在三个非洲国家,莫努匹拉韦和Paxlovid用于COVID-19门诊治疗的成本效益分析

IF 0.6 Q4 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Journal of Public Health in Africa Pub Date : 2025-06-09 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.4102/jphia.v16i1.805
Ijeoma P Edoka, Tom Drake, Peter Baker, Raji Tajudeen, Elias Asfaw, Javier Guzman, Nicaise Ndembi, Justice Nonvignon, Jean Kaseya
{"title":"在三个非洲国家,莫努匹拉韦和Paxlovid用于COVID-19门诊治疗的成本效益分析","authors":"Ijeoma P Edoka, Tom Drake, Peter Baker, Raji Tajudeen, Elias Asfaw, Javier Guzman, Nicaise Ndembi, Justice Nonvignon, Jean Kaseya","doi":"10.4102/jphia.v16i1.805","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Two COVID-19 oral antivirals (COAVs), Molnupiravir and Paxlovid, have been shown to be cost-effective in high-income countries.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>This study assesses the cost-effectiveness of Paxlovid and Molnupiravir, compared to usual care in three African countries.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>The study was conducted using data from Ghana, Rwanda and Zambia.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We modelled costs (2022 United States dollars) and health outcomes in the acute phase of COVID-19 from a public payer's perspective in three unvaccinated target populations: (1) all adult patients, (2) patients aged 65 years and above (elderly), and (3) adult patients with other underlying risk factors for disease severity. We conducted pairwise and full incremental analyses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the pairwise analysis, Paxlovid was less costly and more effective than usual care (i.e. dominated) in all three study countries for elderly patients, while in adults with other underlying risk factors, Paxlovid dominated in Rwanda and Zambia, and Molnupiravir dominated usual care in Rwanda. Neither Paxlovid nor Molnupiravir were cost-effective in the all-adult group in any country context. In the full incremental analysis, Paxlovid dominated both Molnupiravir and usual care in elderly patients (in all three countries) and in adults with other risk factors (in Rwanda and Zambia). Key determinants of cost-effectiveness were COAV price, likelihood of early treatment initiation, hospitalisation rates and vaccination status.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In African settings like Zambia, Ghana or Rwanda, Paxlovid could be cost-effective in unvaccinated populations and those at high risk of progression to severe COVID-19.</p><p><strong>Contribution: </strong>This study broadly supports African governments decisions not to procure substantial quantities of COAV.</p>","PeriodicalId":44723,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Health in Africa","volume":"16 1","pages":"805"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12224064/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A cost-effectiveness analysis of Molnupiravir and Paxlovid for outpatient treatment of COVID-19 in three African countries.\",\"authors\":\"Ijeoma P Edoka, Tom Drake, Peter Baker, Raji Tajudeen, Elias Asfaw, Javier Guzman, Nicaise Ndembi, Justice Nonvignon, Jean Kaseya\",\"doi\":\"10.4102/jphia.v16i1.805\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Two COVID-19 oral antivirals (COAVs), Molnupiravir and Paxlovid, have been shown to be cost-effective in high-income countries.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>This study assesses the cost-effectiveness of Paxlovid and Molnupiravir, compared to usual care in three African countries.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>The study was conducted using data from Ghana, Rwanda and Zambia.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We modelled costs (2022 United States dollars) and health outcomes in the acute phase of COVID-19 from a public payer's perspective in three unvaccinated target populations: (1) all adult patients, (2) patients aged 65 years and above (elderly), and (3) adult patients with other underlying risk factors for disease severity. We conducted pairwise and full incremental analyses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the pairwise analysis, Paxlovid was less costly and more effective than usual care (i.e. dominated) in all three study countries for elderly patients, while in adults with other underlying risk factors, Paxlovid dominated in Rwanda and Zambia, and Molnupiravir dominated usual care in Rwanda. Neither Paxlovid nor Molnupiravir were cost-effective in the all-adult group in any country context. In the full incremental analysis, Paxlovid dominated both Molnupiravir and usual care in elderly patients (in all three countries) and in adults with other risk factors (in Rwanda and Zambia). Key determinants of cost-effectiveness were COAV price, likelihood of early treatment initiation, hospitalisation rates and vaccination status.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In African settings like Zambia, Ghana or Rwanda, Paxlovid could be cost-effective in unvaccinated populations and those at high risk of progression to severe COVID-19.</p><p><strong>Contribution: </strong>This study broadly supports African governments decisions not to procure substantial quantities of COAV.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":44723,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Public Health in Africa\",\"volume\":\"16 1\",\"pages\":\"805\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12224064/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Public Health in Africa\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4102/jphia.v16i1.805\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Public Health in Africa","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4102/jphia.v16i1.805","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:在高收入国家,已证明两种COVID-19口服抗病毒药物Molnupiravir和Paxlovid具有成本效益。目的:本研究评估了三个非洲国家的Paxlovid和Molnupiravir与常规治疗相比的成本效益。环境:研究使用了来自加纳、卢旺达和赞比亚的数据。方法:我们从公共付款人的角度对三个未接种疫苗的目标人群进行了COVID-19急性期的成本(2022美元)和健康结局建模:(1)所有成年患者,(2)65岁及以上(老年人)患者,以及(3)具有其他潜在疾病严重程度危险因素的成年患者。我们进行了两两和全增量分析。结果:在两两分析中,Paxlovid在所有三个研究国家的老年患者中比常规护理更便宜,更有效(即占主导地位),而在具有其他潜在危险因素的成年人中,Paxlovid在卢旺达和赞比亚占主导地位,而在卢旺达占主导地位。Paxlovid和Molnupiravir在任何国家的全成人组中都没有成本效益。在全增量分析中,Paxlovid在老年患者(在所有三个国家)和具有其他危险因素的成年人(在卢旺达和赞比亚)中占主导地位。成本效益的关键决定因素是COAV价格、早期开始治疗的可能性、住院率和疫苗接种状况。结论:在赞比亚、加纳或卢旺达等非洲国家,Paxlovid对于未接种疫苗的人群和进展为严重COVID-19的高风险人群可能具有成本效益。贡献:这项研究广泛支持非洲政府不采购大量COAV的决定。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A cost-effectiveness analysis of Molnupiravir and Paxlovid for outpatient treatment of COVID-19 in three African countries.

Background: Two COVID-19 oral antivirals (COAVs), Molnupiravir and Paxlovid, have been shown to be cost-effective in high-income countries.

Aim: This study assesses the cost-effectiveness of Paxlovid and Molnupiravir, compared to usual care in three African countries.

Setting: The study was conducted using data from Ghana, Rwanda and Zambia.

Methods: We modelled costs (2022 United States dollars) and health outcomes in the acute phase of COVID-19 from a public payer's perspective in three unvaccinated target populations: (1) all adult patients, (2) patients aged 65 years and above (elderly), and (3) adult patients with other underlying risk factors for disease severity. We conducted pairwise and full incremental analyses.

Results: In the pairwise analysis, Paxlovid was less costly and more effective than usual care (i.e. dominated) in all three study countries for elderly patients, while in adults with other underlying risk factors, Paxlovid dominated in Rwanda and Zambia, and Molnupiravir dominated usual care in Rwanda. Neither Paxlovid nor Molnupiravir were cost-effective in the all-adult group in any country context. In the full incremental analysis, Paxlovid dominated both Molnupiravir and usual care in elderly patients (in all three countries) and in adults with other risk factors (in Rwanda and Zambia). Key determinants of cost-effectiveness were COAV price, likelihood of early treatment initiation, hospitalisation rates and vaccination status.

Conclusion: In African settings like Zambia, Ghana or Rwanda, Paxlovid could be cost-effective in unvaccinated populations and those at high risk of progression to severe COVID-19.

Contribution: This study broadly supports African governments decisions not to procure substantial quantities of COAV.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Public Health in Africa
Journal of Public Health in Africa PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
82
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Public Health in Africa (JPHiA) is a peer-reviewed, academic journal that focuses on health issues in the African continent. The journal editors seek high quality original articles on public health related issues, reviews, comments and more. The aim of the journal is to move public health discourse from the background to the forefront. The success of Africa’s struggle against disease depends on public health approaches.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信