Financial Impact of a Long-Acting Injectable Cabotegravir/Rilpivirine Program: A Real-World Experience

Clicks: 44
ID: 326985
2026
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #200 of 635 articles by views in Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 635 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Long-acting injectable (LAI) cabotegravir/rilpivirine (CAB/RPV) is an effective HIV treatment, but barriers, such as financial considerations limit implementation. Understanding the real-world financial impact is essential for program sustainability and equitable access. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study at the University of Nebraska Medical Center, Specialty Care Center (May 2022 to December 2024) evaluated people with HIV (PWH) receiving LAI CAB/RPV via buy-and-bill acquisition. We assessed annual staff time, program income (PI), and patient costs (PC). The primary endpoint was annual PI adjusted for staff time per patient compared to a modeled oral antiretroviral therapy (ART) comparator (bictegravir/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide) using Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test. PI and PC were compared across study years and payer mix with Kruskal-Wallis test. Multivariate regression models explored factors predicting PI losses. RESULTS: The study included 110 PWH receiving 862 injections. LAI CAB/RPV required more annual staff time per participant than oral ART (7.4 hours vs. 3.7 hours). Median annual PI per participant hour managed was significantly lower for LAI CAB/RPV versus oral ART model across all study years (p<0.001). Despite this, the LAI program remained financially viable (median PI of $2,163/injection) with minimal PC; 91% of injections had $0 cost-sharing. PI losses occurred in 4.9% of injections and was associated with Medicaid coverage, lack of AIDS Drug Assistance Program (ADAP) coverage, and insurance changes. CONCLUSIONS: Although LAI CAB/RPV requires double the staff time and generates less time-adjusted PI than oral ART, buy-and-bill LAI programs can remain financially viable. Payer mix and insurance stability are essential to ensuring sustainability and equitable access.
Reference Key
openalex_W7204786790 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Joshua P Havens, Jennifer O'Neill, Maureen Kubat, Jennifer M Davis, Nada Fadul, Shawnalyn Sunagawa, Sara H Bares
Are you one of these authors? Claim your profile
Journal Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/cid/ciag537
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciag537
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.