Article Text

Download PDFPDF

2SPD-004 Budgetary impact of the introduction of cabotegravir plus rilpivirine long-acting in a third-level hospital
  1. R Asensi Diez,
  2. A Linares Alarcon,
  3. C Fernández Cuerva
  1. Hospital Regional Universitario de Málaga, Pharmacy, Málaga, Spain


Background and Importance To analyse the potential budgetary impact of the introduction of cabotegravir (CAB) plus rilpivirine (RPV) long-acting in a third-level hospital.

Aim and Objectives To analyse the possible budgetary impact on our cohort of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) patients.

Material and Methods Inclusion criteria: All active HIV-positive (HIV+) patients ≥18 years old ( with adherence ≥95% and undetectable viral load (<50 copies/mL) in the last 6 months) and with prescription and dispensing of combination oral antiretroviral therapy (ARTs) in our hospital. Study period: January to December 2022. Exclusion criteria: history of previous failure to non-nucleoside analogues or intolerance; HIV subtype A1-A6; body mass index (BMI) ≥30.

Variables collected Number of patients who meet the inclusion criteria, cost of active ARTs in 2022 and CAB 600 mg IM+RPV 900 mg IM long-acting (and CAB and RPV (oral lead-in)). Only direct pharmacological costs have been taken into account.

A Scenario 1 (CAB+RPV long-acting is not used) vs Scenario 2 (with the introduction of CAB+RPV long-acting throughout the year 2023).

Results Of the total of 2,065 HIV+ active patients in our hospital 1,882 patients have been included. 91% of the most prescribed ARTs: BIC/TAF/FTC in 32.74% (n=676); DTG/3TC in 32.15% (n=664); TAF/FTC/RVP in 8.09% (n=167); DRV/c/FTC in 7.94% (n=164); DTG/ABC/3TC in 5.33% (n=110) and DTG/RVP in 4.89% (n=101). 14% (n=268/1,882) already have RPV in their oral ARTs and would not have to do oral lead-in with CABO+RPV the previous month. Only 90% (n=1,694) met all the inclusion criteria. It has been estimated that only 10% of patients would change oral ARTs for long-acting therapy (n=169).

The cost of scenario 1 for the 169 patients would be €1,808,525.11/year. In scenario 2, 87% of the patients (n=147/169) would switch to long-acting ART after oral lead-in with CAB+RPV the previous month at a cost of €1,659,737.31/year; and 13% (N=22/169) would go directly to ART long-acting with a cost of €265,228.04/year. The overall value of scenario 2 would be €1,924,965.35/year. The difference in costs would be +€116,440.24/year.

Conclusion and Relevance Without taking into account other types of costs, the introduction of CAB+RPV long-acting in a third-level hospital would imply a higher cost vs using oral ARTs.

Conflict of Interest No conflict of interest.

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.