Prevention of human immunodeficiency virus-related opportunistic infections in France: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

A simulation model of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) disease, which incorporated French data on the progression of HIV disease in the absence of antiretroviral therapy and on cost, was used to determine the clinical impact and cost-effectiveness of different strategies for the prevention of opportunistic infections in French patients who receive highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART). Compared with use of no prophylaxis, use of trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMZ) increased per-person lifetime costs from euro 185,600 to euro 187,900 and quality-adjusted life expectancy from 112.2 to 113.7 months, for an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of euro 18,700 per quality-adjusted life-year (euro/QALY) gained. Compared with use of TMP-SMZ alone, use of TMP-SMZ plus azithromycin cost euro 23,900/QALY gained; adding fluconazole cost an additional euro 54,500/QALY gained. All strategies that included oral ganciclovir had cost-effectiveness ratios that exceeded euro 100,000/QALY gained. In the era of HAART, on the basis of French data, prophylaxis against Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia, toxoplasmic encephalitis, and Mycobacterium avium complex bacteremia is cost-effective. Prophylaxis against fungal and cytomegalovirus infections is less cost-effective than are other therapeutic options for HIV disease and should remain of lower priority.

Use of genotypic resistance testing to guide hiv therapy: clinical impact and cost-effectiveness.

BACKGROUND: Genotypic sequencing for drug-resistant strains of HIV can guide the choice of antiretroviral therapy. OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost-effectiveness of genotypic resistance testing for patients acquiring drug resistance through failed treatment (secondary resistance) and those infected with resistant virus (primary resistance). DESIGN: Cost-effectiveness analysis with an HIV simulation model incorporating CD4 cell count and HIV RNA level as predictors of disease progression. DATA SOURCES: Published randomized trials and data from the Multicenter AIDS Cohort Study, the national AIDS Cost and Services Utilization Survey, the Red Book, and an institutional cost-accounting system. TARGET POPULATION: HIV-infected patients in the United States with baseline CD4 counts of 0.250 x 10(9) cells/L. TIME HORIZON: Lifetime. PERSPECTIVE: Societal. INTERVENTIONS: Genotypic resistance testing and clinical judgment, compared with clinical judgment alone, in two contexts: after initial treatment failure (secondary resistance testing) and before initiation of antiretroviral therapy (primary resistance testing). OUTCOME MEASURES: Life expectancy, quality-adjusted life expectancy, and cost-effectiveness in dollars per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS: Secondary resistance testing increased life expectancy by 3 months, at a cost of $17 900 per QALY gained. The cost-effectiveness of primary resistance testing was $22 300 per QALY gained with a 20% prevalence of primary resistance but increased to $69 000 per QALY gained with 4% prevalence. RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS: The cost-effectiveness ratio for secondary resistance testing remained under $25 000 per QALY gained, even when effectiveness and cost of testing and antiretroviral therapy, quality-of-life weights, and discount rate were varied. CONCLUSIONS: Genotypic antiretroviral resistance testing following antiretroviral failure is cost-effective. Primary resistance testing also seems to be reasonably cost-effective and will become more so as the prevalence of primary resistance increases.

Preevaluation of clinical trial data: the case of preemptive cytomegalovirus therapy in patients with human immunodeficiency virus.

We developed a mathematical simulation model to anticipate outcomes from an upcoming trial of targeted, preemptive cytomegalovirus (CMV) therapy in high-risk, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected patients identified by means of CMV polymerase chain reaction screening. We estimated the costs and consequences of CMV prophylaxis in patients with CD4(+) counts < or =100 cells/microL under various assumptions regarding disease progression, complication rates, drug effects, and costs. Without CMV preemptive therapy, lifetime costs average $44,600 with expected duration of survival of 19.16 quality-adjusted life-months and 213 CMV cases per 1000 patients. Targeted preemptive therapy with orally administered valganciclovir increases costs and duration of survival to $46,900 and 19.63 quality-adjusted life-months, respectively. CMV cases decrease to 174 per 1000 patients. The cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained is $59,000. This result compares favorably with other strategies in end-stage HIV disease but hinges on valganciclovir cost and efficacy assumptions and the absence of minimally effective salvage antiretroviral therapy for HIV. The upcoming trial should resolve the clinical uncertainty surrounding some of these assumptions.

The cost effectiveness of combination antiretroviral therapy for HIV disease.

BACKGROUND: Combination antiretroviral therapy with a combination of three or more drugs has become the standard of care for patients with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection in the United States. We estimated the clinical benefits and cost effectiveness of three-drug antiretroviral regimens. METHODS: We developed a mathematical simulation model of HIV disease, using the CD4 cell count and HIV RNA level as predictors of the progression of disease. Outcome measures included life expectancy, life expectancy adjusted for the quality of life, lifetime direct medical costs, and cost effectiveness in dollars per quality-adjusted year of life gained. Clinical data were derived from major clinical trials, including the AIDS Clinical Trials Group 320 Study. Data on costs were based on the national AIDS Cost and Services Utilization Survey, with drug costs obtained from the Red Book. RESULTS: For patients similar to those in the AIDS Clinical Trials Group 320 Study (mean CD4 cell count, 87 per cubic millimeter), life expectancy adjusted for the quality of life increased from 1.53 to 2.91 years, and per-person lifetime costs increased from $45,460 to $77,300 with three-drug therapy as compared with no therapy. The incremental cost per quality-adjusted year of life gained, as compared with no therapy, was $23,000. On the basis of additional data from other major studies, the cost-effectiveness ratio for three-drug therapy ranged from $13,000 to $23,000 per quality-adjusted year of life gained. The initial CD4 cell count and drug costs were the most important determinants of costs, clinical benefits, and cost effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of HIV infection with a combination of three antiretroviral drugs is a cost-effective use of resources.