Improving access to antiretrovirals in China: economic analyses of dolutegravir in HIV-1 patients

Abstract

BackgroundThe World Health Organisation recommended dolutegravir (DTG)-based antiretroviral therapy (ART) regimens are available but not reimbursed through the public reimbursement system in China. The objective of this analysis was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of DTG (DTG\u2009+\u2009TDF/3TC) compared to efavirenz (EFV\u2009+\u2009TDF/3TC) in treatment-naive and ritonavir-boosted lopinavir (LPV/r\u2009+\u2009TDF/3TC) in first-line ART failure HIV-1-infected patients in China.MethodsA dynamic Markov model comprising of 5 response states and 6 CD4+ count-based health states was used. Efficacy, estimated as probability of virologic suppression (HIV RNA <\u200950\xa0copies/mL) at 48\xa0weeks, was obtained from a published network meta-analysis for ART-naive patients and from the DAWNING study for patients failing first-line ART. Baseline cohort characteristics were informed using DTG phase 3 studies and the DAWNING study data, respectively. Health state utilities were derived from DTG phase 3 studies. A 5-year cost-effectiveness analyses was conducted using the societal perspective. Outcomes were quality-adjusted-life-years (QALYs), life-years (LYs), incremental cost per QALYs (ICER).ResultsThe viral suppression rates for DTG\u2009+\u2009TDF/3TC were higher than EFV\u2009+\u2009TDF/3TC (75.3% vs 64.0%) in treatment-naive and LPV/r\u2009+\u2009TDF/3TC (74.8% vs 58.4%) in first-line ART failure patients. This resulted in higher QALYs for DTG\u2009+\u2009TDF/3TC in treatment-naive (4.232 vs 4.227) and first-line failure settings (4.224 vs 4.221). Total discounted cost for DTG\u2009+\u2009TDF/3TC patients (RMB 219.259 in treatment-naive and RMB 238,746 in first-line failures) were lower than comparators (EFV\u2009+\u2009TDF/3TC:RMB 221,605; LPV/r\u2009+\u2009TDF/3TC:RMB 244,364), thereby DTG dominated in both settings. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses indicated the probability of DTG\u2009+\u2009TDF/3TC being cost effective was 98.2% in treatment-naive setting and 100% in first-line failure setting at a willingness to pay threshold of RMB 100,000/QALY.ConclusionsWith lower costs, higher response rates and higher QALYs, DTG\u2009+\u2009TDF/3TC can be considered as a cost-effective alternative for treatment naive and first-line failure patients in China.