Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25290340›Full record

ArticlePloS one2014

Cost-effectiveness of HIV drug resistance testing to inform switching to second line antiretroviral therapy in low income settings.

Andrew Phillips, Valentina Cambiano, Fumiyo Nakagawa, Travor Mabugu, Travor Magubu, Alec Miners, Debbie Ford, Deenan Pillay, Andrea De Luca, Jens Lundgren and 1 more

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 20 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Antiretroviral resistance testing in HIV-positive people.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Management of Virologic Failure and HIV Drug Resistance.Infectious disease clinics of North America · 2019
    Review
  15. Review
  16. Observational
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. HIV-1 drug resistance and resistance testing.Infection, genetics and evolution : journal of molecular epidemiology and evolutionary genetics in infectious diseases · 2016
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

  • Erratum issued
    Magubu, Travor [corrected to Mabugu, Travor]
5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Andrew PhillipsResearch Department of Infection & Population Health, UCL, London, United Kingdom.
Valentina CambianoResearch Department of Infection & Population Health, UCL, London, United Kingdom.
Fumiyo NakagawaResearch Department of Infection & Population Health, UCL, London, United Kingdom.
Travor Mabugu
Travor MagubuUniversity of Zimbabwe Clinical Research Centre, Harare, Zimbabwe.
Alec MinersDepartment of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
Debbie FordMRC Clinical Trials Unit, UCL, London, United Kingdom.
Deenan PillayAfrica Centre, KwaZulu Natal, South Africa.
Andrea De LucaUniversity Division of Infectious Diseases, Siena University Hospital, Siena, Italy.
Jens LundgrenDept of Infectious Diseases, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Paul RevillCentre for Health Economics, University of York, York, United Kingdom.

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_U122886353Medical Research Council MC_UU_12023/17
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo guide future need for cheap resistance tests for use in low income settings, we assessed cost-effectiveness of drug resistance testing as part of monitoring of people on first line ART - with switching from first to second line ART being conditional on NNRTI drug resistance mutations being identified.

methodsAn individual level simulation model of HIV transmission, progression and the effect of ART which accounts for adherence and resistance development was used to compare outcomes of various potential monitoring strategies in a typical low income setting in sub-Saharan Africa. Underlying monitoring strategies considered were based on clinical disease, CD4 count or viral load. Within each we considered a strategy in which no further measures are performed, one with a viral load measure to confirm failure, and one with both a viral load measure and a resistance test. Predicted outcomes were assessed over 2015-2025 in terms of viral suppression, first line failure, switching to second line regimen, death, HIV incidence, disability-adjusted-life-years averted and costs. Potential future low costs of resistance tests ($30) were used.

resultsThe most effective strategy, in terms of DALYs averted, was one using viral load monitoring without confirmation. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for this strategy was $2113 (the same as that for viral load monitoring with confirmation). ART monitoring strategies which involved resistance testing did not emerge as being more effective or cost effective than strategies not using it. The slightly reduced ART costs resulting from use of resistance testing, due to less use of second line regimens, was of similar magnitude to the costs of resistance tests.

conclusionUse of resistance testing at the time of first line failure as part of the decision whether to switch to second line therapy was not cost-effective, even though the test was assumed to be very inexpensive.

Indexed as

Anti-HIV AgentsCost-Benefit AnalysisHIV-1PovertyAdolescentAdultDrug Resistance, ViralDrug SubstitutionHIV InfectionsHumansIncidenceMicrobial Sensitivity TestsMiddle AgedPrevalenceTreatment FailureTreatment OutcomeAnti-HIV Agents

Identifiers

PMID25290340
PMCPMC4188574

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.