/lamivudine (RAL + ABC/3TC) and ritonavir-boosted darunavir + abacavir/lamivudine (DRV/r + ABC/3TC) in HIV-1-infected treatment-naive patients in Russia. METHODS: A dynamic Markov model was developed with five response states and six CD4+-based health states. Efficacy estimated as probability of viral suppression (HIV RNA <50 copies/ml) at 48 weeks was obtained from a published network meta-analysis. Baseline cohort characteristics and health state utilities were informed using DTG phase 3 clinical trials. Health care resource use was obtained from literature and costed using published unit costs. Costs (presented in Russian rubles) included antiretroviral drug costs; HIV management costs such as routine care; costs of treating cardiovascular conditions, opportunistic infections, and drug-related adverse effects; and mortality costs. A patient lifetime analysis was conducted using the societal perspective. Outcomes were quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), life-years, incremental cost per QALY ratio, and incremental cost per responder. RESULTS: The viral suppression rate among patients receiving DTG + ABC/3TC was 71.7% compared with 65.2% for RAL + ABC/3TC and 59.6% for DRV/r + ABC/3TC. The mean duration of response per patient was 116.6 months for DTG + ABC/3TC, 108.6 months for RAL + ABC/3TC, and 98.9 months for DRV/r + ABC/3TC. Total discounted costs for treatment over patient lifetime were RUB 2.89, 5.32, and 4.38 million for DTG + ABC/3TC, RAL + ABC/3TC, and DRV/r + ABC/3TC, respectively. Lifetime discounted QALYs were 12.73 for patients on DTG + ABC/3TC and 12.72 each for patients on RAL + ABC/3TC and DRV/r + ABC/3TC. DTG + ABC/3TC thus dominated the other two alternatives. CONCLUSIONS: With lower costs, higher response rates, and comparable QALYs, DTG + ABC/3TC can be considered as a cost-effective alternative.

Dolutegravir for first-line antiretroviral therapy in low-income and middle-income countries: uncertainties and opportunities for implementation and research.

A new first-line antiretroviral therapy (ART) regimen containing dolutegravir is being rolled out in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). In studies from predominantly high-income settings, dolutegravir-based regimens had superior efficacy, tolerability, and durability compared with existing first-line regimens. However, several questions remain about the roll out of dolutegravir in LMICs, where most people with HIV are women of reproductive age, tuberculosis prevalence can be high, and access to viral load and HIV drug resistance testing is limited. Findings from cohort studies suggest that dolutegravir is safe when initiated in pregnancy, but more data are needed to determine the risk of adverse birth outcomes when dolutegravir-based regimens are initiated before conception. Increasing access to viral load testing to monitor the effectiveness of dolutegravir remains crucial, but the best strategy to manage patients with viraemia is unclear. Furthermore, evidence to support the effectiveness of dolutegravir when given with tuberculosis treatment is scarce, particularly in programmatic settings in LMICs. Lastly, whether nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor resistance will affect the long-term efficacy of dolutegravir-based regimens in first-line, and potentially second-line, ART is unknown. Clinical trials, cohorts, and surveillance of HIV drug resistance will be necessary to answer these questions and to maximise the benefits of this new regimen.

The cost-effectiveness and budgetary impact of a dolutegravir-based regimen as first-line treatment of HIV infection in India.

INTRODUCTION: Dolutegravir (DTG)-based antiretroviral therapy (ART) is recommended for first-line HIV treatment in the US and Europe. Efavirenz (EFV)-based regimens remain the standard of care (SOC) in India. We examined the clinical and economic impact of DTG-based first-line ART in the setting of India's recent guidelines change to treating all patients with HIV infection regardless of CD4 count. METHODS: We used a microsimulation of HIV disease, the Cost-Effectiveness of Preventing AIDS Complications (CEPAC)-International model, to project outcomes in ART-naive patients under two strategies: (1) SOC: EFV/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF)/lamivudine (3TC); and (2) DTG: DTG + TDF/3TC. Regimen-specific inputs, including virologic suppression at 48 weeks (SOC: 82% vs. DTG: 90%) and annual costs ($98 vs. $102), were informed by clinical trial data and other sources and varied widely in sensitivity analysis. We compared incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), measured in $/year of life saved (YLS), to India's per capita gross domestic product ($1600 in 2015). We compared the budget impact and HIV transmission effects of the two strategies for the estimated 444,000 and 916,000 patients likely to initiate ART in India over the next 2 and 5 years. RESULTS: Compared to SOC, DTG improved 5-year survival from 76.7% to 83.0%, increased life expectancy from 22.0 to 24.8 years (14.0 to 15.5 years, discounted), averted 13,000 transmitted HIV infections over 5 years, increased discounted lifetime care costs from $3040 to $3240, and resulted in a lifetime ICER of $130/YLS, less than 10% of India's per capita GDP in 2015. DTG maintained an ICER below 50% of India's per capita GDP as long as the annual three-drug regimen cost was ≤$180/year. Over a 2- or 5-year horizon, total undiscounted outlays for HIV-related care were virtually the same for both strategies. CONCLUSIONS: A generic DTG-based regimen is likely to be cost-effective and should be recommended for initial therapy of HIV infection in India.

Cost-effectiveness of public-health policy options in the presence of pretreatment NNRTI drug resistance in sub-Saharan Africa: a modelling study.

BACKGROUND: There is concern over increasing prevalence of non-nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) resistance in people initiating antiretroviral therapy (ART) in low-income and middle-income countries. We assessed the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of alternative public health responses in countries in sub-Saharan Africa where the prevalence of pretreatment drug resistance to NNRTIs is high. METHODS: The HIV Synthesis Model is an individual-based simulation model of sexual HIV transmission, progression, and the effect of ART in adults, which is based on extensive published data sources and considers specific drugs and resistance mutations. We used this model to generate multiple setting scenarios mimicking those in sub-Saharan Africa and considered the prevalence of pretreatment NNRTI drug resistance in 2017. We then compared effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of alternative policy options. We took a 20 year time horizon, used a cost effectiveness threshold of US$500 per DALY averted, and discounted DALYs and costs at 3% per year. FINDINGS: A transition to use of a dolutegravir as a first-line regimen in all new ART initiators is the option predicted to produce the most health benefits, resulting in a reduction of about 1 death per year per 100 people on ART over the next 20 years in a situation in which more than 10% of ART initiators have NNRTI resistance. The negative effect on population health of postponing the transition to dolutegravir increases substantially with higher prevalence of HIV drug resistance to NNRTI in ART initiators. Because of the reduced risk of resistance acquisition with dolutegravir-based regimens and reduced use of expensive second-line boosted protease inhibitor regimens, this policy option is also predicted to lead to a reduction of overall programme cost. INTERPRETATION: A future transition from first-line regimens containing efavirenz to regimens containing dolutegravir formulations in adult ART initiators is predicted to be effective and cost-effective in low-income settings in sub-Saharan Africa at any prevalence of pre-ART NNRTI resistance. The urgency of the transition will depend largely on the country-specific prevalence of NNRTI resistance. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, World Health Organization.

The Cost-effectiveness and Budget Impact of 2-Drug Dolutegravir-Lamivudine Regimens for the Treatment of HIV Infection in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Recommended human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) treatment regimens in the United States contain 3 antiretroviral agents, costing >$30 000/person/year. Pilot studies are evaluating the efficacy of dual therapy with dolutegravir (DTG) and lamivudine (3TC). We examined the potential cost-effectiveness and budget impact of DTG + 3TC regimens in the United States. METHODS: Using a mathematical model, we projected the clinical and economic outcomes of antiretroviral therapy (ART)-naive patients under 4 strategies: (1) no ART (for modeling comparison); (2) 2-drug: initial regimen of DTG + 3TC; (3) induction-maintenance: 48-week induction regimen of 3 drugs (DTG/abacavir [ABC]/3TC), followed by DTG + 3TC maintenance if virologically suppressed; and (4) standard of care: 3-drug regimen of DTG/ABC/3TC. Strategy-dependent model inputs, varied widely in sensitivity analyses, included 48-week virologic suppression (88%-93%), subsequent virologic failure (0.1%-0.6%/month), and Medicaid-discounted ART costs ($15 200-$39 600/year). A strategy was considered cost-effective if its incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was <$100 000/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). RESULTS: The 3 ART strategies had the same 5-year survival rates (90%). The ICER was $22 500/QALY for induction-maintenance and >$500 000/QALY for standard of care. Two-drug was the preferred strategy only when DTG + 3TC 48-week virologic suppression rate exceeded 90%. With 50% uptake of either induction-maintenance or 2-drug for ART-naive patients, cost savings totaled $550 million and $800 million, respectively, within 5 years; savings reached >$3 billion if 25% of currently suppressed patients were switched to DTG + 3TC maintenance. CONCLUSIONS: Should DTG + 3TC demonstrate high rates of virologic suppression, this regimen will be cost-effective and would save >$500 million in ART costs in the United States over 5 years.

Cost-Effectiveness of Dolutegravir in HIV-1 Treatment-Experienced (TE) Patients in France.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a new generation integrase inhibitor (INI), dolutegravir (DTG), in France, in treatment-experienced (TE) and INI-naïve HIV-infected adults with at least two classes resistance compared to raltegravir (RAL), by adapting previously published Anti-Retroviral Analysis by Monte Carlo Individual Simulation (ARAMIS) model. METHODS: ARAMIS is a microsimulation Markov model with a lifetime time horizon and a monthly cycle length. Health states are defined as with or without opportunistic infection and death. In the initial cohort, efficacy and safety data were derived from a phase III study comparing DTG to RAL. Antiretroviral treatment algorithms, accounting for patient history, were based on French guidelines and experts opinion. Costs are mainly including treatment costs, routine HIV and opportunistic infection care, and death. Utilities depend on CD4+ cell count and the occurrence of opportunistic infections. RESULTS: The ARAMIS model indicates in the TE population that DTG compared to RAL over a life time is associated with 0.35 additional quality-adjusted life years (QALY; 10.75 versus 10.41) and additional costs of €7,266 (€390,001 versus €382,735). DTG increased costs are mainly related to a 9.1-month increase in life expectancy for DTG compared with RAL, and consequently a longer time spent on ART. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for DTG compared with RAL is €21,048 per QALY gained. About 83% and 14% of total lifetime costs are associated with antiretroviral therapy and routine HIV care respectively. Univariate deterministic sensitivity analyses demonstrate the robustness of the model. CONCLUSION: DTG is cost-effective in the management of TE INI naive patients in France, from a collective perspective. These results could be explained by the superior efficacy of DTG in this population and its higher genetic barrier to resistance compared to RAL. These data need to be confirmed with longer-term real life data.