Introduction: There are positive aspects regarding the prescribing of fixed dose combinations (FDCs) versus prescribing the medicines separately. However, these have to be balanced against concerns including increased costs and their irrationality in some cases. Consequently, there is a need to review their value among lower-and middle-income countries (LMICs) which have the greatest prevalence of both infectious and noninfectious diseases and issues of affordability. Areas covered: Review of potential advantages, disadvantages, cost-effectiveness, and availability of FDCs in high priority disease areas in LMICs and possible initiatives to enhance the prescribing of valued FDCs and limit their use where there are concerns with their value. Expert commentary: FDCs are valued across LMICs. Advantages include potentially improved response rates, reduced adverse reactions, increased adherence rates, and reduced costs. Concerns include increased chances of drug:drug interactions, reduced effectiveness, potential for imprecise diagnoses and higher unjustified prices. Overall certain FDCs including those for malaria, tuberculosis, and hypertension are valued and listed in the country's essential medicine lists, with initiatives needed to enhance their prescribing where currently low prescribing rates. Proposed initiatives include robust clinical and economic data to address the current paucity of pharmacoeconomic data. Irrational FDCs persists in some countries which are being addressed.

Background: Diabetes mellitus rates continue to rise, which coupled with increasing costs of associated complications has appreciably increased global expenditure in recent years. The risk of complications are enhanced by poor glycaemic control including hypoglycaemia. Long-acting insulin analogues were developed to reduce hypoglycaemia and improve adherence. Their considerably higher costs though have impacted their funding and use. Biosimilars can help reduce medicine costs. However, their introduction has been affected by a number of factors. These include the originator company dropping its price as well as promoting patented higher strength 300 IU/ml insulin glargine. There can also be concerns with different devices between the manufacturers.Objective: To assess current utilisation rates for insulins, especially long-acting insulin analogues, and the rationale for patterns seen, across multiple countries to inform strategies to enhance future utilisation of long-acting insulin analogue biosimilars to benefit all key stakeholders.Our approach: Multiple approaches including assessing the utilisation, expenditure and prices of insulins, including biosimilar insulin glargine, across multiple continents and countries.Results: There was considerable variation in the use of long-acting insulin analogues as a percentage of all insulins prescribed and dispensed across countries and continents. This ranged from limited use of long-acting insulin analogues among African countries compared to routine funding and use across Europe in view of their perceived benefits. Increasing use was also seen among Asian countries including Bangladesh and India for similar reasons. However, concerns with costs and value limited their use across Africa, Brazil and Pakistan. There was though limited use of biosimilar insulin glargine 100 IU/ml compared with other recent biosimilars especially among European countries and Korea. This was principally driven by small price differences in reality between the originator and biosimilars coupled with increasing use of the patented 300 IU/ml formulation. A number of activities were identified to enhance future biosimilar use. These included only reimbursing biosimilar long-acting insulin analogues, introducing prescribing targets and increasing competition among manufacturers including stimulating local production.Conclusions: There are concerns with the availability and use of insulin glargine biosimilars despite lower costs. This can be addressed by multiple activities.

No abstract

Background Cryptococcal meningitis in HIV-infected patients in sub-Saharan Africa accounts for three-quarters of the global cases and 135,000 deaths per annum. Current treatment includes the use of fluconazole and amphotericin B. Recent evidence has shown that the synergistic use of flucytosine improves efficacy and reduces toxicity, however affordability and availability has hampered access to flucytosine in many countries. This study investigated the evidence and cost implications of introducing flucytosine as induction therapy for cryptococcal meningitis in HIV-infected adults in South Africa. Methods A decision analytic cost-effectiveness and cost impact model was developed based on survival estimates from the ACTA trial and local costs for flucytosine as induction therapy in HIV-infected adults with cryptococcal meningitis in a public sector setting in South Africa. The model considered five treatment arms: (a) standard of care; 2-week course amphotericin B/fluconazole (2wk AmBd/Flu), (b) 2-week course amphotericin B/flucytosine (2wk AmBd/5FC), (c) short course; 1-week course amphotericin B/flucytosine (1wk AmBd/5FC) (d) oral course; 2-week oral fluconazole/flucytosine (oral) and e) 1-week course amphotericin B/fluconazole (1wk AmBd/Flu). A sensitivity analysis was conducted on key variables. Results The highest total treatment costs are in the 2-week AmBd/5FC arm followed by the 2-week oral regimen, the 1-week AmBd/5FC, then standard of care with the lowest cost in the 1-week AmBd/Flu arm. Compared to the lowest cost option the 1-week flucytosine course is most cost-effective at USD119/QALY. The cost impact analysis shows that the 1-week flucytosine course has an incremental cost of just over USD293 per patient per year compared to what is currently spent on standard of care. Sensitivity analyses suggest that the model is most sensitive to life expectancy and hospital costs, particularly infusion costs and length of stay. Conclusions The addition of flucytosine as induction therapy for the treatment of cryptococcal meningitis in patients infected with HIV is cost-effective when it is used as a 1-week AmBd/5FC regimen. Savings could be achieved with early discharge of patients as well as a reduction in the price of flucytosine.

South Africa has embarked on major health policy reform to deliver universal health coverage through the establishment of National Health Insurance (NHI). The aim is to improve access, remove financial barriers to care, and enhance care quality. Health technology assessment (HTA) is explicitly identified in the proposed NHI legislation and will have a prominent role in informing decisions about adoption and access to health interventions and technologies. The specific arrangements and approach to HTA in support of this legislation are yet to be determined. Although there is currently no formal national HTA institution in South Africa, there are several processes in both the public and private healthcare sectors that use elements of HTA to varying extents to inform access and resource allocation decisions. Institutions performing HTAs or related activities in South Africa include the National and Provincial Departments of Health, National Treasury, National Health Laboratory Service, Council for Medical Schemes, medical scheme administrators, managed care organizations, academic or research institutions, clinical societies and associations, pharmaceutical and devices companies, private consultancies, and private sector hospital groups. Existing fragmented HTA processes should coordinate and conform to a standardized, fit-for-purpose process and structure that can usefully inform priority setting under NHI and for other decision makers. This transformation will require comprehensive and inclusive planning with dedicated funding and regulation, and provision of strong oversight mechanisms and leadership.