Abstract
Background South Africa recently experienced a first peak in COVID-19 cases and mortality. Dexamethasone and remdesivir both have the potential to reduce COVID-related mortality, but their cost-effectiveness in a resource-limited setting with scant intensive care resources is unknown.
Methods We projected intensive care unit (ICU) needs and capacity from August 2020 to January 2021 using the South African National COVID-19 Epi Model. We assessed cost-effectiveness of 1) administration of dexamethasone to ventilated patients and remdesivir to non-ventilated patients, 2) dexamethasone alone to both non-ventilated and ventilated patients, 3) remdesivir to non-ventilated patients only, and 4) dexamethasone to ventilated patients only; all relative to a scenario of standard care. We estimated costs from the healthcare system perspective in 2020 USD, deaths averted, and the incremental cost effectiveness ratios of each scenario.
Results Remdesivir for non-ventilated patients and dexamethasone for ventilated patients was estimated to result in 1,111 deaths averted (assuming a 0-30% efficacy of remdesivir) compared to standard care, and save $11.5 million. The result was driven by the efficacy of the drugs, and the reduction of ICU-time required for patients treated with remdesivir. The scenario of dexamethasone alone to ventilated and non-ventilated patients requires additional $159,000 and averts 1,146 deaths, resulting in $139 per death averted, relative to standard care.
Conclusions The use of dexamethasone for ventilated and remdesivir for non-ventilated patients is likely to be cost-saving compared to standard care. Given the economic and health benefits of both drugs, efforts to ensure access to these medications is paramount.
40-word summary of article’s main point The use of remdesivir and dexamethasone for treatment of severe COVID-19 in South Africa is likely to be cost-saving relative to standard care. Enabling access to these medications should be prioritize to improve patient outcomes and reduce total costs.
Competing Interest Statement
B.N., I.S. and L.L. report grants from USAID during the conduct of the study. S.S. reports grants from Wellcome Trust during the conduct of the study. L.L. reports grants from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation during the conduct of the study. Other authors have nothing to disclose.
Funding Statement
This work was supported by the United States Agency for International Development [72067419CA00004]. Youngji Jo is supported by the Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Award, National Institutes of Health T32 Training Grant (grant number: T32 AI052074-14). Lawrence Long was supported by National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) of the National Institutes of Health under grant number [1K01MH119923-01A1]. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. The views of authors expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID, the US Government or the National Institutes of Health.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Neither ethical approval nor informed consent was required for this analysis which did not involve human subjects research.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Data consisted of model output and parameters from existing literature. Data available upon request from corresponding author.
