Health economics of PrEP in Europe

Editor’s notes: One of the most common questions for policy makers considering the introduction of PrEP is how much it will cost and whether the benefits will outweigh the costs.  The answers to these questions will be dependent on the specific context but will be strongly influenced by four factors: the cost of PrEP (including its delivery); the savings due to reduced costs of HIV care; the effectiveness of PrEP; and the incidence of HIV in the population who receive PrEP.  The effectiveness and the incidence can be combined to calculate the number needed to treat to prevent an HIV infection.  As mentioned above, both PROUD and Ipergay demonstrated excellent effectiveness in populations that were highly at risk, as shown by the very high incidence in the placebo or deferred arms of these studies.  Durand-Zaleski and colleagues present their analysis of the costs and benefits of PrEP as used in the Ipergay study.  Most participants were in France, where lifetime costs of HIV treatment are estimated to be more than 500 000 euros.  At the time of Ipergay, the medicines for PrEP cost more than 500 euros monthly, but subsequently generic medicines have become available in France for around 180 euros monthly, and the price in France is approximately US$60 per month from Indian suppliers over the internet. When other health related costs are included, the costs to prevent an HIV infection vary from 27 000 to 75 000 euros depending on the costs of the medicines.  The confidence intervals around these estimates are wide because the trial was stopped before there were too many infections given the clear evidence of efficacy.  This model does not discount future costs, as it uses a short time horizon.  The model also does not consider ongoing transmission, which the authors estimate to be around two to three additional people given data from Ipergay’s sexual mixing data.  So, the conclusions that the benefits of PrEP outweigh the costs are based on conservative assumptions for this population.  However, it is important to recognize that the study population had an HIV incidence of 6.6 per 100 person-years and the incidence was more than nine per 100 person-years in the participants recruited into the placebo arm in the two Paris sites.  This led to an estimated number needed to treat of around 18 overall and around 13 for the Parisian sites.  WHO recommends that PrEP is offered to all people at significant risk of HIV infection, in whom the incidence might be more than three per 100 person-years.  An incidence of 3% would more than double the costs per infection averted calculated in this study, and an incidence of 0.66% (which would still represent an important and ongoing HIV epidemic, such as that seen on average in recent PHIA studies in Zambia and twice that seen in Malawi) would increase the costs per infection averted by tenfold.  From a health economic perspective, PrEP should always be prioritized to people who are most at risk.  From a human rights perspective, PrEP should be offered to anyone who wants it and in whom the epidemiological and psychological benefits outweigh the very small clinical risks of taking tenofovir and emtricitabine.

Cambiano and colleagues have modelled the potential impact and costs of PrEP in the UK population of gay men and men who have sex with men.  They assumed that PrEP would be offered to HIV-negative men who reported condomless anal sex in the past three months. Over the next 80 years, HIV infections would be prevented both directly and because of ongoing transmission to other men, leading to considerable cost-savings in terms of health care costs.  Overall, the authors predict that such a PrEP programme might save one billion pounds and avert approximately 25% of the HIV infections that would have been seen in the absence of the programme.  The results included a wide range of probabilistic uncertainty sampling.  The largest changes to their estimates would come from reductions in the costs of ARVs (for both treatment and for PrEP).  If PrEP was considerably cheaper, the time to break even in costs terms would be shorter.  On the one hand, we need models with a long-time horizon to capture all the benefits of preventing HIV infection today.  On the other hand, changes in technologies that may arise in the future cannot be incorporated into such models despite our hope that HIV prevention and treatment is likely to be very different over the next decades.

Costs and benefits of on-demand HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis in MSM.

Durand-Zaleski I, Mutuon P, Charreau I, Tremblay C, Rojas D, Pialoux G, Chidiac C, Capitant C, Spire B, Cotte L, Chas J, Meyer L; Molina JM for the ANRS IPERGAY study group. AIDS. 32(1):95–102, 2018 Jan 2. doi:10.1097/QAD.0000000000001658. [Epub 2017 Oct 12]

Objectives: We undertook the economic evaluation of the double-blind randomized ANRS-IPERGAY trial, which showed the efficacy of on-demand preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF)-emtricitabine (FTC) in preventing HIV infection among high-risk MSM.

Design and methods: The economic evaluation was prospective. Counseling, drugs (TDF-FTC at €500.88 for 30 tablets), tests, visits, and hospital admissions were valued based on in-trial use. The cost of on-demand PrEP/HIV infection averted was compared with the yearly and lifetime costs of HIV infection in France in a cost and benefits analysis.

Results: The yearly number of participants needed to treat to prevent one HIV infection was 17.6 (95% confidence interval = 10.7–49.9). The annual cost of counseling was €690/participant. The total 1-year costs of PrEP were €4271/participant, of which €3129 (73%) were drug costs corresponding to 15 tablets of TDF-FTC/month. The yearly cost of on-demand PrEP to avoid one infection was €75  258. Using TDF-FTC generic (€179.9/30 tablets) reduced the 1-year costs of on-demand PrEP to €2271/participant and €39  970/infection averted, respectively. Using TDF-FTC at international market discounted prices (€60/30 tablets) reduced the costs to €1517/participant and the cost to €26  787/infection averted, comparable with the yearly treatment cost of HIV infection in France. On-demand PrEP was found to be cost saving in France if the duration of exposure was less than 7.5 years at current drug price and 13 years at generic price.

Conclusion: On-demand PrEP in high-risk MSM with TDF-FTC can be considered cost saving. Other benefits include the treatments of other diseases and reductions in secondary infections.

Abstract access 

Cost-effectiveness of pre-exposure prophylaxis for HIV prevention in men who have sex with men in the UK: a modelling study and health economic evaluation.

Cambiano V, Miners A, Dunn D, McCormack S, Ong KJ, Gill ON, Nardone A, Desai M, Field N, Hart G, Delpech V, Cairns G, Rodger A, Phillips AN. Lancet Infect Dis. 2017 Oct 17. doi:10.1016/S1473-3099(17)30540-6. [Epub ahead of print]

Background: In the UK, HIV incidence among men who have sex with men (MSM) has remained high for several years, despite widespread use of antiretroviral therapy and high rates of virological suppression. Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) has been shown to be highly effective in preventing further infections in MSM, but its cost-effectiveness is uncertain.

Methods: In this modelling study and economic evaluation, we calibrated a dynamic, individual-based stochastic model, the HIV Synthesis Model, to multiple data sources (surveillance data provided by Public Health England and data from a large, nationally representative survey, Natsal-3) on HIV among MSM in the UK. We did a probabilistic sensitivity analysis (sampling 22 key parameters) along with a range of univariate sensitivity analyses to evaluate the introduction of a PrEP programme with sexual event-based use of emtricitabine and tenofovir for MSM who had condomless anal sexual intercourse in the previous 3 months, a negative HIV test at baseline, and a negative HIV test in the preceding year. The main model outcomes were the number of HIV infections, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and costs.

Findings: Introduction of such a PrEP programme, with around 4000 MSM initiated on PrEP by the end of the first year and almost 40 000 by the end of the 15th year, would result in a total cost saving (£1·0 billion discounted), avert 25% of HIV infections (42% of which would be directly because of PrEP), and lead to a gain of 40 000 discounted QALYs over an 80-year time horizon. This result was particularly sensitive to the time horizon chosen, the cost of antiretroviral drugs (for treatment and PrEP), and the underlying trend in condomless sex.

Interpretation: This analysis suggests that the introduction of a PrEP programme for MSM in the UK is cost-effective and possibly cost-saving in the long term. A reduction in the cost of antiretroviral drugs (including the drugs used for PrEP) would substantially shorten the time for cost savings to be realised.

Abstract access 

Europe
France, United Kingdom
  • share