| Title |
Cost-Effectiveness of Dolutegravir in HIV-1 Treatment-Naive and Treatment-Experienced Patients in Canada
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Infectious Diseases and Therapy, June 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s40121-015-0071-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Nicolas Despiégel, Delphine Anger, Monique Martin, Neerav Monga, Qu Cui, Angela Rocchi, Sonia Pulgar, Kim Gilchrist, Rodrigo Refoios Camejo |
| Abstract |
The Antiretroviral Analysis by Monte Carlo Individual Simulation (ARAMIS) model was adapted to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of dolutegravir (DTG) in Canada in treatment-naive (TN) and treatment-experienced (TE) human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-1 patients. The ARAMIS-DTG model is a microsimulation model with a lifetime analytic time horizon and a monthly cycle length. Markov health states were defined by HIV health state (with or without opportunistic infection). DTG was compared to efavirenz (EFV), raltegravir (RAL), darunavir/ritonavir, rilpivirine (RPV), elvitegravir/cobicistat, atazanavir/ritonavir and lopinavir/ritonavir in TN patients and to RAL in TE patients. The initial cohort, the main efficacy data and safety data were derived from phase III clinical trials. Treatment algorithms were based on expert opinion. Costs normalized to the year 2013 included antiretroviral treatment cost, testing, adverse event, HIV and cardiovascular disease care and were derived from the literature. Dolutegravir was estimated to be the dominant strategy compared with all comparators in both TN and TE patients. Treatment with DTG was associated with additional quality-adjusted life-years that ranged from 0.17 (vs. RAL) to 0.47 (vs. EFV) in TN patients and was 0.60 in TE patients over a lifetime. Cost savings ranged from Can$1393 (vs. RPV) to Can$28,572 (vs. RAL) in TN patients and amounted to Can$3745 in TE patients. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated the robustness of the model. Dolutegravir is a dominant strategy in the management of TN and TE patients when compared to recommended comparators. This is mainly related to the high efficacy and high barrier to resistance. ViiV Healthcare. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 71 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 12 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 12 | 17% |
| Researcher | 11 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 10 | 14% |
| Unknown | 15 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 24 | 33% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 12 | 17% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 6 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 4% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 7 | 10% |
| Unknown | 17 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 October 2019.
All research outputs
#4,541,805
of 22,914,829 outputs
Outputs from Infectious Diseases and Therapy
#176
of 696 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#57,126
of 264,013 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Infectious Diseases and Therapy
#2
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,914,829 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 696 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 264,013 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 8 of them.