Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32112512›Full record

ArticleJournal of the International AIDS Society2020

Modelling impact and cost-effectiveness of oral pre-exposure prophylaxis in 13 low-resource countries.

Carel Pretorius, Melissa Schnure, Juan Dent, Robert Glaubius, Guy Mahiane, Matthew Hamilton, Meghan Reidy, Sindy Matse, Emmanuel Njeuhmeli, Delivette Castor and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the International AIDS Society, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Carel PretoriusAvenir Health, Glastonbury, CT, USA.
Melissa SchnureThe Palladium Group, Washington, DC, USA.
Juan DentThe Palladium Group, Washington, DC, USA.
Robert GlaubiusAvenir Health, Glastonbury, CT, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4936-0264
Guy MahianeAvenir Health, Glastonbury, CT, USA.
Matthew HamiltonAvenir Health, Takoma Park, MD, USA.
Meghan ReidyAvenir Health, Takoma Park, MD, USA.
Sindy MatseMinistry of Health, Mbabane, Eswatini.
Emmanuel NjeuhmeliUnited States Agency for International Development (USAID), Mbabane, Eswatini.
Delivette CastorOffice of HIV/AIDS, USAID, Washington, DC, USA.
Katharine KripkeAvenir Health, Takoma Park, MD, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8228-4577

Funding

PEPFAR
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionOral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) provision is a priority intervention for high HIV prevalence settings and populations at substantial risk of HIV acquisition. This mathematical modelling analysis estimated the impact, cost and cost-effectiveness of scaling up oral PrEP in 13 countries.

methodsWe projected the impact and cost-effectiveness of oral PrEP between 2018 and 2030 using a combination of the Incidence Patterns Model and the Goals model. We created four PrEP rollout scenarios involving three priority populations-female sex workers (FSWs), serodiscordant couples (SDCs) and adolescent girls and young women (AGYW)-both with and without geographic prioritization. We applied the model to 13 countries (Eswatini, Ethiopia, Haiti, Kenya, Lesotho, Mozambique, Namibia, Nigeria, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia and Zimbabwe). The base case assumed achievement of the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS 90-90-90 antiretroviral therapy targets, 90% male circumcision coverage by 2020 and 90% efficacy and adherence levels for oral PrEP.

resultsIn the scenarios we examined, oral PrEP averted 3% to 8% of HIV infections across the 13 countries between 2018 and 2030. For all but three countries, more than 50% of the HIV infections averted by oral PrEP in the scenarios we examined could be obtained by rollout to FSWs and SDCs alone. For several countries, expanding oral PrEP to include medium-risk AGYW in all regions greatly increased the impact. The efficiency and impact benefits of geographic prioritization of rollout to AGYW varied across countries. Variations in cost-effectiveness across countries reflected differences in HIV incidence and expected variations in unit cost. For most countries, rolling out oral PrEP to FSWs, SDCs and geographically prioritized AGYW was not projected to have a substantial impact on the supply chain for antiretroviral drugs.

conclusionsThese modelling results can inform prioritization, target-setting and other decisions related to oral PrEP scale-up within combination prevention programmes. We caution against extensive use given limitations in cost data and implementation approaches. This analysis highlights some of the immediate challenges facing countries-for example, trade-offs between overall impact and cost-effectiveness-and emphasizes the need to improve data availability and risk assessment tools to help countries make informed decisions.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAnti-HIV AgentsCircumcision, MaleCost-Benefit AnalysisDeveloping CountriesEconomicsFemaleGlobal HealthHIV InfectionsHumansMaleModels, EconomicPre-Exposure ProphylaxisSexual PartnersSex WorkersAnti-HIV Agentscost-effectivenessHIVmathematical modellingpolicypre-exposure prophylaxisPrEP

Identifiers

PMID32112512
PMCPMC7048876

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.