RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 A Decision Analytics Model to Optimize Investment in Interventions Targeting the HIV PrEP Cascade of Care
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2020.12.10.20247270
DO 10.1101/2020.12.10.20247270
A1 Samuel M. Jenness
A1 Gregory Knowlton
A1 Dawn K. Smith
A1 Julia L. Marcus
A1 Emeli J. Anderson
A1 Aaron J. Siegler
A1 Jeb Jones
A1 Patrick S. Sullivan
A1 Eva Enns
YR 2021
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/04/01/2020.12.10.20247270.abstract
AB Objectives Gaps between recommended and actual levels of HIV preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) use remain among men who have sex with men (MSM). Interventions can address these gaps, but it is unknown how public health initiatives should invest prevention funds into these interventions to maximize their population impact.Design We used a stochastic network-based HIV transmission model for MSM in the Atlanta area paired with an economic budget optimization model.Methods The model simulated MSM participating in up to three real-world PrEP cascade interventions designed to improve initiation, adherence, or persistence. The primary outcome was infections averted over 10 years. The budget optimization model identified the investment combination under different budgets that maximized this outcome given intervention costs from a payer perspective.Results From the base 15% PrEP coverage level, the three interventions could increase coverage to 27%, resulting in 12.3% of infections averted over 10 years. Uptake of each intervention was interdependent: maximal use of the adherence and persistence interventions depended on new PrEP users generated by the initiation intervention. As the budget increased, optimal investment involved a mixture of the initiation and persistence interventions, but not the adherence intervention. If adherence intervention costs were halved, the optimal investment was roughly equal across interventions.Conclusions Investments into the PrEP cascade through initiatives should account for the interactions of the interventions as they are collectively deployed. Given current intervention efficacy estimates, the total population impact of each intervention may be improved with greater total budgets or reduced intervention costs.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis work was supported by Centers for Disease Control and Prevention cooperative agreement number U38 PS004646 and National Institutes of Health grant R01 AI138783. Dr. Marcus is supported in part by National Institutes of Health grant K01 AI122853.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Emory University Institutional Review Board approved the study protocols for the primary empirical data collection yielding model parameters for the current study.All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesThe model code and parameters are all open and availability at the Github repository linked below. https://github.com/EpiModel/PrEP-Optimize