The cost of antiretroviral therapy can be considered with regard to both lost productivity and the expense that would be incurred to provide more intensive medical care if disease progression is not slowed or prevented with timely treatment.

Strictly speaking, cost-effectiveness is the amount it costs to prolong a person’s life by one year in terms of drugs and other medical expenses. Cost-effectiveness does not take into account quality of life. The quality adjusted life year (QALY) is the measure used to define cost utility. It is an estimate of the value individuals would place on having their health maintained in a particular state by a medical intervention.

Cost-benefit analysis measures and compares all the costs and all the benefits of a particular intervention. Costs include lost wages and the price of social services and disability benefits that must be paid, as well as direct medical costs. It also places financial value on different levels of quality of life, taking into account factors such as chronic pain or serious side-effects. Clinicians, patient advocates, funders and taxpayers all want to know whether the large sums of money allocated to anti-HIV treatment are worthwhile, albeit for different reasons.