Increasing survival time decreases the cost-effectiveness of using "test & treat to eliminate HIV epidemics
-
1.
Center for Biomedical Modeling, Semel Institute of Neuroscience & Human Behavior, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, 10940 Wilshire Blvd, Suite 1450, Los Angeles, CA 90024
-
Received:
01 November 2012
Accepted:
29 June 2018
Published:
01 August 2013
-
-
MSC :
Primary: 92D30, 92C60; Secondary: 92C50.
-
-
Treating HIV-infected individuals reduces their viral load, consequently increasing their survival time and decreasing their infectivity.It has been proposed that universal testing and treatment (i.e., universal ``test & treat'') could lead to HIV elimination and would be extremely cost-effective.It is now being debated whether to use a universal ``test and treat'' approach in the ``real-world'' as a prevention strategy to control HIV epidemics.However current modeling predictions of the impact, and cost-effectiveness, of universal ``test & treat'' strategies are based on an unrealistically short survival time for treated individuals.Here we use mathematical modeling and a longer, more realistic, survival time.We model the potential impact of a universal ``test & treat'' strategy in South Africa.Our results show that increasing the length of the survival time on treatment, although beneficial to individuals, reduces the probability of eliminating HIV and decreases the cost-effectiveness of using universal ``test & treat'' strategies.Therefore our results show that individual-level benefits and public health benefits will conflict when using ``test & treat'' strategies to reduce HIV transmission.
Citation: Bradley G. Wagner, Brian J. Coburn, Sally Blower. Increasing survival time decreases the cost-effectiveness of using "test & treat to eliminate HIV epidemics[J]. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2013, 10(5&6): 1673-1686. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2013.10.1673
-
Abstract
Treating HIV-infected individuals reduces their viral load, consequently increasing their survival time and decreasing their infectivity.It has been proposed that universal testing and treatment (i.e., universal ``test & treat'') could lead to HIV elimination and would be extremely cost-effective.It is now being debated whether to use a universal ``test and treat'' approach in the ``real-world'' as a prevention strategy to control HIV epidemics.However current modeling predictions of the impact, and cost-effectiveness, of universal ``test & treat'' strategies are based on an unrealistically short survival time for treated individuals.Here we use mathematical modeling and a longer, more realistic, survival time.We model the potential impact of a universal ``test & treat'' strategy in South Africa.Our results show that increasing the length of the survival time on treatment, although beneficial to individuals, reduces the probability of eliminating HIV and decreases the cost-effectiveness of using universal ``test & treat'' strategies.Therefore our results show that individual-level benefits and public health benefits will conflict when using ``test & treat'' strategies to reduce HIV transmission.
References
[1]
|
Science, 287 (2000), 650-654.
|
[2]
|
Curr. Drug Targets Infect. Disord., 3 (2003), 345-353.
|
[3]
|
Int. Stat. Rev., 62 (1994), 229-243.
|
[4]
|
Lancet, 373 (2009), 1077; author reply, 1080-1071.
|
[5]
|
N. Engl. J. Med., 365 (2011), 493-505.
|
[6]
|
PLoS ONE, 5 (2010), e11068.
|
[7]
|
JAMA, 301 (2009), 2380-2382.
|
[8]
|
Wiley Series in Mathematical and Computational Biology, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., Chichester, 2000.
|
[9]
|
AIDS, 24 (2010), 729-735.
|
[10]
|
J. Acquir. Immune Defic. Syndr., 55 (2010), S116-121.
|
[11]
|
Lancet, 358 (2001), 404-409.
|
[12]
|
Clin. Infect. Dis., 52 (2011), 793-800.
|
[13]
|
Lancet, 373 (2009), 9-11.
|
[14]
|
Lancet, 373 (2009), 48-57.
|
[15]
|
PLoS ONE, 7 (2012), e30216.
|
[16]
|
Lancet, 357 (2001), 1149-1153.
|
[17]
|
Lecture Notes in Biomathematics, 56, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1984.
|
[18]
|
J. Infect. Dis., 198 (2008), 59-67.
|
[19]
|
Ann. Intern. Med., 155 (2011), 209-216.
|
[20]
|
Lancet, 368 (2006), 531-536.
|
[21]
|
(2007).
|
[22]
|
(2011).
|
[23]
|
Math. Biosci., 180 (2002), 29-48.
|
[24]
|
Lancet Infect. Dis., 2 (2002), 487-493.
|
[25]
|
AIDS, 24 (2010), 775-776.
|
[26]
|
Lancet, 376 (2010), 953-954.
|
[27]
|
PLoS ONE, 7 (2012), e41212.
|
-
-
-
-