Dataset Information

How to Get Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Right? The Case of Vaccine Economics in Latin America.

ABSTRACT:

Background

In middle-income countries, vaccines against pneumococcal disease, rotavirus, and human papilloma virus are in general more costly, not necessarily cost saving, and less consistently cost-effective than earlier generation vaccines against measles, diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis. Budget impact is also substantial; public spending on vaccines in countries adopting new vaccines is, on average, double the amount of countries that have not adopted. Policymakers must weigh the costs and benefits of the adoption decision carefully, given the low coverage of other kinds of cost-effective health and nonhealth interventions in these same settings and relatively flat overall public spending on health as a share of gross domestic product (GDP) over time.

Objective

This paper considers lessons learned from recent vaccine cost-effectiveness analyses and subsequent adoption decisions in Latin America a, largely under the auspices of the Pro Vac Initiative.

Results

The paper illustrates how small methodological choices and seemingly minor technical limitations of cost-effectiveness models can have major implications for the studies' conclusions, potentially influencing countries' subsequent vaccine adoption decisions.

Methods

We evaluate the ProVac models and technical outputs against the standards and framework set out by the International Decision Support Initiative Reference Case for economic evaluation and consider the practical effects of deviations from those standards.

Conclusions

Lessons learned are discussed, including issues of appropriate comparators, GDP-based thresholds, and use of average versus incremental cost-effectiveness ratios as a convention are assessed. The article ends with recommendations for the future.

SUBMITTER: Glassman A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5193155 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

How to Get Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Right? The Case of Vaccine Economics in Latin America.

Glassman Amanda A Cañón Oscar O Silverman Rachel R

Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research 20161201 8

<h4>Background</h4>In middle-income countries, vaccines against pneumococcal disease, rotavirus, and human papilloma virus are in general more costly, not necessarily cost saving, and less consistently cost-effective than earlier generation vaccines against measles, diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis. Budget impact is also substantial; public spending on vaccines in countries adopting new vaccines is, on average, double the amount of countries that have not adopted. Policymakers must weigh the c ...[more]

PMID: 27987640

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDespite widespread utilization of influenza vaccines, effectiveness (VE) has not been routinely measured in Latin America.MethodsWe used a case test-negative control design to estimate trivalent inactivated influenza VE against laboratory-confirmed influenza among hospitalized children aged 6months-5years and adults aged ≥60years which are age-groups targeted for vaccination. We sought persons with severe acute respiratory infections (SARI), hospitalized at 71 sentinel hospitals in Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Honduras, Panama, and Paraguay during January-December 2013. Cases had an influenza virus infection confirmed by real-time reverse transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); controls had a negative rRT-PCR result for influenza viruses. We used a two-stage random effects model to estimate pooled VE per target age-group, adjusting for the month of illness onset, age and preexisting medical conditions.ResultsWe identified 2620 SARI patients across sites: 246 influenza cases and 720 influenza-negative controls aged ≤5years and 448 cases and 1206 controls aged ≥60years. The most commonly identified subtype among participants (48%) was the influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 virus followed by influenza A(H3N2) (34%) and influenza B (18%) viruses. Among children, the adjusted VE of full vaccination (one dose for previously vaccinated or two if vaccine naïve) against any influenza virus SARI was 47% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 14-71%); VE was 58% (95% CI: 16-79%) against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, and 65% (95% CI: -9; 89%) against influenza A(H3N2) viruses associated SARI. Crude VE of full vaccination against influenza B viruses associated SARI among children was 3% (95% CI: -150; 63). Among adults aged ≥60years, adjusted VE against any influenza SARI was 48% (95% CI: 34-60%); VE was 54% (95% CI: 37-69%) against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, 43% (95% CI: 18-61%) against influenza A(H3N2) and 34% (95% CI: -4; 58%) against B viruses associated SARI.ConclusionInfluenza vaccine provided moderate protection against severe influenza illness among fully vaccinated young children and older adults, supporting current vaccination strategies.

Project description:Untreated syphilis in pregnancy is associated with adverse clinical outcomes to the infant. In low- and middle-income countries in Asia and Latin America, 20%-30% of women are not tested for syphilis during pregnancy. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of increasing the coverage for antenatal syphilis screening in 11 Asian and 20 Latin American countries, using a point-of-care immunochromatographic strip (ICS) test.The decision analytical cost-effectiveness models reported incremental costs per disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) averted from the perspectives of the national health care payer. Clinical outcomes were stillbirths, neonatal deaths, and congenital syphilis. DALYs were computed using WHO disability weights. Costs included the ICS test, three injections of benzathine penicillin, and nurse wages. Country-specific inputs included the antenatal prevalence of syphilis and the proportion of women in the antenatal care setting that are screened for syphilis infection as reported in the 2014 WHO baseline report on global sexually transmitted infection surveillance. Country-specific data on the annual number of live births, proportion of women with at least one antenatal care visit, and per capita gross national income were also included in the model.The incremental cost/DALY averted of syphilis screening is US$53 (range: US$10-US$332; Prob<1*per capita GDP=99.71%) in Asia and US$60 (range: US$5-US$225; Prob<1*per capita GDP=99.77%) in Latin America. Universal screening may reduce the annual number of stillbirths by 20,344 and 4,270, neonatal deaths by 8,201 and 1,721, cases of congenital syphilis by 10,952 and 2,298, and avert 925,039 and 197,454 DALYs in the aggregate Asian and Latin American panel, respectively.Antenatal syphilis screening is highly cost-effective in all the 11 Asian and 20 Latin American countries assessed. Our findings support the decision to expand syphilis screening in countries with currently low screening rates or continue national syphilis screening programs in countries with high rates.

Project description:BackgroundAs of September 2022, nearly 1.3 billion doses of COVID-19 vaccine products have been administered in Latin America and the Caribbean, where 27% of global COVID-19 deaths have occurred. This study aimed to estimate the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines against lab-confirmed COVID-19 related hospitalizations and deaths among adults in Argentina, Brazil, Chile, and Colombia.MethodsUsing a test-negative case control design, we evaluated the effectiveness of a primary vaccination series considering six COVID-19 vaccine products (Sputnik V, mRNA-1273, CoronaVac, ChAdOx1, BNT162b2, Ad26.COV2.S) against lab-confirmed COVID-19 hospitalizations and deaths among 83,708 hospitalized adults from February-December, 2021. Data from hospitalization records, COVID surveillance, and vaccination registries were used. Vaccine effectiveness was estimated using logistic regression ((1-OR) x 100).FindingsThe average age of participants was 56.7 (SD = 17.5), and 45,894 (54.8%) were male. Adjusted VE (aVE) estimates for full vaccination against hospitalization were 82% for mRNA-1273 (95% confidence interval (CI) = -30 to 98%), 76% (71%-81%) for BNT162b2, 65% (61-68%) for ChAdOx1, 57% (10-79%) for Sputnik V, 53% (50-56%) for CoronaVac, and 46% (23-62%) for Ad26.COV2.S. Estimates, particularly for CoronaVac, varied by variant. Decreasing aVE was estimated as age increased, particularly for CoronaVac and ChAdOx1. aVE estimates against death were generally higher, with 100% (CI not estimated) for mRNA-1273, 82% (69-90%) for BNT162b2, 73% (69-77%) for ChAdOx1, 65% (60-67%) for CoronaVac, 38% (-75 to 78%) for Sputnik V, 6% (-58 to 44%) for Ad26.COV2.S.InterpretationPrimary series vaccination with available COVID-19 vaccine products was effective against COVID-19 hospitalization and mortality. Effectiveness varied by product and declined with increasing age.FundingThis study was funded by the Pan-American Health Organization (PAHO, World Health Organization (WHO)). PAHO convened and led the study implementation.

Project description:BackgroundEarly HIV diagnosis reduces morbidity, mortality, the probability of onward transmission, and their associated costs, but might increase cost because of earlier initiation of antiretroviral treatment (ART). We investigated this trade-off by estimating the cost-effectiveness of HIV screening in primary care.MethodsWe modelled the effect of the four-times higher diagnosis rate observed in the intervention arm of the RHIVA2 randomised controlled trial done in Hackney, London (UK), a borough with high HIV prevalence (≥0·2% adult prevalence). We constructed a dynamic, compartmental model representing incidence of infection and the effect of screening for HIV in general practices in Hackney. We assessed cost-effectiveness of the RHIVA2 trial by fitting model diagnosis rates to the trial data, parameterising with epidemiological and behavioural data from the literature when required, using trial testing costs and projecting future costs of treatment.FindingsOver a 40 year time horizon, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were £22 201 (95% credible interval 12 662-132 452) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained, £372 207 (268 162-1 903 385) per death averted, and £628 874 (434 902-4 740 724) per HIV transmission averted. Under this model scenario, with UK cost data, RHIVA2 would reach the upper National Institute for Health and Care Excellence cost-effectiveness threshold (about £30 000 per QALY gained) after 33 years. Scenarios using cost data from Canada (which indicate prolonged and even higher health-care costs for patients diagnosed late) suggest this threshold could be reached in as little as 13 years.InterpretationScreening for HIV in primary care has important public health benefits as well as clinical benefits. We predict it to be cost-effective in the UK in the medium term. However, this intervention might be cost-effective far sooner, and even cost-saving, in settings where long-term health-care costs of late-diagnosed patients in high-prevalence regions are much higher (≥60%) than those of patients diagnosed earlier. Screening for HIV in primary care is cost-effective and should be promoted.FundingNHS City and Hackney, UK Department of Health, National Institute for Health Research Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care.

Dataset Information

How to Get Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Right? The Case of Vaccine Economics in Latin America.

Background

Objective

Results

Methods

Conclusions

Publications

How to Get Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Right? The Case of Vaccine Economics in Latin America.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets