Table 4.

 Sensitivity analyses for key inputs and modelling assumptions for cost effectiveness analysis, antiretroviral monitoring study, Tororo and Busia Districts, Uganda, 2003-7

Input or assumption	Values/methods used			Most/least favourable ICER ($/DALY averted)
	Base case	Most/least favourable*		Clinical/CD4 (v clinical)	Clinical/CD4/viral load (v clinical/CD4)
Deaths per 100 person years (intention to treat):
Clinical/CD4/viral load, 95% CI†, other arms kept at base case	3.7	2.22/6.11		174/174	1550/dominated‡
Clinical/CD4, 95% CI†, other arms kept at base case	4.1	2.55/6.48		368/1792§	Dominated‡/1263
Clinical, 95% CI†, other arms kept at base case	5.8	9.10/3.70		454/2832§	5181/5181
Deaths per 100 person years (per protocol):
Viral load arm, CD4 arm, clinical arm	Intention to treat (above)	NA/2.2, 2.0, 3.5		NA/88	NA/dominated‡
Annual rate of regimen change:
Viral load arm, CD4 arm, clinical arm	0.7%, 0.4%, 1.8%	50-150% of base case values		401/dominant‡	4882/5466
Future DALYs averted and costs added per death:
Inclusion or exclusion of projections beyond trial	Included	NA/excluded		NA/307	NA/10 257
Unit costs of monitoring test kits:
CD4	3.80	1.90/5.70		233/115	5187/5175
Viral load	27.20	13.60/54.40		176/173	3322/7040
Costs of antiretroviral drugs (annual; per person):
First line regimen	125	63/188		73/275	5169/5193
Second line regimen	1119	557/1679		451/dominant‡	4825/5538
Costs of opportunistic infection treatment:
Observed (base case) v imputed from rates of opportunistic infection	122, 123, 127	97, 123, 194/NA		1.06/NA	4906/NA

NA=not applicable.

*For cost effectiveness of laboratory testing.

†95% CI from clinical trial.¹¹

‡Dominated=higher cost and fewer DALYs than comparator; dominant=cheaper and better.

§ICER for high end of mortality range represents reverse comparison among arms.