Dataset Information

The potential global cost-effectiveness of prospective Strep A vaccines and associated implementation efforts.

ABSTRACT: Group A Streptococcus causes a wide range of diseases from relatively mild infections including pharyngitis to more severe illnesses such as invasive diseases and rheumatic heart disease (RHD). Our aim is to estimate the cost-effectiveness of a hypothetical Strep A vaccine on multiple disease manifestations at the global-level. Cost-effectiveness analyses were carried out by building on the potential epidemiological impact of vaccines that align with the WHO's Preferred Product Characteristics for Strep A vaccines. Maximum vaccination costs for a cost-effective vaccination strategy were estimated at the thresholds of 1XGDP per capita and health opportunity costs. The maximum cost per fully vaccinated person for Strep A vaccination to be cost-effective was $385-$489 in high-income countries, $213-$312 in upper-income-income countries, $74-$132 in lower-middle-income countries, and $37-$69 in low-income countries for routine vaccination at birth and 5 years of age respectively. While the threshold costs are sensitive to vaccine characteristics such as efficacy, and waning immunity, a cost-effective Strep A vaccine will lower morbidity and mortality burden in all income settings.

SUBMITTER: Lee JS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10457324 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The potential global cost-effectiveness of prospective Strep A vaccines and associated implementation efforts.

Lee Jung-Seok JS Mogasale Vittal V Kim Sol S Cannon Jeffrey J Giannini Fiona F Abbas Kaja K Excler Jean-Louis JL Kim Jerome H JH

NPJ vaccines 20230825 1

Group A Streptococcus causes a wide range of diseases from relatively mild infections including pharyngitis to more severe illnesses such as invasive diseases and rheumatic heart disease (RHD). Our aim is to estimate the cost-effectiveness of a hypothetical Strep A vaccine on multiple disease manifestations at the global-level. Cost-effectiveness analyses were carried out by building on the potential epidemiological impact of vaccines that align with the WHO's Preferred Product Characteristics f ...[more]

PMID: 37626118

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundA wide range of possible malaria vaccines is being considered and there is a need to identify which vaccines should be prioritized for clinical development. An important element of the information needed for this prioritization is a prediction of the cost-effectiveness of potential vaccines in the transmission settings in which they are likely to be deployed. This analysis needs to consider a range of delivery modalities to ensure that clinical development plans can be aligned with the most appropriate deployment strategies.MethodsThe simulations are based on a previously published individual-based stochastic model for the natural history and epidemiology of Plasmodium falciparum malaria. Three different vaccine types: pre-erythrocytic vaccines (PEV), blood stage vaccines (BSV), mosquito-stage transmission-blocking vaccines (MSTBV), and combinations of these, are considered each delivered via a range of delivery modalities (Expanded Programme of Immunization - EPI-, EPI with booster, and mass vaccination combined with EPI). The cost-effectiveness ratios presented are calculated for four health outcomes, for assumed vaccine prices of US$ 2 or US$ 10 per dose, projected over a 10-year period.ResultsThe simulations suggest that PEV will be more cost-effective in low transmission settings, while BSV at higher transmission settings. Combinations of BSV and PEV are more efficient than PEV, especially in moderate to high transmission settings, while compared to BSV they are more cost-effective in moderate to low transmission settings. Combinations of MSTBV and PEV or PEV and BSV improve the effectiveness and the cost-effectiveness compared to PEV and BSV alone only when applied with EPI and mass vaccinations. Adding booster doses to the EPI is unlikely to be a cost-effective alternative to delivering vaccines via the EPI for any vaccine, while mass vaccination improves effectiveness, especially in low transmission settings, and is often a more efficient alternative to the EPI. However, the costs of increasing the coverage of mass vaccination over 50% often exceed the benefits.ConclusionThe simulations indicate malaria vaccines might be efficient malaria control interventions, and that both transmission setting and vaccine delivery modality are important to their cost-effectiveness. Alternative vaccine delivery modalities to the EPI may be more efficient than the EPI. Mass vaccination is predicted to provide substantial health benefits at low additional costs, although achieving high coverage rates can lead to substantial incremental costs.

Project description:IntroductionPromising HIV vaccine candidates are steadily progressing through the clinical trial pipeline. Once available, HIV vaccines will be an important complement but also potential competitor to other biomedical prevention tools such as pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP). Accordingly, the value of HIV vaccines and the policies for rollout may depend on that interplay and tradeoffs with utilization of existing products. In this economic modelling analysis, we estimate the cost-effectiveness of HIV vaccines considering their potential interaction with PrEP and condom use.MethodsWe developed a dynamic model of HIV transmission among the men who have sex with men population (MSM), aged 15-64 years, in Seattle, WA offered PrEP and HIV vaccine over a time horizon of 2025-2045. A healthcare sector perspective with annual discount rate of 3% for costs (2017 USD) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) was used. The primary economic endpoint is the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) when compared to no HIV vaccine availability.ResultsHIV vaccines improved population health and increased healthcare costs. Vaccination campaigns achieving 90% coverage of high-risk men and 60% coverage of other men within five years of introduction are projected to avoid 40% of new HIV infections between 2025 and 2045. This increased total healthcare costs by $30 million, with some PrEP costs shifted to HIV vaccine spending. HIV vaccines are estimated to have an ICER of $42,473/QALY, considered cost-effective using a threshold of $150,000/QALY. Results were most sensitive to HIV vaccine efficacy and future changes in the cost of PrEP drugs. Sensitivity analysis found ranges of 30-70% HIV vaccine efficacy remained cost-effective. Results were also sensitive to reductions in condom use among PrEP and vaccine users.ConclusionsAccess to an HIV vaccine is desirable as it could increase the overall effectiveness of combination HIV prevention efforts and improve population health. Planning for the rollout and scale-up of HIV vaccines should carefully consider the design of policies that guide interactions between vaccine and PrEP utilization and potential competition.

Dataset Information

The potential global cost-effectiveness of prospective Strep A vaccines and associated implementation efforts.

Publications

The potential global cost-effectiveness of prospective Strep A vaccines and associated implementation efforts.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets