COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF ATAZANAVIR/RITONAVIR (ATV+RTV) COMPARED WITH LOPINAVIR/RITONAVIR (LPV+RTV) IN TREATMENT-NAÏVE HIV-INFECTED PATIENTS IN MEXICO- A MODEL BASED ON THE CASTLE STUDY

Author(s)

Juarez-Garcia A1, Martinez-Rivera G1, Donato BM21Bristol-Myers Squibb, Mexico City, D.F., Mexico, 2Bristol-Myers Squibb, Wallingford, CT, USA

OBJECTIVES: In the last years in Mexico HIV/AIDS appears within the first seven causes of mortality among the population between 15 and 64 years old (SINAIS). Boosted PI combination therapy, in combination with other advances, has lowered the mortality rate among HIV-infected patients almost to that of the uninfected population. The 96-week CASTLE randomized trial demonstrated that, in HAART-naïve patients, ATV/RTV was non-inferior to LPV/RTV for suppressing viral replication and caused lower rates of GI toxicity and lower increases in total cholesterol. In this study we evaluated the cost-effectiveness of ATV/RTV versus LPV/RTV in treatment-naïve HIV patients in Mexico, using results from the CASTLE study. METHODS: A lifetime Markov micro simulation model was used to estimate the cost per QALY for both therapies lifetime costs, clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness. Tenofovir-emtricitabine was considered the backbone therapy. A million-member cohort of HIV-infected, treatment-naïve adults progressed at 3-month intervals through 8 health states. The model measures the cost per adverse event averted of the ATV based regime, focusing in particular on GI and coronary heart disease outcomes.  The analysis was conducted from the Mexican Health care perspective. Outcomes were discounted at a 5% rate. Virologic suppression, health state transition probabilities, cholesterol changes, and side effect rates were derived from CASTLE. Costs and utilities were derived from literature and expert opinion. RESULTS: Patients initiating ATV+RTV regime had longer quality-adjusted survival than those initiating LPV+RTV, (10.47 vs. 10.26 years) and lower total costs ($95,579 vs. $103,891 USD) resulting in a more effective and less costly treatment option (dominant alternative). Sensitivity analyses demonstrated that the model is robust to a wide range of parameter estimates. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis suggests that the use of ATV+RTV in the Mexican healthcare setting is a preferred option when compared to LPV+RTV for treatment of treatment-naïve HIV patients.

Conference/Value in Health Info

2011-05, ISPOR 2011, Baltimore, MD, USA

Value in Health, Vol. 14, No. 3 (May 2011)

Code

PIN23

Topic

Economic Evaluation

Topic Subcategory

Cost-comparison, Effectiveness, Utility, Benefit Analysis

Disease

Infectious Disease (non-vaccine)

Explore Related HEOR by Topic


Your browser is out-of-date

ISPOR recommends that you update your browser for more security, speed and the best experience on ispor.org. Update my browser now

×