Transcript Slide 1
The prevention benefits of expanded AIDS treatment: how large, how affordable? The new era in HIV/AIDS treatment and prevention: science, implementation and finance Wilton Park Meeting Geneva, Switzerland 27 – 28 June 2012 Robert Hecht, Managing Director Main Messages 1. The population-level prevention effects of expanded treatment are not fully understood – but modeling suggests that these could be significant. 2. In a high prevalence setting like South Africa, treatment efforts to date -- as imperfect as they have been – appear to have reduced new infections by 15-30% over the past six years. 3. Broadening treatment will lower new infections further – the South African government’s current expanded effort and a Universal Test and Treat program could cut infections by an additional 26% over a decade. 4. Rapidly expanded treatment in South Africa will double ART costs over the next five years. This is large but affordable. The cost of universal test and treat would more severely strain the country’s fiscal capacity. 5. Coupling expanded ART with other proven prevention interventions could achieve additional reductions in new infections. Treatment as prevention in a high prevalence setting Estimated impact of AIDS treatment on incidence, South Africa 2006-11 Source: Eaton et al., 2012 What would be the impact of expanded treatment in the coming years? We modeled three scenarios for South Africa: Current Practice (CP): individuals access ART after symptoms show, CD4 < 350 cells/mm from 2011, 15% drop out in first year Expanded Effort (EE): individuals tested every two years; ART initiated @ CD4 ~ 350; effective linkage to care, 4% drop-out rate Universal Test and Treat (UTT): 90% receive an AIDS test every year, initiation immediately after testing positive, 2% drop-out rate The number of ART patients would grow significantly under EE and UTT 4,500,000 Annual number of ART patients 4,000,000 3,500,000 NSP 3,000,000 2,500,000 CP 2,000,000 EE 1,500,000 UTT 1,000,000 500,000 0 2010 2015 2020 2025 Year 2030 2035 2040 Annual infections would also fall substantially 600,000 500,000 New infections 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 0 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 Year No ART CP EE UTT 2040 How much would it cost? Cost of annual treatment scale up 2-3X in first five years Cost over 10 years (USD billion) R30,000 R25,000 $ 30.5 ZAR millions R20,000 CP R15,000 EE $ 19.3 UTT R10,000 $ 13.7 R5,000 R0 2010 2015 2020 2025 Year 2030 2035 2040 How affordable would rapid ART scale-up be? 2011 status quo: ART = ZAR 7.8 billion (US$ 0.93 billion) 63% of total national AIDS spending 8% of government health budget 2015 projected costs for each scenario, South Africa CP EE UTT Cost of ART (ZAR billion) (US$ billion) R 11.3 R 16 R 26.1 (US$ 1.35) (US$ 1.92) (US$ 3.13) Share of estimated AIDS spending 38% 54% 88% Share of estimated health budget 7% 10% 17% Expanded treatment plus other prevention could further lower new infections – KZN province Intervention Baseline (‘status quo’) ART at CD4 200 cells/µl ART at CD4 350 cells/µl Early ART Male circumcision Long-acting PrEP (TMC 287 + DPV ring) Assumption Impact ART is introduced in 2004 and subsequently scaled-up such that when CD4 drops below 200 cells/µl, 33% initiate ART and when CD4 drops below 100 cells/µl, 37% initiate ART. A dropout rate of 7 per 100 PY is assumed. From 2013 onwards, 75% of individuals with CD4 ≤200 cells/µl receive ART. A dropout rate of 7 per 100 PY is assumed. 18.5% From 2014 onwards, 35% of individuals with CD4 ≤350 cells/µl receive ART. A dropout rate of 7 per 100 PY is assumed. 32.1% From 2015 onwards, 25% of newly infected individuals are initiated on ART on average nine months following the end of acute infection. A dropout rate of 7 per 100 PY is assumed. Scaled-up from 2016. 50% of uncircumcised males are circumcised over a 5 year period, such that the proportion of men circumcised increases from 27% in 2016 to 65% in 2021. Scaled-up from 2017. 30% of men and women (15-54 years) receive PrEP. PrEP is scaled-up over 5 years (from 2017 to 2021) after which time coverage is maintained. PrEP efficacy of 70% and adherence of 100% are assumed. 42.1% 55.1% 68.7% Issues for discussion What are the likely prevention gains from implementing current ART guidelines in high prevalence settings? What are the financial implications in these extreme settings, especially for governments in middle income countries (e.g., South Africa), for donors in low income countries (e.g., Mozambique)? How should national leaders regard the benefits, costs, and feasibility of a more aggressive UTT approach, logistically and financially? How far could a combination of scaled up ART and other costeffective prevention services go in blunting the epidemic in Southern Africa?