Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26681778›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of infectious diseases2016

Potential Clinical and Economic Value of Long-Acting Preexposure Prophylaxis for South African Women at High-Risk for HIV Infection.

Rochelle P Walensky, Margo M Jacobsen, Linda-Gail Bekker, Robert A Parker, Robin Wood, Stephen C Resch, N Kaye Horstman, Kenneth A Freedberg, A David Paltiel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of infectious diseases, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 6 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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Evidence Gaps in Economic Evaluations of HIV Interventions Targeting Young People: A Systematic Review.The Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine · 2024
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Rochelle P WalenskyMedical Practice Evaluation Center Division of Infectious Disease Division of General Internal Medicine Division of Infectious Disease, Brigham and Women's Hospital Harvard University Center for AIDS Research, Harvard Medical School.
Margo M JacobsenMedical Practice Evaluation Center Division of General Internal Medicine.
Linda-Gail BekkerDesmond Tutu HIV Centre, Institute of Infectious Disease and Molecular Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Cape Town, South Africa.
Robert A ParkerMedical Practice Evaluation Center Division of General Internal Medicine MGH Biostatistics Center, Massachusetts General Hospital Harvard University Center for AIDS Research, Harvard Medical School.
Robin WoodDesmond Tutu HIV Centre, Institute of Infectious Disease and Molecular Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Cape Town, South Africa.
Stephen C ReschCenter for Health Decision Science.
N Kaye HorstmanMedical Practice Evaluation Center Division of General Internal Medicine.
Kenneth A FreedbergMedical Practice Evaluation Center Division of Infectious Disease Division of General Internal Medicine Harvard University Center for AIDS Research, Harvard Medical School Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health Department of Epidemiology, Boston University School of Public Health, Massachusetts.
A David PaltielYale School of Public Health, New Haven, Connecticut.

Funding

Optimizing HIV Care in Less Developed CountriesR01AI058736 · NIAID · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI Kenneth Alan Freedberg, Emily Parker Hyle · 2004 to 2026
$21.5M
Novel Methods to Inform HIV/TB Clinical Trial DevelopmentR01AI093269 · NIAID · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI REDDY, KRISHNA P · 2011 to 2024
$6.8M
Optimizing HIV Care in Less Developed CountriesR37AI058736 · NIAID · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI FREEDBERG, KENNETH ALAN · 2018 to 2024
$6.6M
Novel Methods to Inform HIV/TB Clinical Trial DevelopmentR37AI093269 · NIAID · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI WALENSKY, ROCHELLE P. · 2015 to 2019
$3.8M
Novel approaches to the design and evaluation of combination HIV preventionR01MH105203 · NIMH · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI PALTIEL, A. DAVID · 2014 to 2018
$3.3M
NIAID NIH HHS AI093269NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI058736NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI093269NIAID NIH HHS R37 AI058736NIAID NIH HHS R37 AI093269NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH105203
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFor young South African women at risk for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection, preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is one of the few effective prevention options available. Long-acting injectable PrEP, which is in development, may be associated with greater adherence, compared with that for existing standard oral PrEP formulations, but its likely clinical benefits and additional costs are unknown.

methodsUsing a computer simulation, we compared the following 3 PrEP strategies: no PrEP, standard PrEP (effectiveness, 62%; cost per patient, $150/year), and long-acting PrEP (effectiveness, 75%; cost per patient, $220/year) in South African women at high risk for HIV infection (incidence of HIV infection, 5%/year). We examined the sensitivity of the strategies to changes in key input parameters among several outcome measures, including deaths averted and program cost over a 5-year period; lifetime HIV infection risk, survival rate, and program cost and cost-effectiveness; and budget impact.

resultsCompared with no PrEP, standard PrEP and long-acting PrEP cost $580 and $870 more per woman, respectively, and averted 15 and 16 deaths per 1000 women at high risk for infection, respectively, over 5 years. Measured on a lifetime basis, both standard PrEP and long-acting PrEP were cost saving, compared with no PrEP. Compared with standard PrEP, long-acting PrEP was very cost-effective ($150/life-year saved) except under the most pessimistic assumptions. Over 5 years, long-acting PrEP cost $1.6 billion when provided to 50% of eligible women.

conclusionsCurrently available standard PrEP is a cost-saving intervention whose delivery should be expanded and optimized. Long-acting PrEP will likely be a very cost-effective improvement over standard PrEP but may require novel financing mechanisms that bring short-term fiscal planning efforts into closer alignment with longer-term societal objectives.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAnti-HIV AgentsComputer SimulationCost-Benefit AnalysisDelayed-Action PreparationsDemographyFemaleHIV InfectionsHumansIncidenceMiddle AgedModels, EconomicPre-Exposure ProphylaxisRiskSouth AfricaAnti-HIV AgentsDelayed-Action Preparationscost-effectivenessHIVlong-acting agentspreexposure prophylaxisSouth Africa

Identifiers

PMID26681778
PMCPMC4837902

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.