ArticleClinical research in HIV/AIDS2016
The Price of Prevention: Cost Effectiveness of Biomedical HIV Prevention Strategies in South Africa.
Article in Clinical research in HIV/AIDS, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evolving landscape of economic evaluations of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis and pre-exposure prophylaxis implementation strategies: a systematic review.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2025Pooled it
- Impact of HIV on HPV-related cancers in men who have sex with men: a review.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2024Review
- Implementation and resource needs for long-acting PrEP in low- and middle-income countries: a scoping review.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2023Article
- Cost and cost-effectiveness analysis of pre-exposure prophylaxis among men who have sex with men in two hospitals in Thailand.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2018Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSouth Africa has the highest global burden of human immunodefciency virus [HIV]. The study compared the cost-effectiveness of individual and combination HIV preventive strategies against the current rollout of ART and possible ART scale-up.
methodsAdolescents attending South African schools in 2012 were included in the semi-Markov running annual cycles. The ART and HIV counseling and testing program [comparator] was weighed against the interventions [viz. HIV vaccine, a dual vaccine strategy [HIV and HPV vaccines], oral pre-exposure prophylaxis [PrEP] and voluntary medical male circumcision [VMMC]; and various combinations thereof. Quality-adjusted life years [QALY] determined changes in HIV associated mortality and infections averted. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analysis determined parameter uncertainty. Discount rates of 3% with a lifetime horizon [70 years] were applied.
resultsDual vaccination was highly cost-effective strategy [US$ 7 per QALY gained] and averted 29% of new HIV infections. VMMC [US$ 30 per QALY gained] proved more cost-effective than HIV vaccination alone [US$ 93 per QALY gained], though VMMC averted 6% more new infections than the HIV vaccine when considered among male participants. PrEP interventions were the least cost-effective with pharmaceutical and human resource spending driving the costs. Combined dual vaccination and VMMC strategies were a dominant intervention. Strategies involving PrEP were the least cost-effective.
conclusionVMMC, HIV vaccination and dual vaccination strategies were more cost-effective than any PrEP strategies. A multi-intervention biomedical approach could avert considerable new HIV infections and present a cost-effective use of resources; particularly where large scale multi-interventional randomized controlled trials are absent.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28824960PMC5562157W2749358614What 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.