Does funding for HIV and sexually transmitted disease prevention matter? Evidence from panel data.

Since the onset of the AIDS epidemic, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has allocated several billion dollars for the prevention of HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) in the United States. Using state-level data from 1981 to 1998, the authors found that greater amounts of prevention funding in a given year are associated with reductions in reported gonorrhea incidence rates in subsequent years. The authors conclude that funding for STD and HIV prevention, on the whole, appears to have a discernable impact on the incidence of STDs.

Modeling the impact of HIV chemoprophylaxis strategies among men who have sex with men in the United States: HIV infections prevented and cost-effectiveness.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: HIV chemoprophylaxis may be a future prevention strategy to help control the global epidemic of HIV/AIDS. Safety and efficacy trials of two agents are currently underway. We assess the expected number of HIV cases prevented and cost-effectiveness of a hypothetical HIV chemoprophylaxis program among men who have sex with men in a large US city. DESIGN AND METHODS: We developed a stochastic compartmental mathematical model using HIV/AIDS surveillance data to simulate the HIV epidemic and the impact of a 5-year chemoprophylaxis program under varying assumptions for epidemiological, behavioral, programmatic and cost parameters. We estimated program effectiveness and costs from the perspective of the US healthcare system compared with current HIV prevention practices. The main outcome measures were number of HIV infections prevented and incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-years saved. RESULTS: A chemoprophylaxis program targeting 25% of high-risk men who have sex with men in New York City could prevent 780 (4%) to 4510 (23%) of the 19 510 HIV infections predicted to occur among all men who have sex with men in New York City in 5 years. More than half of prevented infections would be among those not taking chemoprophylaxis but who benefit from reduced HIV prevalence in the community. Under base-case assumptions, incremental cost was US$ 31 970 per quality-adjusted life-years saved. The program was cost-effective under most variations in efficacy, mechanism of protection and adherence. CONCLUSION: HIV chemoprophylaxis among high-risk men who have sex with men in a major US city could prevent a significant number of HIV infections and be cost-effective.