Background New WHO guidelines recommend ART initiation for HIV-positive persons with CD4 cell counts ≤500 cells/µL, a higher threshold than was previously recommended. Country decision makers must consider whether to further expand ART eligibility accordingly. Methods We used multiple independent mathematical models in four settings—South Africa, Zambia, India, and Vietnam—to evaluate the potential health impact, costs, and cost-effectiveness of different adult ART eligibility criteria under scenarios of current and expanded treatment coverage, with results projected over 20 years. Analyses considered extending eligibility to include individuals with CD4 ≤500 cells/µL or all HIV-positive adults, compared to the previous recommendation of initiation with CD4 ≤350 cells/µL. We assessed costs from a health system perspective, and calculated the incremental cost per DALY averted ($/DALY) to compare competing strategies. Strategies were considered ‘very cost-effective’ if the $/DALY was less than the country’s per capita gross domestic product (GDP; South Africa: $8040, Zambia: $1425, India: $1489, Vietnam: $1407) and ‘cost-effective’ if $/DALY was less than three times per capita GDP. Findings In South Africa, the cost per DALY averted of extending ART eligibility to CD4 ≤500 cells/µL ranged from $237 to $1691/DALY compared to 2010 guidelines; in Zambia, expanded eligibility ranged from improving health outcomes while reducing costs (i.e. dominating current guidelines) to $749/DALY. Results were similar in scenarios with substantially expanded treatment access and for expanding eligibility to all HIV-positive adults. Expanding treatment coverage in the general population was therefore found to be cost-effective. In India, eligibility for all HIV-positive persons ranged from $131 to $241/DALY and in Vietnam eligibility for CD4 ≤500 cells/µL cost $290/DALY. In concentrated epidemics, expanded access among key populations was also cost-effective. Interpretation Earlier ART eligibility is estimated to be very cost-effective in low- and middle-income settings, although these questions should be revisited as further information becomes available. Scaling-up ART should be considered among other high-priority health interventions competing for health budgets. Funding The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and World Health Organization

ObjectiveWe estimated the incremental cost and impact on diagnosis and treatment uptake of national rollout of Xpert MTB/RIF technology (Xpert) for the diagnosis of pulmonary TB above the cost of current guidelines for the years 2011 to 2016 in South Africa.MethodsWe parameterised a population-level decision model with data from national-level TB databases (n = 199,511) and implementation studies. The model follows cohorts of TB suspects from diagnosis to treatment under current diagnostic guidelines or an algorithm that includes Xpert. Assumptions include the number of TB suspects, symptom prevalence of 5.5%, annual suspect growth rate of 10%, and 2010 public-sector salaries and drug and service delivery costs. Xpert test costs are based on data from an in-country pilot evaluation and assumptions about when global volumes allowing cartridge discounts will be reached.ResultsAt full scale, Xpert will increase the number of TB cases diagnosed per year by 30%–37% and the number of MDR-TB cases diagnosed by 69%–71%. It will diagnose 81% of patients after the first visit, compared to 46% currently. The cost of TB diagnosis per suspect will increase by 55% to USD 60–61 and the cost of diagnosis and treatment per TB case treated by 8% to USD 797–873. The incremental capital cost of the Xpert scale-up will be USD 22 million and the incremental recurrent cost USD 287–316 million over six years.ConclusionXpert will increase both the number of TB cases diagnosed and treated and the cost of TB diagnosis. These results do not include savings due to reduced transmission of TB as a result of earlier diagnosis and treatment initiation.

Katharina Kranzer and colleagues investigate the operational characteristics of an active tuberculosis case-finding service linked to a mobile HIV testing unit that operates in underserviced areas in Cape Town, South Africa.

A new SARS-CoV-2 variant of concern, Omicron (B.1.1.529), has been identified based on genomic sequencing and epidemiological data in South Africa. Presumptive Omicron cases in South Africa have grown extremely rapidly, despite high prior exposure and moderate vaccination coverage. The available evidence suggests that Omicron spread is at least in part due to evasion of this immune protection, though it may also exhibit higher intrinsic transmissibility. Using detailed laboratory and epidemiological data from South Africa, we estimate the constraints on these two characteristics of the new variant and their relationship. Our estimates and associated uncertainties provide essential information to inform projection and scenario modeling analyses, which are crucial planning tools for governments around the world.

IntroductionWhile momentum for increasing treatment thresholds is growing, if patients cannot be retained in HIV care from the time of testing positive through long-term adherence to antiretroviral therapy (ART), such strategies may fall short of expected gains. While estimates of retention on ART exist, few cohorts have data on retention from testing positive through long-term ART care.MethodsWe explored attrition (loss or death) at the Themba Lethu HIV clinic, Johannesburg, South Africa in 3 distinct cohorts enrolled at HIV testing, pre-ART initiation, and ART initiation.ResultsBetween March 2010 and August 2012 we enrolled 380 patients testing HIV+, 206 initiating pre-ART care, and 185 initiating ART. Of the 380 patients enrolled at testing HIV-positive, 38.7% (95%CI: 33.9–43.7%) returned for eligibility staging within ≤3 months of testing. Of the 206 enrolled at pre-ART care, 84.5% (95%CI: 79.0–88.9%) were ART eligible at their first CD4 count. Of those, 87.9% (95%CI: 82.4–92.2%) initiated ART within 6 months. Among patients not ART eligible at their first CD4 count, 50.0% (95%CI: 33.1–66.9%) repeated their CD4 count within one year of the first ineligible CD4. Among the 185 patients in the ART cohort, 22 transferred out and were excluded from further analysis. Of the remaining 163, 81.0% (95%CI: 74.4–86.5%) were retained in care through two years on treatment.ConclusionsOur findings from a well-resourced clinic demonstrate continual loss from all stages of HIV care and strategies to reduce attrition from all stages of care are urgently needed.

Policy discussions about the feasibility of massively scaling up antiretroviral therapy (ART) to reduce HIV transmission and incidence hinge on accurately projecting the cost of such scale-up in comparison to the benefits from reduced HIV incidence and mortality. We review the available literature on modelled estimates of the cost of providing ART to different populations around the world, and suggest alternative methods of characterising cost when modelling several decades into the future. In past economic analyses of ART provision, costs were often assumed to vary by disease stage and treatment regimen, but for treatment as prevention, in particular, most analyses assume a uniform cost per patient. This approach disregards variables that can affect unit cost, such as differences in factor prices (i.e., the prices of supplies and services) and the scale and scope of operations (i.e., the sizes and types of facilities providing ART). We discuss several of these variables, and then present a worked example of a flexible cost function used to determine the effect of scale on the cost of a proposed scale-up of treatment as prevention in South Africa. Adjusting previously estimated costs of universal testing and treatment in South Africa for diseconomies of small scale, i.e., more patients being treated in smaller facilities, adds 42% to the expected future cost of the intervention.

Although many African countries have achieved high levels of HIV diagnosis, funding constraints have necessitated greater focus on more efficient testing approaches. We compared the impact and cost-effectiveness of several potential new testing strategies in South Africa, and assessed the prospects of achieving the UNAIDS target of 95% of HIV-positive adults diagnosed by 2030. We developed a mathematical model to evaluate the potential impact of home-based testing, mobile testing, assisted partner notification, testing in schools and workplaces, and testing of female sex workers (FSWs), men who have sex with men (MSM), family planning clinic attenders and partners of pregnant women. In the absence of new testing strategies, the diagnosed fraction is expected to increase from 90.6% in 2020 to 93.8% by 2030. Home-based testing combined with self-testing would have the greatest impact, increasing the fraction diagnosed to 96.5% by 2030, and would be highly cost-effective compared to currently funded HIV interventions, with a cost per life year saved (LYS) of $394. Testing in FSWs and assisted partner notification would be cost-saving; the cost per LYS would also be low in the case of testing MSM ($20/LYS) and self-testing by partners of pregnant women ($130/LYS).

Background In economic analyses of HIV interventions, South Africa is often used as a case in point, due to the availability of good epidemiological and programme data and the global relevance of its epidemic. Few analyses however use locally relevant cost data. We reviewed available cost data as part of the South African HIV Investment Case, a modelling exercise to inform the optimal use of financial resources for the country’s HIV programme. Methods We systematically reviewed publication databases for published cost data covering a large range of HIV interventions and summarised relevant unit costs (cost per person receiving a service) for each. Where no data was found in the literature, we constructed unit costs either based on available information regarding ingredients and relevant public-sector prices, or based on expenditure records. Results Only 42 (5%) of 1,047 records included in our full-text review reported primary cost data on HIV interventions in South Africa, with 71% of included papers covering ART. Other papers detailed the costs of HCT, MMC, palliative and inpatient care; no papers were found on the costs of PrEP, social and behaviour change communication, and PMTCT. The results informed unit costs for 5 of 11 intervention categories included in the Investment Case, with the remainder costed based on ingredients (35%) and expenditure data (10%). Conclusions A large number of modelled economic analyses of HIV interventions in South Africa use as inputs the same, often outdated, cost analyses, without reference to additional literature review. More primary cost analyses of non-ART interventions are needed.