Cost-effectiveness of easy-access, risk-informed oral pre-exposure prophylaxis in HIV epidemics in sub-Saharan Africa: a modelling study. The lancet. HIV Phillips, A. N., Bershteyn, A., Revill, P., Bansi-Matharu, L., Kripke, K., Boily, M. C., Martin-Hughes, R., Johnson, L. F., Mukandavire, Z., Jamieson, L., Meyer-Rath, G., Hallett, T. B., Ten Brink, D., Kelly, S. L., Nichols, B. E., Bendavid, E., Mudimu, E., Taramusi, I., Smith, J., Dalal, S., Baggaley, R., Crowley, S., Terris-Prestholt, F., Godfrey-Faussett, P., Mukui, I., Jahn, A., Case, K. K., Havlir, D., Petersen, M., Kamya, M., Koss, C. A., Balzer, L. B., Apollo, T., Chidarikire, T., Mellors, J. W., Parikh, U. M., Godfrey, C., Cambiano, V. 2022; 9 (5): e353-e362

Abstract

Approaches that allow easy access to pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), such as over-the-counter provision at pharmacies, could facilitate risk-informed PrEP use and lead to lower HIV incidence, but their cost-effectiveness is unknown. We aimed to evaluate conditions under which risk-informed PrEP use is cost-effective.We applied a mathematical model of HIV transmission to simulate 3000 setting-scenarios reflecting a range of epidemiological characteristics of communities in sub-Saharan Africa. The prevalence of HIV viral load greater than 1000 copies per mL among all adults (HIV positive and negative) varied from 1·1% to 7·4% (90% range). We hypothesised that if PrEP was made easily available without restriction and with education regarding its use, women and men would use PrEP, with sufficient daily adherence, during so-called seasons of risk (ie, periods in which individuals are at risk of acquiring infection). We refer to this as risk-informed PrEP. For each setting-scenario, we considered the situation in mid-2021 and performed a pairwise comparison of the outcomes of two policies: immediate PrEP scale-up and then continuation for 50 years, and no PrEP. We estimated the relationship between epidemic and programme characteristics and cost-effectiveness of PrEP availability to all during seasons of risk. For our base-case analysis, we assumed a 3-monthly PrEP cost of US$29 (drug $11, HIV test $4, and $14 for additional costs necessary to facilitate education and access), a cost-effectiveness threshold of $500 per disability-adjusted life-year (DALY) averted, an annual discount rate of 3%, and a time horizon of 50 years. In sensitivity analyses, we considered a cost-effectiveness threshold of $100 per DALY averted, a discount rate of 7% per annum, the use of PrEP outside of seasons of risk, and reduced uptake of risk-informed PrEP.In the context of PrEP scale-up such that 66% (90% range across setting-scenarios 46-81) of HIV-negative people with at least one non-primary condomless sex partner take PrEP in any given period, resulting in 2·6% (0·9-6·0) of all HIV negative adults taking PrEP at any given time, risk-informed PrEP was predicted to reduce HIV incidence by 49% (23-78) over 50 years compared with no PrEP. PrEP was cost-effective in 71% of all setting-scenarios, and cost-effective in 76% of setting-scenarios with prevalence of HIV viral load greater than 1000 copies per mL among all adults higher than 2%. In sensitivity analyses with a $100 per DALY averted cost-effectiveness threshold, a 7% per year discount rate, or with PrEP use that was less well risk-informed than in our base case, PrEP was less likely to be cost-effective, but generally remained cost-effective if the prevalence of HIV viral load greater than 1000 copies per mL among all adults was higher than 3%. In sensitivity analyses based on additional setting-scenarios in which risk-informed PrEP was less extensively used, the HIV incidence reduction was smaller, but the cost-effectiveness of risk-informed PrEP was undiminished.Under the assumption that making PrEP easily accessible for all adults in sub-Saharan Africa in the context of community education leads to risk-informed use, PrEP is likely to be cost-effective in settings with prevalence of HIV viral load greater than 1000 copies per mL among all adults higher than 2%, suggesting the need for implementation of such approaches, with ongoing evaluation.US Agency for International Development, US President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, and Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

View details for DOI 10.1016/S2352-3018(22)00029-7

View details for PubMedID 35489378