Search

Summary: Background: Hepatitis C elimination may be possible with broad uptake of direct-acting antiviral treatments (DAAs). In 2016 the Australian government committed A$1.2 billion for five years of unlimited DAAs (March 2016 to February 2021) in a risk-sharing agreement with pharmaceutical companies. We assess the impact, cost-effectiveness and net economic benefits likely to be realised from this investment. Methods: Mathematical modelling to project outcomes for 2016-2030 included: (S1) a counter-factual scenario (testing/treatment maintained at pre-2016 levels); (S2) the current status-quo (testing/treatment as actually occurred 2016-2019, with trends maintained to 2030); and (S3) elimination scenario (S2 plus testing/treatment rates increased between 2021-2030 to achieve the WHO elimination targets). Findings: S1 resulted in 68,800 new hepatitis C infections and 18,540 hepatitis C-related deaths over 2016-2030. The total health system cost (HCV testing, treatment, disease management) was A$3.01 billion and the cost of lost productivity due to absenteeism, presenteeism and premature deaths was A$26.14 billion. S2 averted 15,700 (23%) new infections and 8,500 (46%) deaths by 2030, with a total health system cost of A$3.48 billion, A$472 million more than S1 (A$1.65 billion more in testing/treatment but A$1.20 billion less in disease costs; A$5,752 per QALY gained from a health systems perspective). Productivity loss over 2016-2030 was A$19.96 billion, A$6.17 less than S1, making S2 cost-saving from a societal perspective by 2022 with a net economic benefit of A$5.70 billion by 2030. S3 averted an additional 10,000 infections and 930 deaths compared with S2 and increased the longer-term economic benefit. Interpretation: Five years of unrestricted access to DAAs in Australia has led to significant health benefits and is likely to become cost-saving from a societal perspective by 2022. Funding: Burnet Institute

Background: Detention of people who use drugs into compulsory drug detention centres (CDDCs) is common throughout East and Southeast Asia. Evidence-based pharmacological therapies for treating substance use disorders, such as opioid agonist treatments with methadone, are generally unavailable in these settings. We used a unique opportunity where CDDCs coexisted with voluntary drug treatment centres (VTCs) providing methadone in Malaysia to compare the timing and occurrence of opioid relapse (measured using urine drug testing) in individuals transitioning from CDDCs versus methadone maintenance in VTCs. Methods: We did a parallel, two-arm, prospective observational study of opioid-dependent individuals aged 18 years and older who were treated in Malaysia in the Klang Valley in two settings: CDDCs and VTCs. We used sequential sampling to recruit individuals. Assessed individuals in CDDCs were required to participate in services such as counselling sessions and manual labour. Assessed individuals in VTCs could voluntarily access many of the components available in CDDCs, in addition to methadone therapy. We undertook urinary drug tests and behavioural interviews to assess individuals at baseline and at 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months post-release. The primary outcome was time to opioid relapse post-release in the community confirmed by urinary drug testing in individuals who had undergone baseline interviewing and at least one urine drug test (our analytic sample). Relapse rates between the groups were compared using time-to-event methods. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02698098). Findings: Between July 17, 2012, and August 21, 2014, we screened 168 CDDC attendees and 113 VTC inpatients; of these, 89 from CDDCs and 95 from VTCs were included in our analytic sample. The baseline characteristics of the two groups were similar. In unadjusted analyses, CDDC participants had significantly more rapid relapse to opioid use post-release compared with VTC participants (median time to relapse 31 days [IQR 26–32] vs 352 days [256–unestimable], log rank test, p

Background: New WHO guidelines recommend initiation of antiretroviral therapy for HIV-positive adults with CD4 counts of 500 cells per μL or less, a higher threshold than was previously recommended. Country decision makers have to decide whether to further expand eligibility for antiretroviral therapy accordingly. We aimed to assess the potential health benefits, costs, and cost-effectiveness of various eligibility criteria for adult antiretroviral therapy and expanded treatment coverage. Methods: We used several independent mathematical models in four settings—South Africa (generalised epidemic, moderate antiretroviral therapy coverage), Zambia (generalised epidemic, high antiretroviral therapy coverage), India (concentrated epidemic, moderate antiretroviral therapy coverage), and Vietnam (concentrated epidemic, low antiretroviral therapy coverage)—to assess the potential health benefits, costs, and cost-effectiveness of various eligibility criteria for adult antiretroviral therapy under scenarios of existing and expanded treatment coverage, with results projected over 20 years. Analyses assessed the extension of eligibility to include individuals with CD4 counts of 500 cells per μL or less, or all HIV-positive adults, compared with the previous (2010) recommendation of initiation with CD4 counts of 350 cells per μL or less. We assessed costs from a health-system perspective, and calculated the incremental cost (in US$) per disability-adjusted life-year (DALY) averted to compare competing strategies. Strategies were regarded very cost effective if the cost per DALY averted was less than the country's 2012 per-head gross domestic product (GDP; South Africa: $8040; Zambia: $1425; India: $1489; Vietnam: $1407) and cost effective if the cost per DALY averted was less than three times the per-head GDP. Findings: In South Africa, the cost per DALY averted of extending eligibility for antiretroviral therapy to adult patients with CD4 counts of 500 cells per μL or less ranged from $237 to $1691 per DALY averted compared with 2010 guidelines. In Zambia, expansion of eligibility to adults with a CD4 count threshold of 500 cells per μL ranged from improving health outcomes while reducing costs (ie, dominating the previous guidelines) to $749 per DALY averted. In both countries results were similar for expansion of eligibility to all HIV-positive adults, and when substantially expanded treatment coverage was assumed. Expansion of treatment coverage in the general population was also cost effective. In India, the cost for extending eligibility to all HIV-positive adults ranged from $131 to $241 per DALY averted, and in Vietnam extending eligibility to patients with CD4 counts of 500 cells per μL or less cost $290 per DALY averted. In concentrated epidemics, expanded access for key populations was also cost effective. Interpretation: Our estimates suggest that earlier eligibility for antiretroviral therapy is very cost effective in low-income and middle-income settings, although these estimates should be revisited when more data become available. Scaling up antiretroviral therapy through earlier eligibility and expanded coverage should be considered alongside other high-priority health interventions competing for health budgets. Funding: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, WHO.