Trial reportPharmacoEconomics1999
An evaluation of the cost effectiveness of adding lamivudine to zidovudine-containing regimens in HIV infection. Canadian perspective.
Trial report in PharmacoEconomics, 1999. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Use and cost of antiretrovirals in France 1995-2000: an analysis based on the Medical Dossier on Human Immunodeficiency (release 2) database.PharmacoEconomics · 2004Article
- Cost effectiveness of combination HIV therapy: 3 years later.PharmacoEconomics · 2000Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA prospective cost-effectiveness analysis undertaken as part of the CAESAR (Canada, Australia, Europe, South Africa) placebo-controlled clinical trial showed that the addition of lamivudine to zidovudine-containing regimens for 1 year reduced progression of HIV infection to AIDS or death, as well as significantly reducing the number of hospitalisations, outpatient visits and the requirement for medications for HIV-related illness and adverse events. Data from all 1840 patients included in the 'intent-to-treat' population of the CAESAR trial were used for the present analysis. A Canadian third-party payer perspective was adopted, and all costs were adjusted to 1997 prices.
resultsThe savings associated with reduced healthcare resource use in the CAESAR study were estimated to be 1123 Canadian dollars ($Can) per patient, over the year. These savings partly offset the cost of lamivudine. The analysis showed that the addition of lamivudine to zidovudine-containing regimens resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $Can 14,225 [95% confidence interval (CI): $Can4383 to $Can29,577] for progression to AIDS/death avoided and of $Can5631 (95%CI: $Can2010 to $Can12,929) for HIV-related illness avoided.
conclusionsOur findings indicate that treatments that slow the progression of HIV infection to AIDS or death have the potential to facilitate healthcare savings, which partly offset the drug acquisition costs. The results also demonstrate that it is possible to undertake economic evaluations in parallel with a major clinical end-point study.
Indexed as
Identifiers
10537442What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.