IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/aphecp/v9y2011i4p217-223.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cost-efficacy analysis of the MONET trial using UK antiretroviral drug prices

Author

Listed:
  • Brian Gazzard
  • Andrew Hill
  • Anne Anceau

Abstract

Based on the MONET results, the lower cost of DRV/r monotherapy versus triple therapy in the UK would allow more patients to be treated for fixed budgets, while maintaining HIV RNA suppression at >50 copies/mL. If all patients meeting the inclusion criteria of the MONET trial in the UK were switched to DRV/r monotherapy, there is the potential to save up to £60 million in antiretroviral drug costs from the UK NHS budget. Copyright Adis Data Information BV 2011

Suggested Citation

  • Brian Gazzard & Andrew Hill & Anne Anceau, 2011. "Cost-efficacy analysis of the MONET trial using UK antiretroviral drug prices," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 9(4), pages 217-223, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:9:y:2011:i:4:p:217-223
    DOI: 10.2165/11592220-000000000-00000
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.2165/11592220-000000000-00000
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2165/11592220-000000000-00000?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Juan Pasquau & Joana Gostkorzewicz & Francisco Ledesma & Anne Anceau & Andrew Hill & Christiane Moecklinghoff, 2012. "Budget impact analysis of switching to darunavir/ritonavir monotherapy for HIV-infected people in Spain," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 139-141, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:9:y:2011:i:4:p:217-223. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.