Cost-effectiveness of broadly neutralizing antibody prophylaxis for HIV-exposed infants in sub-Saharan African settings

INTRODUCTION

Infant HIV prophylaxis with broadly neutralizing anti-HIV antibodies (bNAbs) could provide long-acting protection against vertical transmission. We sought to estimate the potential clinical impact and cost-effectiveness of hypothetical bNAb prophylaxis programmes for children known to be HIV exposed at birth in three sub-Saharan African settings.

METHODS

We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis using the CEPAC-Pediatric model, simulating cohorts of infants from birth through death in Côte d'Ivoire, South Africa and Zimbabwe. These settings were selected to reflect a broad range of HIV care cascade characteristics, antenatal HIV prevalence and budgetary constraints. We modelled strategies targeting bNAbs to only WHO-designated "high-risk" HIV-exposed infants (HR-HIVE) or to all HIV-exposed infants (HIVE). We compared four prophylaxis approaches within each target population: standard of care oral antiretroviral prophylaxis (SOC), and SOC plus bNAbs at birth (1-dose), at birth and 3 months (2-doses), or every 3 months throughout breastfeeding (Extended). Base-case model inputs included bNAb efficacy (60%/dose), effect duration (3 months/dose) and costs ($60/dose), based on published literature. Outcomes included paediatric HIV incidence and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) calculated from discounted life expectancy and lifetime HIV-related costs.

RESULTS

The model projects that bNAbs would reduce absolute infant HIV incidence by 0.3-2.2% (9.6-34.9% relative reduction), varying by country, prophylaxis approach and target population. In all three settings, HR-HIVE-1-dose would be cost-saving compared to SOC. Using a 50% GDP per capita ICER threshold, HIVE-Extended would be cost-effective in all three settings with ICERs of $497/YLS in Côte d'Ivoire, $464/YLS in South Africa and $455/YLS in Zimbabwe. In all three settings, bNAb strategies would remain cost-effective at costs up to $200/dose if efficacy is ≥30%. If the bNAb effect duration were reduced to 1 month, the cost-effective strategy would become HR-HIVE-1-dose in Côte d'Ivoire and Zimbabwe and HR-HIVE-2-doses in South Africa. Findings regarding the cost-effectiveness of bNAb implementation strategies remained robust in sensitivity analyses regarding breastfeeding duration, maternal engagement in postpartum care, early infant diagnosis uptake and antiretroviral treatment costs.

CONCLUSIONS

At current efficacy and cost estimates, bNAb prophylaxis for HIV-exposed children in sub-Saharan African settings would be a cost-effective intervention to reduce vertical HIV transmission.

A multi-country cross-sectional study to assess predictors of daily versus on-demand oral pre-exposure prophylaxis in youth from South Africa, Uganda and Zimbabwe

INTRODUCTION

Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) carries the burden of the HIV epidemic, especially among adolescents and young people (AYP). Little is known about pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) uptake and preferences among AYP in SSA. We describe preferences for daily and on-demand PrEP among AYP in South Africa, Uganda and Zimbabwe.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey was conducted in 2019 among 13- to 24-year olds, capturing socio-demographics, HIV risk behaviours and preferences for daily or on-demand PrEP. Logistic regression models were used to estimate odds ratios, adjusting for site, sex and age.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

A total of 1330 participants from Cape Town (n = 239), Johannesburg (n = 200), Entebbe (n = 491) and Chitungwiza (n = 400) were enrolled; 673 (51%) were male, and the median age was 19 years (interquartile range 17-22 years). Of 1287 participants expressing a preference, 60% indicated a preference for on-demand PrEP with differences by site (p < 0.001), sex (p < 0.001) and age group (p = 0.003). On-demand PrEP was most preferred in Entebbe (75%), among males (65%) versus females (54%) and in older participants (62% in 18- to 24-year-olds vs. 47% in 13- to 15-year-olds). After adjusting for site, sex and age group, preference for on-demand PrEP decreased as sex frequency over the past month increased (p-trend = 0.004) and varied with the number of partners in the last 6 months, being least popular among those reporting four or more partners (p = 0.02). Participants knowing further in advance that they were likely to have sex were more likely to prefer on-demand PrEP (p-trend = 0.02). Participants having a larger age gap with their most recent partner and participants whose last partner was a transactional sex partner or client were both less likely to prefer on-demand compared to daily PrEP (p = 0.05 and p = 0.09, respectively). Participants who knew their most recent partner was living with HIV or who did not know the HIV status of their most recent partner were less likely to prefer on-demand PrEP (p = 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Our data show that AYP in four SSA communities prefer on-demand over daily PrEP options, with differences seen by site, age and sex. PrEP demand creation needs to be reviewed, optimized and tailored to socio-demographic differences and designed in conjunction with AYP.

Pharmacokinetics and Drug-Drug Interactions of Isoniazid and Efavirenz in Pregnant Women Living With HIV in High TB Incidence Settings: Importance of Genotyping

The World Health Organization guidelines recommend that individuals living with HIV receive ≥ 6 months of isoniazid preventive therapy, including pregnant women. Yet, plasma isoniazid exposure during pregnancy, in the antiretroviral therapy era, has not been well-described. We investigated pregnancy-induced and pharmacogenetic-associated pharmacokinetic changes and drug-drug interactions between isoniazid and efavirenz in pregnant women. Eight hundred forty-seven women received isoniazid for 28 weeks, either during pregnancy or at 12 weeks postpartum, and 786 women received efavirenz. After adjusting for NAT2 and CYP2B6 genotype and weight, pregnancy increased isoniazid and efavirenz clearance by 26% and 15%, respectively. Isoniazid decreased efavirenz clearance by 7% in CYP2B6 normal metabolizers and 13% in slow and intermediate metabolizers. Overall, both isoniazid and efavirenz exposures were reduced during pregnancy, but the main determinants of drug concentration were NAT2 and CYP2B6 genotypes, which resulted in a five-fold difference for both drugs between rapid and slow metabolizers.

Emerging evidence from a systematic review of safety of pre-exposure prophylaxis for pregnant and postpartum women: where are we now and where are we heading?

INTRODUCTION

HIV incidence is high during pregnancy and breastfeeding with HIV acquisition risk more than doubling during pregnancy and the postpartum period compared to when women are not pregnant. The World Health Organization recommends offering pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) to pregnant and postpartum women at substantial risk of HIV infection. However, maternal PrEP national guidelines differ and most countries with high maternal HIV incidence are not offering PrEP. We conducted a systematic review of recent research on PrEP safety in pregnancy to inform national policy and rollout.

METHODS

We used a standard Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) approach to conduct a systematic review by searching for completed, ongoing, or planned PrEP in pregnancy projects or studies from clinicaltrials.gov, PubMed and NIH RePORTER from 2014 to March 2019. We performed a systematic review of studies that assess tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF)-based oral PrEP safety in pregnant and breastfeeding HIV-uninfected women.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

We identified 14 completed (n = 5) and ongoing/planned (n = 9) studies that evaluate maternal and/or infant outcomes following PrEP exposure during pregnancy or breastfeeding. None of the completed studies found differences in pregnancy or perinatal outcomes associated with PrEP exposure. Nine ongoing studies, to be completed by 2022, will provide data on >6200 additional PrEP-exposed pregnancies and assess perinatal, infant growth and bone health outcomes, expanding by sixfold the data on PrEP safety in pregnancy. Research gaps include limited data on (1) accurately measured PrEP exposure within maternal and infant populations including drug levels needed for maternal protection; (2) uncommon perinatal outcomes (e.g. congenital anomalies); (3) infant outcomes such as bone growth beyond one year following PrEP exposure; (4) outcomes in HIV-uninfected women who use PrEP during pregnancy and/or lactation.

CONCLUSIONS

Expanding delivery of PrEP is an essential strategy to reduce HIV incidence in pregnancy and breastfeeding women. Early safety studies of PrEP among pregnant women without HIV infection are reassuring and ongoing/planned studies will contribute extensive new data to bolster the safety profile of PrEP use in pregnancy. However, addressing research gaps is essential to expanding PrEP delivery for women in the context of pregnancy.