↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

New strategies for lowering the costs of antiretroviral treatment and care for people with HIV/AIDS in the United Kingdom

Overview of attention for article published in ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR, July 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
21 Mendeley
Title
New strategies for lowering the costs of antiretroviral treatment and care for people with HIV/AIDS in the United Kingdom
Published in
ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR, July 2012
DOI 10.2147/ceor.s12496
Pubmed ID
Authors

Brian Gazzard, Christiane Moecklinghoff, Andrew Hill

Abstract

In the UK, the annual cost of treatment and care for people with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)/acquired immune deficiency virus (AIDS) rose by over 600% from £104 million in 1997 to £762 million in 2010; approximately two-thirds of the £762 million cost of treatment and care in 2010 was for the procurement of antiretrovirals and other related drugs. The number of people accessing care for HIV/AIDS rose from 22,000 in 2000 to 65,000 in 2009. Adoption of "test and treat" guidelines for treating all HIV-infected people with antiretrovirals would further increase the burden of costs. Given the current economic situation, there is now a new focus on strategies for treatment and care of people with HIV-1 infection which can maintain efficacy but at a lower cost. In this review, we propose three strategies which could potentially lower the costs of treatment and care, ie, stopping testing CD4 counts for patients with full HIV RNA suppression on antiretroviral treatment and recent CD4 counts above 350 cells/μL; more widespread use of generic antiretrovirals as replacements for patients currently taking patented versions; and use of darunavir-ritonavir monotherapy as a switch option for patients with full HIV RNA suppression on other antiretrovirals and no history of virological failure. However, it is important that high standards of clinical care are maintained despite cost-saving measures. Antiretrovirals with generic alternatives may have toxicity issues, eg, zidovudine and nevirapine. There could be ethical issues in starting patients on these drugs if they are currently tolerating other treatments. The use of darunavir-ritonavir monotherapy is not consistently recommended in international HIV treatment guidelines.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 5%
Unknown 20 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 19%
Other 3 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 14%
Student > Bachelor 3 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 10%
Other 3 14%
Unknown 3 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 33%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 19%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 14%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 10%
Psychology 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 3 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 September 2012.
All research outputs
#20,294,544
of 25,806,080 outputs
Outputs from ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR
#394
of 527 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#134,545
of 177,511 outputs
Outputs of similar age from ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR
#4
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,806,080 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 527 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.0. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 177,511 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.