Your browser doesn't support javascript.

Biblioteca Virtual em Saúde

Brasil

Home > Pesquisa > ()
Imprimir Exportar

Formato de exportação:

Exportar

Email
Adicionar mais destinatários
| |

Cost-effectiveness of initial antiretroviral treatment administered as single vs. multiple tablet regimens with the same or different components / Coste-efectividad del tratamiento inicial antirretroviral de comprimido único vs. tratamiento con regímenes de múltiples comprimidos con los mismos o diferentes componentes

Llibre, Josep M; Lazzari, Elisa de; Molina, Jean-Michel; Gallien, Sébastien; Gonzalez-García, Juan; Imaz, Arkaitz; Podzamczer, Daniel; Clotet, Bonaventura; Domingo, Pere; Gatell, Josep M.
Enferm. infecc. microbiol. clín. (Ed. impr.); 36(1): 16-20, ene. 2018. tab
Artigo em Inglês | IBECS | ID: ibc-170109

Objective:

To evaluate the efficiency of single-tablet regimens (STR) and multiple-tablet regimens (MTR) with exactly the same or different components.

Methods:

A study was conducted on HIV-1-infected antiretroviral-naïve patients from 6 Spanish or French centers, who were started on treatment with STR-Atripla®, or the same components separately (MTR-SC), or a different MTR (MTR-Other). Effectiveness was measured as percentage of HIV-RNA <50copies/mL at 48 weeks (ITT). Efficiency was the ratio between costs (direct cost of antiretrovirals plus outpatient visits, hospital admissions, and resistance tests) and effectiveness.

Results:

The study included a total of 2773 patients (759 STR-Atripla®, 483 MTR-SC, and 1531 MTR-Other). Median age was 37 years, 15% were HCV co-infected, 27% had a CD4+ count <200cells/μL, and 30% had viral load ≥100.000copies/mL. The duration of the assigned treatment was longer for STR-Atripla® (P<.0001). Response rates (adjusted for CD4+ count, viral load, and clustered on hospitals) at 48 weeks were 76%, 74%, and 62%, respectively (P<.0001). Virological failure was more common in MTR patients (P=.0025), and interruptions due to intolerance with MTR-Other (P<.0001). Cost per responder at 48 weeks (efficiency) was euros12,406 with STR-Atripla®, euros11,034 with MTR-SC (0.89 [0.82, 0.99] times lower), and euros18,353 (1.48 [1.38, 1.61] times higher) with MTR-Other.

Conclusions:

STR-Atripla® and MTR-SC regimens showed similar effectiveness, but virological failure rate was lower with STR-Atripla. MTR-SC, considered less convenient, had a marginally better efficiency, mainly due to lower direct costs. MTR-Other regimens had both a worse effectiveness and efficiency. Similar efficiency analyses adjusting for baseline characteristics should be recommended for new STRs (AU)
Biblioteca responsável: ES1.1
Localização: BNCS
Selo DaSilva