Dynamic choice HIV prevention with long-acting injectable cabotegravir pre-exposure prophylaxis in east, central, southern, and west Africa: a cost-effectiveness modelling analysis
- PMID: 40946710
- PMCID: PMC12854106
- DOI: 10.1016/S2352-3018(25)00169-9
Dynamic choice HIV prevention with long-acting injectable cabotegravir pre-exposure prophylaxis in east, central, southern, and west Africa: a cost-effectiveness modelling analysis
Abstract
Background: In randomised controlled trials in Kenya and Uganda, a dynamic choice HIV prevention (DCP) intervention that offered structured choice of biomedical prevention product and opportunity to change products over time substantially improved prevention coverage; incident HIV infections were eliminated when long-acting cabotegravir was included as an option. We aimed to assess the potential cost-effectiveness of the intervention regimen in east, central, southern, and west Africa.
Methods: We used the existing individual-based HIV Synthesis model. Through sampling of parameter values at the start of each model run of a simulated population of adults, we created 1000 setting-scenarios, reflecting uncertainty in assumptions and a range of characteristics similar to those seen in east, central, southern, and west Africa. For each setting-scenario, we simulated predicted outcomes including disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) and costs up to 50 years resulting from (1) continuing with the status quo (ie, no DCP); (2) introduction of the DCP intervention with oral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP), and condoms without long-acting cabotegravir PrEP (ie, DCP without cabotegravir); and (3) introduction of the DCP intervention and including long-acting cabotegravir PrEP (ie, DCP including cabotegravir). We used a cost-effectiveness threshold of US$500 per DALY averted, and a discount rate of 3% per year. The annual cost of DCP including cabotegravir was assumed to be $190 per person. Net DALYs averted was calculated by DALYs averted plus the difference in costs divided by the cost-effectiveness threshold.
Findings: Reflecting the trial results, among people with a PrEP indication (ie, having an HIV acquisition risk) and an HIV test in the past 3 months, the median proportion of people on PrEP was 14% (90% range 4-43) with no DCP, 54% (23-74) with DCP without cabotegravir, and 71% (35-83) with DCP including cabotegravir. These increases in PrEP use led to HIV incidence reductions, with incidence rate ratios of 0·89 (0·67-1·17) for DCP without cabotegravir and 0·64 (0·44-0·97) for DCP including cabotegravir, relative to no DCP. Across setting-scenarios, both DCP policies led to DALYs being averted: 18 400 DALYs per year (95% CI 16 700-20 100) for DCP including cabotegravir and 56 400 DALYs per year (52 300-60 500) for DCP without cabotegravir in 10 million adults. Compared with no DCP, there was a mean increase in annual discounted costs over 50 years: $8·6 million (7·7-9·4) for DCP without cabotegravir and $13·2 million (11·6-14·8) for DCP including cabotegravir. Addition of long-acting cabotegravir PrEP to DCP was cost-effective (vs DCP without cabotegravir); the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for DCP including cabotegravir (vs no DCP) was $234 per DALY averted. There was substantial variation across setting-scenarios and we found that DCP was more likely to be the cost-effective choice in settings with high prevalence of unsuppressed HIV or low proportion of people with an indication for PrEP.
Interpretation: Offering structured PrEP and PEP choice including long-acting cabotegravir and enabling risk-informed use could reduce HIV incidence by a third over 10 years. If projected generic production costs of long-acting cabotegravir can be realised, it is likely to be cost-effective across multiple settings in east, central, southern, and west Africa.
Funding: US National Institutes of Health.
Copyright © 2025 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.
Conflict of interest statement
Declaration of interests ANP declares grant funding from the US National Institutes of Health (NIH), National Institute for Health and Care Research, EU, Wellcome, and the Gates Foundation and private consultancy work for WHO on a multi-model policy project. LB-M declares grant funding from EU, Wellcome, and the Gates Foundation and private consultancy work for WHO on a multi-model policy project. MDH declares grant funding from NIH and National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. DVH declares grant funding from NIH. GC declares grants from NIH to University of California, San Francisco. MP declares grants from NIH to her institution. All other authors declare no competing interests.
Figures
References
-
- UNAIDS. 2024 global AIDS report—the urgency of now: AIDS at a crossroads. July 22, 2024. https://www.unaids.org/en/resources/documents/2024/global-aids-update-2024 (accessed May 31, 2025).
MeSH terms
Substances
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous
