Skip to main content
Log in

Lamivudine Reduces Healthcare Resource Use when Added to Zidovudine-Containing Regimens in Patients with HIV Infection

  • Original Research Article
  • Impact of Lamivudine on Healthcare Resource Use
  • Published:
PharmacoEconomics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background: The impact on healthcare resource use of adding lamivudine to concurrent zidovudine-containing antiretroviral regimens was studied as a part of a 52-week multinational study [CAESAR (Canada, Australia, Europe and South Africa)] in HIV-infected patients with moderate to severe immunodeficiency (25 to 250 CD4+ cells/mm3).

Results: Significantly fewer lamivudine than placebo recipients required hospitalisations (p = 0.002), unscheduled outpatient visits (p = 0.013) or prescribed medications for HIV-related illness (p < 0.001). The mean number of hospitalisations and the mean duration of hospitalisation for HIV-related illness were 47% and 51% lower, respectively, with lamivudine than with placebo. The mean number of unscheduled outpatient visits was 32% lower with lamivudine than with placebo. Lamivudine was also associated with a significant reduction in the number of patients who were hospitalised (p = 0.04) or required unscheduled outpatient visits (p = 0.02) as a result of adverse events.

Conclusions: Notwithstanding the fact that retrospective studies have suggested that more effective antiretroviral treatments reduce healthcare use, the CAESAR study is one of the few prospective controlled trials to demonstrate that by slowing disease progression with combination therapy it is possible to reduce healthcare resource use in patients with HIV infection. Although the combination of lamivudine and zidovudine alone is not likely to be sufficient to achieve complete long term suppression of viral replication and to halt disease progression, the study demonstrates the immediate economic benefits of preventing HIV progression in HIV-infected patients with moderate to severe immunodeficiency (25 to 250 CD4+ cells/mm3). These findings suggest that treatment regimens that slow progression of HIV infection have the potential to produce savings in non-drug healthcare costs, which may partly or fully offset the drug costs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. DELTA Coordinating Committee. DELTA: a randomized double-blind controlled trial comparing combinations of zidovudine plus didanosine or zalcitabine with zidovudine alone in HIV infected individuals. Lancet 1996; 348: 283–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Randomized trial of addition of lamivudine or lamivudine plus loviride to zidovudine-containing regimens for patients with HIV-1 infections: the CAESAR trial. Lancet 1997; 349: 1413–21

  3. British HIV Association guidelines for antiretroviral treatment of HIV seropositive individuals. BHIVA Guidelines Coordinating Committee. Lancet 1997; 349 (9058): 1086–92

    Google Scholar 

  4. Payne N. British HIV Association guidelines for antiretroviral treatment of HIV seropositive individuals. Lancet 1997; 349: 1837

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Petrou S, Dooley M, Whitaker L, et al. The economic costs of caring for people with HIV infection and AIDS in England and Wales. Pharmacoeconomics 1996; 9 (4): 332–40

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Brettle RP, Atkinson FI, Wilcock J, et al. The cost of health care for HIV-positive patients. Int J STD AIDS 1997; 8: 50–3

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Fortgang IS, Moore RD. Hospital admissions of HIV infected patients from 1988 to 1992 in Maryland. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr Hum Retrovirol 1995; 8: 365–72

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Moore RD, Bartlett JG. Combination antiretroviral therapy in HIV infection: an economic perspective. Pharmacoeconomics 1996; 10 (2): 109–13

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Eron JJ, Benoit SL, Jemesk J, et al. Treatment with lamivudine, zidovudine, or both in HIV-positive patients with 200 to 500 CD4+ cells per millimetre. N Engl J Med 1995; 333: 1662–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Staszewski S, Loveday C, Picazo JJ, et al. Safety and efficacy of lamivudine-zidovudine combination therapy in zidovudine-experienced patients. JAMA 1996; 276: 111–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Lacey L, Hill A, Mauskopf J. The incidence of opportunistic infections and hospitalisations in HIV patients treated with lamivudine/zidovudine [abstract P37]. 3rd International Congress on Drug Therapy and HIV Iinfection; 1996 Nov 3-7; Birmingham, UK. AIDS 1996; 10 Suppl. 2: S28

    Google Scholar 

  12. Anis H, Hogg RS, Wang X, et al. The effect of attenuating CD4 decline on subsequent hospitalisation: potential benefit of viral load driven antiretroviral therapy [abstract 263]. 4th Conference on Retroviral and Opportunistic Infections; 1997 Jan 22-26; Washington DC: 1997: 112

  13. Mouton Y, Alfandari S, Valette M, et al. Impact of protease inhibitors on AIDS defining events and hospitalisations in 10 French AIDS reference centres. AIDS 1997 Oct; 11 (12): F101–5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Anis AH, Hogg RS, Wang X, et al. Modelling the potential economic impact of viral load driven triple drug combination antiretroviral therapy. Pharmacoeconomics 1998; 13 (6): 697–705

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 1993 revised classification system for HIV infection and expanded surveillance case definition for AIDS among adolescents and adults. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 1992; 41 (RR-17): 1–19

    Google Scholar 

  16. Mauskopf JA, Lacey LA, Kempel A, et al. The cost effectiveness of treatment with lamivudine and zidovudine compared to zidovudine alone: a comparison of Markov model and trial estimates. Am J Manag Care 1998; 4 (7): 1004

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Carpenter CCJ, Fischl MA, Hammer SL, et al. Antiviral therapy for HIV infection in 1998. Updated recommendations of the International AIDS Society — USA Panel. JAMA 1998; 280: 78–86

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Gazzard B, Moyle G, on behalf of the BHIVA Guidelines writing committee. 1998 revision to the British HIV Association guidelines for antiretroviral treatment of HIV seropositive individuals. Lancet 1998; 352: 314–6

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Chancellor JV, Hill AM, Sabin CA, et al. Modelling the cost effectiveness of lamivudine/zidovudine combination therapy in HIV infection. Pharmacoeconomics 1997; 12 (1): 54–66

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Lacey L, Mauskopf J, Lindrooth R, et al. A prospective costconsequence analysis of adding lamivudine to zidovudinecontaining antiretroviral treatment regimens for HIV infection in the US. Pharmacoeconomics 1999; 15 Suppl. 1: 23–38

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Lacey L, Youle M, Trueman P, et al. A prospective evaluation of the cost effectiveness of adding lamivudine to zidovudinecontaining antiretroviral treatment regimens in HIV infection: European perspective. Pharmacoeconomics 1999; 15 Suppl. 1: 39–53

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lacey, L., Gill, M. Lamivudine Reduces Healthcare Resource Use when Added to Zidovudine-Containing Regimens in Patients with HIV Infection. Pharmacoeconomics 15 (Suppl 1), 13–22 (1999). https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-199915001-00002

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-199915001-00002

Keywords

Navigation