Alba Christopher, Malhotra Shelly, Horsfall Stephanie, Barnhart Matthew E, Bekker Adrie, Chapman Katerina, Cunningham Coleen K, Fast Patricia E, Fouda Genevieve G, Freedberg Kenneth A, Goga Ameena, Ghazaryan Lusine R, Leroy Valériane, Mann Carlyn, McCluskey Margaret M, McFarland Elizabeth J, Muturi-Kioi Vincent, Permar Sallie R, Shapiro Roger, Sok Devin, Stranix-Chibanda Lynda, Weinstein Milton C, Ciaranello Andrea L, Dugdale Caitlin M
Medical Practice Evaluation Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, United States.
IAVI, New York, United States.
medRxiv. 2023 Nov 7:2023.11.06.23298184. doi: 10.1101/2023.11.06.23298184.
Approximately 130 000 infants acquire HIV annually despite global maternal antiretroviral therapy scale-up. We evaluated the potential clinical impact and cost-effectiveness of offering long-acting, anti-HIV broadly neutralizing antibody (bNAb) prophylaxis to infants in three distinct settings.
We simulated infants in Côte d'Ivoire, South Africa, and Zimbabwe using the Cost-Effectiveness of Preventing AIDS Complications-Pediatric (CEPAC-P) model. We modeled strategies offering a three-bNAb combination in addition to WHO-recommended standard-of-care oral prophylaxis to infants: a) with known, WHO-defined high-risk HIV exposure at birth (); b) with known HIV exposure at birth (); or c) with or without known HIV exposure (). Modeled infants received , , or (every 3 months through 18 months) bNAb dosing. Base case model inputs included 70% bNAb efficacy (sensitivity analysis range: 10-100%), 3-month efficacy duration/dosing interval (1-6 months), and $20/dose cost ($5-$100/dose). Outcomes included pediatric HIV infections, life expectancy, lifetime HIV-related costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs, in US$/year-of-life-saved [YLS], assuming a ≤50% GDP per capita cost-effectiveness threshold).
The base case model projects that bNAb strategies targeting and infants would prevent 7-26% and 10-42% additional pediatric HIV infections, respectively, compared to standard-of-care alone, ranging by dosing approach. would be cost-effective (cost-saving compared to standard-of-care) in Côte d'Ivoire and Zimbabwe; would be cost-effective in South Africa (ICER: $882/YLS). BNAb strategies targeting infants would result in greater lifetime costs and smaller life expectancy gains than . Throughout most bNAb efficacies and costs evaluated in sensitivity analyses, targeting infants would be cost-effective in Côte d'Ivoire and Zimbabwe, and targeting infants would be cost-effective in South Africa.
Adding long-acting bNAbs to current standard-of-care prophylaxis would be cost-effective, assuming plausible efficacies and costs. The cost-effective target population would vary by setting, largely driven by maternal antenatal HIV prevalence and postpartum incidence.
尽管全球扩大了孕产妇抗逆转录病毒疗法的规模,但每年仍有大约13万婴儿感染艾滋病毒。我们评估了在三种不同环境中为婴儿提供长效抗艾滋病毒广泛中和抗体(bNAb)预防措施的潜在临床影响和成本效益。
我们使用预防艾滋病并发症-儿科(CEPAC-P)模型模拟了科特迪瓦、南非和津巴布韦的婴儿情况。我们模拟了除世界卫生组织推荐的标准护理口服预防措施外,为婴儿提供三种bNAb组合的策略:a)出生时已知有世界卫生组织定义的高风险艾滋病毒暴露();b)出生时已知有艾滋病毒暴露();或c)有或无已知艾滋病毒暴露()。模拟的婴儿接受了、或(每3个月一次,持续18个月)bNAb给药。基础病例模型输入包括70%的bNAb疗效(敏感性分析范围:10-100%)、3个月的疗效持续时间/给药间隔(1-6个月)以及每剂20美元的成本(每剂5-100美元)。结果包括儿童艾滋病毒感染、预期寿命、终身艾滋病毒相关成本以及增量成本效益比(ICER,以美元/挽救生命年[YLS]为单位,假设人均国内生产总值成本效益阈值≤50%)。
基础病例模型预测,与单独的标准护理相比,针对和婴儿的bNAb策略分别可预防7-26%和10-42%的额外儿童艾滋病毒感染,具体取决于给药方法。在科特迪瓦和津巴布韦,将具有成本效益(与标准护理相比节省成本);在南非将具有成本效益(ICER:882美元/YLS)。针对婴儿的bNAb策略将导致比更高的终身成本和更小的预期寿命增加。在敏感性分析中评估的大多数bNAb疗效和成本情况下,针对婴儿的策略在科特迪瓦和津巴布韦将具有成本效益,而针对婴儿的策略在南非将具有成本效益。
假设疗效和成本合理,在当前标准护理预防措施中添加长效bNAb将具有成本效益。具有成本效益的目标人群将因环境而异,这在很大程度上由孕产妇产前艾滋病毒流行率和产后发病率驱动。