ArticleBMC public health2023
Cost-effectiveness analysis of antiretroviral drugs for treatment-naive HIV infection in China.
Article in BMC public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Cost-effectiveness of frequent HIV screening among men who have sex with men in China.BMC public health · 2025Article
- INSTIs-centered antiviral regimens for first-line treatment of HIV/AIDS: a network meta-analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Health Economics Evaluation of Bictegravir/Emtricitabine/Tenofovir for a First-Line Treatment of HIV-1 Infection in China.ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR · 2025Article
- The Effectiveness of Antiretroviral Therapy in Mitigating New HIV Infections in Southwest China: An Ecological Study.Infection and drug resistance · 2025Article
- Durability and effectiveness of dual vs. triple therapy and tablet simplification in ART: findings from the Italian MOSAICO study.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionDolutegravir (DTG)-based regimen was included in the expanded formulary of China's National Free Antiretroviral Treatment Program at the end of 2021. Yet high price of DTG and lack of health economic evaluation in China present barriers for implementation of the regimen. The study aims to investigate the lifetime cost-effectiveness of DTG-based regimen for treatment-naive HIV infection in China.
methodsA decision-analytic Markov model was used to obtain the costs and effectiveness of four regimens: Arm A, efavirenz (EFV)-based regimen; Arm B, DTG-based regimen; Arm C, elvitegravir/cobicistat/tenofovir alafenamide/emtricitabine (EVG/c/FTC/TAF) regimen; Arm D, abacavir/lamivudine/dolutegravir (ABC/3TC/DTG) regimen. The potential impact of national centralized drug procurement policy was assessed in scenario analysis. The results were further validated through sensitivity analysis.
resultsCompared with other three regimens, DTG-based regimen led to the fewest cumulative adverse reactions, opportunistic infections and deaths. Compared with EFV-based regimen, the base-case ICERs for DTG-based regimen were 13,357 (USD/QALY) and 13,424 (USD/QALY) from the healthcare system and societal perspective respectively. In the policy scenario analysis with the procurement price of DTG equal to that of LPV/r, DTG-based regimen would be dominant. The model results remained robust in sensitivity analyses.
conclusionsDTG-based regimen for treatment-naive patients is likely to be cost-effective and deserve wider implementation in China. This study strongly suggests the centralized procurement of DTG to minimize cost and maximize cost-effectiveness.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.