Paying for PrEP: A qualitative study of cost factors that impact pre-exposure prophylaxis uptake in the US

Geographic variations of pre-exposure prophylaxis reversal and abandonment among United States counties

OBJECTIVE

In the United States, one in five newly insurer-approved pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) prescriptions are reversed with over 70% of those reversed, being abandoned. Given the Ending the HIV Epidemic (EHE) initiative's goals, we assessed geographic variations of PrEP reversal and abandonment across EHE and non-EHE counties in the United States.

DESIGN

This was a cross-sectional analysis of secondary data.

METHODS

Data were collected from Symphony Analytics for adults 18 years and older, with a newly prescribed PrEP claim. Using the proportion of PrEP prescriptions by county, hotspot analysis was conducted utilizing Getis Ord Gi∗ statistics stratified by EHE and non EHE counties. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with residing in hotspots of PrEP reversal or PrEP abandonments.

RESULTS

Across 516 counties representing 36,204 patients, the overall PrEP reversal rate was 19.4%, whereas the PrEP abandonment rate was 13.7%. Reversals and abandonments were higher for non-EHE (22.7 and 17.1%) than EHE (15.6 and 10.5%) counties. In both EHE and non-EHE counties, younger age, less education, females, and an out-of-pocket cost of greater than $100, were significantly associated with greater likelihood of residing in hotspots of PrEP reversal or abandonment, while Hispanics, Medicaid recipients, and an out-of-pocket cost of $10 or less had lower likelihood of residing in hotspots of reversal and abandonment.

CONCLUSION

Findings indicate the need for implementation of focused interventions to address disparities observed in PrEP reversal and abandonment. Moreover, to improve primary PrEP adherence, national PrEP access programs should streamline and improve PrEP accessibility across different geographic jurisdictions.

Estimating The Impact Of Out-Of-Pocket Cost Changes On Abandonment Of HIV Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis

Oral HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is highly effective for preventing HIV. Several different developments in the US either threaten to increase or promise to decrease PrEP out-of-pocket costs and access in the coming years. In a sample of 58,529 people with a new insurer-approved PrEP prescription, we estimated risk-adjusted percentages of patients who abandoned (did not fill) their initial prescription across six out-of-pocket cost categories. We then simulated the percentage of patients who would abandon PrEP under hypothetical changes to out-of-pocket costs, ranging from $0 to more than $500. PrEP abandonment rates of 5.5 percent at $0 rose to 42.6 percent at more than $500; even a small increase from $0 to $10 doubled the rate of abandonment. Conversely, abandonment rates that were 48.0 percent with out-of-pocket costs of more than $500 dropped to 7.3 percent when those costs were cut to $0. HIV diagnoses were two to three times higher among patients who abandoned PrEP prescriptions than among those who filled them. These results imply that recent legal challenges to the provision of PrEP with no cost sharing could substantially increase PrEP abandonment and HIV rates, upending progress on the HIV/AIDS epidemic.

Identifying HIV PrEP Attributes to Increase PrEP Use Among Different Groups of Gay, Bisexual, and Other Men Who Have Sex with Men: A Latent Class Analysis of a Discrete Choice Experiment

Daily pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is highly effective at preventing HIV among gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (GBMSM), although uptake remains suboptimal. By identifying the features of PrEP that appeal to various subgroups of GBMSM, this study aimed to improve PrEP uptake by examining preferences for PrEP use. Adults ≥ 18 years old in six New England states completed an online discrete choice experiment survey. A latent class analysis (LCA) was conducted to identify groups of GBMSM based on four attributes of choices for PrEP (cost, time, side effects, and mode of administration). Multinominal logistic regression was conducted to compare the association between sociodemographic and behavioral characteristics and class memberships. Data from 675 GBMSM were analyzed. A 3-Class model was selected as the best fit model. Class 1 (47.7% of individuals) was identified as having "no specific preferences". Class 2 (18.5% of individuals) were "Cost- and time-conscious" and were significantly more likely to be older, have prior sexually transmitted infection (STI) testing, have low household income, private insurance, and have extreme concerns about HIV risk than those with no specific preference (Class 1). Finally, Class 3 (34.1% of individuals) were "Side effects-conscious" and were more likely to have low income, private insurance, and have moderate and extreme concerns about HIV risk than those with no specific preference (Class 1). Findings indicate that outreach to GBMSM who have never used PrEP should emphasize low cost and short travel times to increase potential PrEP use.

Optimizing Uptake of Long-Acting Injectable Pre-exposure Prophylaxis for HIV Prevention for Men Who Have Sex with Men

Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is a highly effective HIV prevention tool. Long-acting injectable PrEP (LAI-PrEP) offers another opportunity to reduce HIV. However, how at-risk individuals will consider LAI-PrEP over other modes of administration is unclear. We conducted a discrete choice experiment on preferences for PrEP among a sample of N = 688 gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (GBMSM). We analyzed preferences for mode of administration, side-effects, monetary cost, and time cost using a conditional logit model and predicted preference for PrEP options. LAI-PrEP was preferred, despite mode of administration being the least important PrEP attribute. Side-effects were the most important attribute influencing preferences for PrEP (44% of decision); costs were second-most-important (35% of decision). PrEP with no side-effects was the most important preference, followed by monthly out-of-pocket costs of $0. Practitioners and policymakers looking to increase PrEP uptake should keep costs low, communicate clearly about PrEP side-effects, and allow the use of patient-preferred modes of PrEP administration, including LAI-PrEP.