Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2021 Jul 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Biomed Inform. 2020 Jun 8;107:103475. doi: 10.1016/j.jbi.2020.103475

Table 3.

Key inputs parameters used to validate the CEPAC model with the community benefit incorporated against the HOPE model.

Value
Parameter MSM PWID Source
Number of PrEP-eligible individuals in 2016 2,206,379 386,209 [5, 36-38]
HIV prevalence, % 11.0 15.0 [39, 40]
HIV incidence, rate /100 PYs 0.6 0.9 Derived from [5]
PrEP efficacy, % (range) 73.0 (44.0-92.0) 49.0 (9.6-70.0) [5, 17, 18]
PrEP uptake, % (range) 40.0 (20.0-60.0) 10.0 (5.0-15.0) [5]
Linkage to care, % 73.4 [41]
Weighted average transmission rate within the primary cohort (rate/100 PYs) 3.3 7.1 Derived from incidence and prevalence
Transmission risk ratio by HIV RNA level (copies/mL) [4]
  >100,000 4.4
  10,001-100,000 3.9
  3,001-10,000 2.0
  501-3,000 1.0 (reference)
  ≤500 0.1
Transmission risk ratio while in acute phase (vs. chronic) 5.3 [42]
Viral suppression on first-line ART (DTG) at 48 weeks, % 87.0 [14, 43]

CEPAC: Cost-Effectiveness of Preventing AIDS Complications model; HOPE: HIV Optimization and Prevention Economics model; DTG: dolutegravir; HIV: human immunodeficiency virus; mL: milliliter; MSM: men who have sex with men; PrEP: pre-exposure prophylaxis; PWID: people who inject drugs; PY: person-year.