An Updated Economic Assessment of Moxidectin Treatment Strategies for Onchocerciasis Elimination.

BACKGROUND: Concerns that annual mass administration of ivermectin, the predominant strategy for onchocerciasis control and elimination, may not lead to elimination of parasite transmission (EoT) in all endemic areas have increased interest in alternative treatment strategies. One such strategy is moxidectin. We performed an updated economic assessment of moxidectin- relative to ivermectin-based strategies. METHODS: We investigated annual and biannual community-directed treatment with ivermectin (aCDTI, bCDTI) and moxidectin (aCDTM, bCDTM) with minimal or enhanced coverage (65% or 80% of total population taking the drug, respectively) in intervention-naive areas with 30%, 50%, or 70% microfilarial baseline prevalence (representative of hypo-, meso-, and hyperendemic areas). We compared programmatic delivery costs for the number of treatments achieving 90% probability of EoT (EoT90), calculated with the individual-based stochastic transmission model EPIONCHO-IBM. We used the costs for 40 years of program delivery when EoT90 was not reached earlier. The delivery costs do not include drug costs. RESULTS: aCDTM and bCDTM achieved EoT90 with lower programmatic delivery costs than aCDTI with 1 exception: aCDTM with minimal coverage did not achieve EoT90 in hyperendemic areas within 40 years. With minimal coverage, bCDTI delivery costs as much or more than aCDTM and bCDTM. With enhanced coverage, programmatic delivery costs for aCDTM and bCDTM were lower than for aCDTI and bCDTI. CONCLUSIONS: Moxidectin-based strategies could accelerate progress toward EoT and reduce programmatic delivery costs compared with ivermectin-based strategies. The costs of moxidectin to national programs are needed to quantify whether delivery cost reductions will translate into overall program cost reduction.

Costs of mass drug administration for scabies in Fiji.

In 2019, the Murdoch Children's Research Institute in partnership with the Fiji Ministry of Health and Medical Services carried out an integrated mass drug administration (MDA) for the treatment of scabies and lymphatic filariasis in the Northern Division of Fiji (population estimate 131,914). We conducted a retrospective micro-costing exercise focused on the cost of scabies control in order to inform budgeting and policy decision making in an endemic setting. We collected detailed information on financial and economic costs incurred by both parties during the course of the MDA campaign (April 2018 to July 2019). We also conducted interviews with personnel involved in the financial administration of the MDA campaign. The economic cost of delivering two doses of ivermectin was US$4.88 per person. The cost of donated drugs accounted for 36.3% of total MDA costs. In this first large-scale MDA for the public health control of scabies, the estimated cost of delivering MDA per person for scabies was considerably more expensive than the costs reported for other neglected tropical diseases. The important cost drivers included the remuneration of health care workers who were extensively involved in the campaign, coverage of hard-to-reach, mainly rural populations and the two-dose regimen of ivermectin. These results highlight the importance of these cost determinants and can be used to plan current and future MDA programs.

Ivermectina para el tratamiento de pacientes con COVID-19 y expuestos al SARS-CoV-2 (7 de Mayo de 2021) / Ivermectin for the treatment of patients with COVID-19 y expuestos al SARS-CoV-2 (May 7, 2021)

INTRODUCCIÓN: La ivermectina es un fármaco antiparasitario con actividad inmuno-moduladora y antiinflamatoria, no autorizado para mujeres embarazadas o en período de lactancia, ni para niños de menos de 15 kg de peso corporal. La dosis para el tratamiento antiparasitario varía entre 150 mcg/Kg y 250 mcg/Kg por vía oral y única vez, con un posible re tratamiento a partir de los 14 días para algunas indicaciones. La ivermectina se encuentra aprobada solamente como antiparasitario por la Administración Nacional de Medicamentos, Alimentos y Tecnología Médica (ANMAT), Administración de Drogas y Alimentos de los Estados Unidos (FDA, su sigla del inglés Food and Drug Administration) y por la Agencia Europea de Medicina (EMA, su sigla del inglés European Medicine Agency). Durante los años previos, se ha demostrado la capacidad de la ivermectina in vitro, de disminuir la replicación viral, a través de diferentes mecanismos, entre los que se incluye la inhibición de la interacción entre la proteína integrasa (IN) del virus de la inmunodeficiencia humana-1 (VIH-1) y el heterodímero α/ß1 de importina (IMP) responsable de la importación nuclear de esta proteína.3-4 Los estudios sobre las proteínas del SARS-CoV han revelado que podría existir un rol potencial de la ivermectina a través de este mecanismo de acción de IMPα/ß1, principalmente durante el proceso de infección a las células del huésped, en el cierre nucleocitoplasmático dependiente de la señal de la proteína de la nucleocápside del SARS-CoV. OBJETIVO: El objetivo del presente informe es evaluar parámetros de eficacia, seguridad, conveniencia y recomendaciones disponibles acerca del uso ivermectina para la profilaxis de la infección por el virus SARS-CoV-2 y para el tratamiento de pacientes con COVID-19. MÉTODOS: Teniendo en cuenta la velocidad con la que la información relacionada a la pandemia aparece y se modifica (link), se desarrolló un protocolo sustentado en proyectos que resume activamente la evidencia científica a medida que la misma se hace disponible. Con este fin se utilizó la plataforma Love de Epistemonikos para identificar revisiones sistemáticas "vivas". Se seleccionaron aquellas con una calidad metodológica apropiada evaluada a través de la herramienta AMSTAR-2, y que a su vez llevaran un proceso de actualización frecuente.8 De cada una de las revisiones sistemáticas identificadas se extractaron los efectos de la intervención sobre los desenlaces priorizados como importantes o críticos separando los efectos del tratamiento sobre pacientes expuestos (infección por SARS-CoV-2 confirmada por laboratorio) y en pacientes infectados y con COVID-19 (mortalidad, ingreso en asistencia ventilatoria mecánica, duración de estadía hospitalaria, tiempo a la resolución de síntomas o mejoría clínica al día 7-28 y eventos adversos graves) y la certeza en dichos efectos. Adicionalmente se extractaron datos relacionados a efectos de subgrupo potencialmente relevantes para la toma de decisión, con especial énfasis en el tiempo de evolución y la severidad de la enfermedad. RECOMENDACIONES: Se identificaron siete recomendaciones de las cuales cinco cumplen con los criterios de inclusión del presente informe. CONCLUSIONES: En personas no infectadas expuestas al SARS-CoV-2, existe incertidumbre en el efecto de la ivermectina para prevenir la infección sintomática, presunta o confirmada por este virus. El cuerpo de evidencia disponible hasta el momento muestra que, en pacientes con COVID-19, existe incertidumbre en el efecto de ivermectina sobre la mortalidad y los eventos adversos graves. La ivermectina podría no tener efecto sobre el ingreso en ventilación mecánica o la duración de la internación y probablemente no tenga efecto en el tiempo de resolución de los síntomas La ivermectina se encuentra ampliamente disponible en Argentina y está aprobada por ANMAT para el tratamiento de infecciones parasitarias. Sin embargo, no se encuentra aprobada para su uso en la prevención de la infección por el virus SARS-CoV-2 o para el tratamiento de personas con COVID-19. Su costo comparativo es bajo. Las guías de práctica clínica identificadas consistentemente brindan recomendaciones en contra del empleo de ivermectina en personas expuestas al virus SARS-CoV-2 o con enfermedad por COVID-19.

The Effect of Drug Pricing on Outpatient Payments and Treatment for Three Soil-Transmitted Helminth Infections in the United States, 2010-2017.

The price of certain antiparasitic drugs (e.g., albendazole and mebendazole) has dramatically increased since 2010. The effect of these rising prices on treatment costs and use of standard of care (SOC) drugs is unknown. To measure the impact of drug prices on overall outpatient cost and quality of care, we identified outpatient visits associated with ascariasis, hookworm, and trichuriasis infections from the 2010 to 2017 MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters and Multi-state Medicaid databases using Truven Health MarketScan Treatment Pathways. Evaluation was limited to members with continuous enrollment in non-capitated plans 30 days prior, and 90 days following, the first diagnosis. The utilization of SOC prescriptions was considered a marker for quality of care. The impact of drug price on the outpatient expenses was measured by comparing the changes in drug and nondrug outpatient payments per patient through Welch's two sample t-tests. The total outpatient payments per patient (drug and nondrug), for the three parasitic infections, increased between 2010 and 2017. The increase was driven primarily by prescription drug payments, which increased 20.6-137.0 times, as compared with nondrug outpatient payments, which increased 0.3-2.2 times. As prices of mebendazole and albendazole increased, a shift to alternative SOC and non-SOC drug utilization was observed. Using parasitic infection treatment as a model, increases in prescription drug prices can act as the primary driver of increasing outpatient care costs. Simultaneously, there was a shift to alternative SOC, but also to non-SOC drug treatment, suggesting a decrease in quality of care.

The Battle against COVID 19 Pandemic: What we Need to Know Before we "Test Fire" Ivermectin.

The world is faced with the dire challenge of finding an effective treatment against the rampaging COVID 19 pandemic. Amidst the crisis, reports of in vitro inhibitory activity of ivermectin, an approved anthelmintic, against the causative SARSCoV2 virus, have generated lot of optimism. In this article, we have fished and compiled the needed information on the drug, that will help readers and prospective investigators in having a quick overview. Though the primordial biological action of the drug is allosteric modulation of helminthic ion channel receptor, its in vitro activity against both RNA and DNA viruses is known for almost a decade. In the past two years, efficacy study in animal models of pseudorabies and zika virus was found to be favourable and unfavourable respectively. Only one clinical study evaluated the drug in dengue virus infection without any clinical efficacy. However, the proposed mechanism of drug action, by inhibiting the importin family of nucleus-cytoplasmic transporters along with favourable pharmacokinetics, warrants exploration of its role in COVID 19 through safely conducted clinical trials. Being an available and affordable drug, enlisted in WHO List of Essential Medicine, and a long track record of clinical safety, the drug is already in clinical trials the world over. As the pandemic continues to ravage human civilisation with unabated intensity, the world eagerly waits for a ray of hope emanating from the outcome of the ongoing trials with ivermectin as well as other drugs.

Implications for annual retesting after a test-and-not-treat strategy for onchocerciasis elimination in areas co-endemic with Loa loa infection: an observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: A test-and-not-treat (TaNT) strategy has been developed to prevent people with high concentrations of circulating Loa loa microfilariae (>20 000 microfilariae per mL) developing serious adverse events after ivermectin treatment during mass drug administration to eliminate onchocerciasis. An important question related to cost and programmatic issues is whether annual retesting is required for everyone. We therefore aimed to investigate changes in L loa microfilarial densities during TaNT campaigns run 18 months apart. METHODS: In this observational cohort study, we assessed the participants of two TaNT campaigns for onchocerciasis. These campaigns, which were run by a research team, together with personnel from the Ministry of Health and community health workers, were done in six health areas (in 89 communities) in Okola health district (Cameroon); the first campaign was run between Aug 10, and Oct 29, 2015, and the second was run between March 7, and May 26, 2017. All individuals aged 5 years and older were invited to be screened for Loa loa microfilaraemia before being offered ivermectin (unless contraindicated). L loa microfilarial density was measured at the point of care using the LoaScope. All those with a L loa microfilarial density of 20 000 microfilariae per mL or less were offered treatment; in the first 2 weeks of the 2015 campaign, a higher exclusion threshold of 26 000 microfilariae per mL or less was used. At both rounds of the intervention, participants were registered with a paper form, in which personal information were collected. In 2017, we also recorded whether each individual reported participation in the 2015 campaign. The primary outcome, assessed in all participants, was whether L loa microfilarial density was above or below the exclusion threshold (ie, the criteria that guided the decision to treat). FINDINGS: In the 2015 TaNT campaign, 26 415 people were censused versus 29 587 people in the 2017 TaNT campaign. All individuals aged 5 years and older without other contraindications to treatment (22 842 people in 2015 and 25 421 people in 2017) were invited to be screened for L loa microfilaraemia before being offered ivermectin. In 2015, 16 182 individuals were examined with the LoaScope, versus 18 697 individuals in the same communities in 2017. 344 (2·1%) individuals were excluded from ivermectin treatment because of a high L loa microfilarial density in 2015, versus 283 (1·5%) individuals in 2017 (p<0·0001). Records from 2017 could be matched to those from 2015 for 6983 individuals (43·2% of the 2015 participants). In this cohort, in 2017, 6981 (>99·9%) of 6983 individuals treated with ivermectin in 2015 had L loa microfilariae density below the level associated with neurological serious adverse events. INTERPRETATION: Individuals treated with ivermectin do not need to be retested for L loa microfilaraemia before the next treatment, provided that they can be re-identified. This adjusted approach will enable substantial cost savings and facilitate reaching programmatic goals for elimination of onchocerciasis in areas that are co-endemic for loiasis. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Division of Intramural Research (National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, US National Institutes of Health).

Economic losses caused by the use of low-efficacy anthelmintic drugs in growing heifers.

The aim of this study was to compare the economic revenue related to the use of low- or high-efficacy anthelmintic drugs within suppressive or strategic schemes of treatment in growing heifers. Heifers raised in a semi-intensive grazing system in southern Brazil were used. Levamisole and ivermectin were selected as the high- and the low-efficacy drugs, respectively, based on a previous efficacy test. Subsequently, these drugs were used within strategic (Strat; four times per year) or suppressive (Supp; once a month) treatment regimens in the heifers, and their liveweight and eggs per gram of feces counts were monthly evaluated during a 13-month period. The total costs of the treatments and their cost-benefit ratio in regard to liveweight gain were calculated. Final mean liveweight gains (kg) observed were 126.7 (Strat-Low), 133.6 (Supp-Low), 141.3 (Strat-High), 142.9 (Supp-High), and 125.8 (Control). Treatments with a high-efficacy drug resulted in monetary gains of US$ 19.56 (Strat-High) and US$ 14.98 (Supp-High), but Supp-Low and Strat-Low treatments caused economic losses. Total cost of the efficacy test (US$ 374.79) could be paid by the additional liveweight gain of 20 heifers from the Strat-High group. These results showed that it would be preferable not to treat the heifers against GIN if compared with treating them with a low-efficacy drug. In addition, we showed that the use of four treatments per year with a high-efficacy drug-selected by efficacy test-resulted in a profitable management to control GIN in growing heifers raised in a semi-intensive gazing system in southern Brazil.

A systematic review of scabies transmission models and data to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of scabies interventions.

BACKGROUND: Scabies is a common dermatological condition, affecting more than 130 million people at any time. To evaluate and/or predict the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of scabies interventions, disease transmission modelling can be used. OBJECTIVE: To review published scabies models and data to inform the design of a comprehensive scabies transmission modelling framework to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of scabies interventions. METHODS: Systematic literature search in PubMed, Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library identified scabies studies published since the year 2000. Selected papers included modelling studies and studies on the life cycle of scabies mites, patient quality of life and resource use. Reference lists of reviews were used to identify any papers missed through the search strategy. Strengths and limitations of identified scabies models were evaluated and used to design a modelling framework. Potential model inputs were identified and discussed. FINDINGS: Four scabies models were published: a Markov decision tree, two compartmental models, and an agent-based, network-dependent Monte Carlo model. None of the models specifically addressed crusted scabies, which is associated with high morbidity, mortality, and increased transmission. There is a lack of reliable, comprehensive information about scabies biology and the impact this disease has on patients and society. DISCUSSION: Clinicians and health economists working in the field of scabies are encouraged to use the current review to inform disease transmission modelling and economic evaluations on interventions against scabies.

Production responses and cost-benefit of long-acting pre-lambing anthelmintic treatment of yearling ewes in two commercial flocks in New Zealand.

AIMS: To investigate the production responses and cost-benefit of administering a controlled-release anthelmintic capsule (CRC) to pregnant yearling ewes prior to lambing. METHODS: Yearling ewes from two commercial sheep flocks (A, n=489; B, n=248) in the North Island of New Zealand were enrolled in the study. Prior to lambing, CRC containing albendazole and abamectin were administered to half the ewes while the other half remained untreated. Ewe liveweights and body condition scores were measured prior to lambing, at weaning and, for Flock B, prior to subsequent mating. Lambs were matched to dams shortly after birth and the weight and number of lamb weaned per ewe were determined. A cost-benefit analysis was undertaken for Flock B considering the increased weight of lamb weaned per ewe, and the weight of ewes at the next mating and the benefit in terms of lambs born. RESULTS: The mean weight at weaning of treated ewes was greater for treated than untreated ewes by 2.76 (95% CI 0.64-4.88) kg in Flock A (p<0.001) and 2.35 (95% CI -0.41-5.12) kg in Flock B (p=0.003); the weight of lamb weaned per ewe was greater for treated than untreated ewes by 1.43 (95% CI -0.71 to -3.49) kg in Flock A (p=0.041) and 3.97 (95% CI 1.59-6.37) kg in Flock B (p<0.001), and ewe liveweight prior to subsequent mating was greater for treated than untreated ewes in Flock B by 4.60 (95% CI 3.6-5.6) kg (p<0.001). There was no difference in the percentage of lambs reared to weaning between treated and untreated ewes in either flock (p>0.8). The overall cost-benefit of treatment for Flock B was NZ$9.44 per treated ewe. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Pre-lambing CRC administration to yearling ewes resulted in increased ewe weaning weights and weight of lamb weaned in both the flocks studied. There was an economic benefit in the one flock where this was assessed.

Audit of the community-directed treatment with ivermectin (CDTI) for onchocerciasis and factors associated with adherence in three regions of Cameroon.

BACKGROUND: After more than 15 years of community-directed treatment with ivermectin (CDTI) in the Centre 1, Littoral 2 and West CDTI projects in Cameroon, the epidemiological evaluation conducted in 2011 revealed that onchocerciasis endemicity was still high in some communities. To investigate the potential reasons explaining this high endemicity, a cluster coverage survey was conducted in April-May 2015 in three health districts (HD), to assess the implementation of the CDTI, the 2014 therapeutic coverage and the five-year adherence to treatment. A two-stage cluster design was considered during analyses, with data weighted proportionally to age and gender distribution in the population. RESULTS: In the three HDs, 69 community leaders, 762 heads of households, 83 community drug distributors (CDD) and 2942 household members were interviewed. The CDTI organization and the involvement of heads of households were in average weak, with 84.0% (95% CI: 81.2-86.4%) of them who had not participated in activities during the 2014 mass drug administration (MDA). On average, six of ten community leaders declared that the period of treatment was decided by the health personnel while the CDDs selection was made during a community meeting for only 43.4% of them. The 2014 weighted therapeutic coverage was 64.1% (95% CI: 56.8-70.9%), with no significant difference in the three HDs. The survey coverages were lower than the reported coverages with a significant difference varying from 14.1% to 22.0%. Among those aged 10 years and above, 57.8% (95% CI: 50.2-65.1%) declared having taken the treatment each time during the last five MDAs with no significant difference among HDs, while 9.8% (95% CI: 7.5-12.8%) declared that they had never taken the drug. In multivariate analysis, the most important factors associated with the five-year adherence to treatment were high involvement in CDTI and age (40+ years). CONCLUSIONS: Despite more than 15 years of CDTI, there was still weak community participation and ownership, a lower coverage than reported and an average five-year adherence in the surveyed HDs. The reinforcement of the community ownership by the Ministry of Public Health officials and the timely procurement of ivermectin as requested by the communities are some measures that should be implemented to improve the therapeutic coverage, adherence to treatment and hence achieve onchocerciasis elimination. Further anthropological and entomological studies would provide better insights into our understanding of the persistence of the disease in these three CDTI projects.

Evaluation of Treatment Coverage and Enhanced Mass Drug Administration for Onchocerciasis and Lymphatic Filariasis in Five Local Government Areas Treating Twice Per Year in Edo State, Nigeria.

The western region of Edo state in southern Nigeria is highly endemic for onchocerciasis. Despite years of mass drug administration (MDA) with ivermectin (IVM), reports suggest persistently high prevalence of onchocerciasis, presumably because of poor coverage. In 2016, twice-per-year treatment with IVM (combined with albendazole for lymphatic filariasis in the first round where needed) began in five local government areas (LGAs) of Edo state. We undertook a multistage cluster survey within 3 months after each round of MDA to assess coverage. First-round coverage was poor: among 4,942 people of all ages interviewed from 145 clusters, coverage was 31.1% (95% confidence intervals [CI]: 24.1-38.0%). Most respondents were not offered medicines. To improve coverage in the second round, three LGAs were randomized to receive MDA through a "modified campaign" approach focused on improved supervision and monitoring. The other two LGAs continued with standard MDA as before. A similar survey was conducted after the second round, interviewing 3,362 people in 87 clusters across the five LGAs. Coverage was not statistically different from the first round (40.0% [95% CI: 31.0-49.0%]) and there was no significant difference between the groups (P = 0.7), although the standard MDA group showed improvement over round 1 (P < 0.01). The additional cost per treatment in the modified MDA was 1.6 times that of standard MDA. Compliance was excellent among those offered treatment. We concluded that poor mobilization, medicine distribution, and program penetration led to low coverage. These must be addressed to improve treatment coverage in Edo state.

Doing well while fighting river blindness: the alignment of a corporate drug donation programme with responsibilities to shareholders.

OBJECTIVE: Using the example of Merck's donations of ivermectin, to show how tax incentives and non-profit collaborators can make corporate largesse consistent with obligations to maximise returns to shareholders. METHODS: We obtained information from publicly available data and estimated Merck's tax deductions according to the US Internal Revenue Code. Reviews of Merck-Kitasato contracts and personal interviews provided additional information regarding key lessons from this collaboration. RESULTS: Our best estimate of the direct cost to Merck of the ivermectin tablets donated during 2005-2011 is around US$ 600 million, well below the stated value of US$ 3.8 billion. Our calculation of tax write-offs reduces the net cost to around US$ 180 million in that period. Indirect market benefits and effects on goodwill further enhanced the compatibility of Merck's donation programme with the company's profit-maximising objective. The case offers lessons for effective management of collaborations with public and non-profit organisations. CONCLUSION: Merck's role in the donation of ivermectin for the treatment of onchocerciasis is widely and justly acknowledged as a prime example of corporate largesse in the public interest. It is nevertheless important to note that several public and non-profit collaborators, and United States taxpayers, played significant roles in increasing Merck's incentives, and indeed ability, to conduct the donation programme that changed so many lives in poor countries, while meeting its responsibilities to shareholders. Overall, the record indicates responsible corporate management of Merck's ivermectin programme and demonstrates the feasibility of socially responsible policies in a manner compatible with obligations to shareholders.

Cost-Effectiveness of Ivermectin 1% Cream in Adults with Papulopustular Rosacea in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Papulopustular rosacea is a chronic skin disease involving central facial erythema in combination with papules and pustules. Papulopustular rosacea is treated with topical, systemic, or a combination of topical and systemic therapies. Currently approved topical therapies include azelaic acid gel/cream/foam twice daily (BID) and metronidazole cream/gel/lotion BID. Ivermectin 1% cream once daily (QD) is a new topical agent for the treatment of papulopustular rosacea that has been approved for the management of inflammatory lesions of rosacea and offers an alternative to current treatments. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of ivermectin 1% cream QD compared with current topical treatments in order to understand the cost of adding ivermectin as a treatment option that would bring additional clinical benefit for adults with papulopustular rosacea in the United States. METHODS: The cost-effectiveness of ivermectin 1% cream QD was compared with metronidazole 0.75% cream BID and azelaic acid 15% gel BID for adults in the United States with moderate-to-severe papulopustular rosacea using a Markov cohort state transition structure with 2 mutually exclusive health states (rosacea and no rosacea) and 5 phases. Patients could succeed or fail to respond to treatment and experience a relapse after treatment success. The model took a health care payer perspective (direct medical costs of topical and/or systemic therapy plus health care costs for physician and specialist visits) and used a 3-year time horizon. The model was run for a cohort of 1,000 patients. Costs (2014 U.S. dollars) and benefits (disease-free days and quality-adjusted life-years [QALYs]) were discounted at a rate of 3% per annum. Cost-effectiveness was determined by the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and measured in terms of incremental cost per QALY gained (estimated from health state utilities for patients with and without rosacea). Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were conducted to assess the robustness of model outcomes. RESULTS: Compared with metronidazole 0.75% cream BID, ivermectin 1% cream QD was associated with higher costs but provided greater clinical benefit, with an ICER of $13,211 per QALY gained. For a cohort of 1,000 patients, ivermectin 1% cream QD provided an additional 72,922 disease-free days (200 years) over a 3-year period compared with metronidazole 0.75% cream BID, leading to a lower cost per disease-free day for ivermectin 1% cream QD ($4.54) compared with metronidazole 0.75% cream BID ($4.85). Ivermectin 1% cream QD was associated with lower total costs and greater clinical benefit compared with azelaic acid 15% gel BID at year 3 and dominated this treatment. After 3 years, ivermectin 1% cream QD was associated with the lowest health care costs ($62,767 compared with $73,284 for metronidazole 0.75% cream BID and $77,208 for azelaic acid 15% gel BID), reflecting a 15% reduction in physician visit costs, when compared with metronidazole 0.75% cream BID, and almost a 20% reduction, when compared with azelaic acid 15% gel BID. The univariate sensitivity analyses indicated that the results are sensitive to the time horizon selected: the longer the time horizon, the more beneficial the results for ivermectin 1% cream QD relative to the comparators, although even at 1 year, ivermectin 1% cream QD dominated azelaic acid 15% gel BID. The PSA suggested that ivermectin 1% cream QD was the most likely treatment to be cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $15,000 and above. CONCLUSIONS: Ivermectin 1% cream QD had favorable incremental cost-effectiveness when compared with metronidazole 0.75% cream BID and dominated azelaic acid 15% gel BID in the treatment of papulopustular rosacea in the United States. Therefore, ivermectin 1% cream QD may be a good first-line treatment for papulopustular rosacea, providing additional clinical benefit at no or low additional cost. DISCLOSURES: This study was sponsored by Galderma Laboratories. The sponsor was involved in the design of the model structure but not in the collection of the data used to populate the model. Manuscript preparation was also funded by Galderma. Taieb is an investigator and advisor for Galderma. Gold is an investigator for Galderma. Feldman is a consultant and speaker for Galderma and has received grants from Galderma. Dansk and Bertranou received a research grant from Galderma to conduct this study. Dansk and Bertranou contributed to the design of the model structure, the sourcing and inputting of the data, and the interpretation of the results. Taieb, Feldman, and Gold contributed to the interpretation of the results. All authors reviewed draft versions of the manuscript and gave permission for the submission of the final version.

Efficacy, acceptability and cost effectiveness of four therapeutic agents for treatment of scabies.

The aim of this study is to evaluate four drug regimens for treatment of scabies as regard their efficacy, acceptability and cost effectiveness. Two hundred cases with ordinary scabies were randomized into four groups. First group received ivermectin 200 µg/kg body weight single oral dose, repeated after one week. The second received benzyl benzoate 20% cream. The third received permethrin 2.5%-5% lotion, whereas the fourth group received 5-10% sulfur ointment. Topical treatments were applied for five consecutive nights. Patients were followed up for two weeks for cure rate and adverse effects. At the end of the study, permethrin provided a significant efficacy of 88% and acceptability in 100% of cases, but had higher cost to treat one case (20.25 LE). Ivermectin provided efficacy and acceptability rates of 84% and 96%, respectively, and had a cheaper cost (9.5 LE). Benzyl benzoate provided 80% for both rates and was the cheapest drug. Sulfur ointment provided the least rates, and it was the most expensive. Treatment choice will depend on the age, the general condition of cases, patient compliance to topical treatment and his ability to stick to its roles, and the economic condition of the patient.

Financial and Economic Costs of the Elimination and Eradication of Onchocerciasis (River Blindness) in Africa.

BACKGROUND: Onchocerciasis (river blindness) is a parasitic disease transmitted by blackflies. Symptoms include severe itching, skin lesions, and vision impairment including blindness. More than 99% of all cases are concentrated in sub-Saharan Africa. Fortunately, vector control and community-directed treatment with ivermectin have significantly decreased morbidity, and the treatment goal is shifting from control to elimination in Africa. METHODS: We estimated financial resources and societal opportunity costs associated with scaling up community-directed treatment with ivermectin and implementing surveillance and response systems in endemic African regions for alternative treatment goals--control, elimination, and eradication. We used a micro-costing approach that allows adjustment for time-variant resource utilization and for the heterogeneity in the demographic, epidemiological, and political situation. RESULTS: The elimination and eradication scenarios, which include scaling up treatments to hypo-endemic and operationally challenging areas at the latest by 2021 and implementing intensive surveillance, would allow savings of $1.5 billion and $1.6 billion over 2013-2045 as compared to the control scenario. Although the elimination and eradication scenarios would require higher surveillance costs ($215 million and $242 million) than the control scenario ($47 million), intensive surveillance would enable treatments to be safely stopped earlier, thereby saving unnecessary costs for prolonged treatments as in the control scenario lacking such surveillance and response systems. CONCLUSIONS: The elimination and eradication of onchocerciasis are predicted to allow substantial cost-savings in the long run. To realize cost-savings, policymakers should keep empowering community volunteers, and pharmaceutical companies would need to continue drug donation. To sustain high surveillance costs required for elimination and eradication, endemic countries would need to enhance their domestic funding capacity. Societal and political will would be critical to sustaining all of these efforts in the long term.

The potential impact of moxidectin on onchocerciasis elimination in Africa: an economic evaluation based on the Phase II clinical trial data.

BACKGROUND: Spurred by success in several foci, onchocerciasis control policy in Africa has shifted from morbidity control to elimination of infection. Clinical trials have demonstrated that moxidectin is substantially more efficacious than ivermectin in effecting sustained reductions in skin microfilarial load and, therefore, may accelerate progress towards elimination. We compare the potential cost-effectiveness of annual moxidectin with annual and biannual ivermectin treatment. METHODS: Data from the first clinical study of moxidectin were used to parameterise the onchocerciasis transmission model EPIONCHO to investigate, for different epidemiological and programmatic scenarios in African savannah settings, the number of years and in-country costs necessary to reach the operational thresholds for cessation of treatment, comparing annual and biannual ivermectin with annual moxidectin treatment. RESULTS: Annual moxidectin and biannual ivermectin treatment would achieve similar reductions in programme duration relative to annual ivermectin treatment. Unlike biannual ivermectin treatment, annual moxidectin treatment would not incur a considerable increase in programmatic costs and, therefore, would generate sizeable in-country cost savings (assuming the drug is donated). Furthermore, the impact of moxidectin, unlike ivermectin, was not substantively influenced by the timing of treatment relative to seasonal patterns of transmission. CONCLUSIONS: Moxidectin is a promising new drug for the control and elimination of onchocerciasis. It has high programmatic value particularly when resource limitation prevents a biannual treatment strategy, or optimal timing of treatment relative to peak transmission season is not feasible.

Onchocerciasis control in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC): challenges in a post-war environment.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate onchocerciasis control activities in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) in the first 12 years of community-directed treatment with ivermectin (CDTI). METHODS: Data from the National Programme for Onchocerciasis (NPO) provided by the National Onchocerciasis Task Force (NOTF) through the annual reports of the 21 CDTI projects for the years 2001-2012 were reviewed retrospectively. A hypothetical-inputs-process-outputs-outcomes table was constructed. RESULTS: Community-directed treatment with ivermectin expanded from 1968 communities in 2001 to 39 100 communities by 2012 while the number of community-directed distributors (CDD) and health workers (HW) multiplied. By 2012, there were ratios of 1 CDD per 262 persons and 1 HW per 2318 persons at risk. More than 80% of the funding came from the fiduciary funds of the African Programme for Onchocerciasis Control. The cost of treatment per person treated fell from US$ 1.1 in 2001 to US$ 0.1 in 2012. The therapeutic coverage increased from 2.7% (2001) to 74.2% (2012); the geographical coverage, from 4.7% (2001) to 93.9% (2012). Geographical coverage fell in 2005 due to deaths in loiasis co-endemic areas, and the therapeutic coverage fell in 2008 due to insecurity. CONCLUSIONS: Challenges to CDTI in DRC have been serious adverse reactions to ivermectin in loiasis co-endemic areas and political conflict. Targets for personnel or therapeutic and geographical coverages were not met. Longer term funding and renewed efforts are required to achieve control and elimination of onchocerciasis in DRC.