Dataset Information

Cost-effectiveness of bivalent versus monovalent vaccines against hand, foot and mouth disease.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES:Enterovirus 71 (EV71) and coxsackievirus A16 (CA16) were responsible for 43.3% (235 123/543 243) and 24.8% (134 607/543 243) of all laboratory-confirmed hand, foot and mouth disease (HFMD) cases during 2010-2015 in China. Three monovalent EV71 vaccines have been licensed in China while bivalent EV71/CA16 vaccines are under development. A comparative cost-effectiveness analysis of bivalent EV71/CA16 versus monovalent EV71 vaccination would be useful for informing the additional value of bivalent HFMD vaccines in China. METHODS:We used a static model parameterized with the national HFMD surveillance data during 2010-2013, virological HFMD surveillance records from all 31 provinces in mainland China during 2010-2013 and caregiver survey data of costs and health quality of life during 2012-2013. We estimated the threshold vaccine cost (TVC), defined as the maximum additional cost that could be paid for a cost-effective bivalent EV71/CA16 vaccine over a monovalent EV71 vaccine, as the outcome. The base case analysis was performed from a societal perspective. Several sensitivity analyses were conducted by varying assumptions governing HFMD risk, costs, discounting and vaccine efficacy. RESULTS:In the base case, choosing the bivalent EV71/CA16 over monovalent EV71 vaccination would be cost-effective only if the additional cost of the bivalent EV71/CA16 compared with the monovalent EV71 vaccine is less than €4.7 (95% CI 4.2-5.2). Compared with the TVC in the base case, TVC increased by up to €8.9 if all the test-negative cases were CA16-HFMD; decreased by €1.1 with an annual discount rate of 6% and exclusion of the productivity loss; and increased by €0.14 and €0.3 with every 1% increase in bivalent vaccine efficacy against CA16-HFMD and differential vaccine efficacy against EV71-HFMD, respectively. CONCLUSIONS:Bivalent EV71/CA16 vaccines can be cost-effective compared with monovalent EV71 vaccines, if suitably priced. Our study provides further evidence for determining the optimal use of HFMD vaccines in routine paediatric vaccination programme in China.

SUBMITTER: Liu D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6942242 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Cost-effectiveness of bivalent versus monovalent vaccines against hand, foot and mouth disease.

Liu D D Leung K K Jit M M Yu H H Yang J J Liao Q Q Liu F F Zheng Y Y Wu J T JT

Clinical microbiology and infection : the official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases 20190704 3

<h4>Objectives</h4>Enterovirus 71 (EV71) and coxsackievirus A16 (CA16) were responsible for 43.3% (235 123/543 243) and 24.8% (134 607/543 243) of all laboratory-confirmed hand, foot and mouth disease (HFMD) cases during 2010-2015 in China. Three monovalent EV71 vaccines have been licensed in China while bivalent EV71/CA16 vaccines are under development. A comparative cost-effectiveness analysis of bivalent EV71/CA16 versus monovalent EV71 vaccination would be useful for informing the additional ...[more]

PMID: 31279839

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPublic health programs to prevent invasive meningococcal disease (IMD) with monovalent serogroup C meningococcal conjugate vaccine (MCV-C) and quadrivalent meningococcal conjugate vaccines (MCV-4) in infancy and adolescence vary across Canadian provinces. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of various vaccination strategies against IMD using current and anticipated future pricing and recent epidemiology.MethodsA cohort model was developed to estimate the clinical burden and costs (CAN$2014) of IMD in the Canadian population over a 100-year time horizon for three strategies: (1) MCV-C in infants and adolescents (MCV-C/C); (2) MCV-C in infants and MCV-4 in adolescents (MCV-C/4); and (3) MCV-4 in infants (2 doses) and adolescents (MCV-4/4). The source for IMD incidence was Canadian surveillance data. The effectiveness of MCV-C was based on published literature. The effectiveness of MCV-4 against all vaccination regimens was assumed to be the same as for MCV-C regimens against serogroup C. Herd effects were estimated by calibration to estimates reported in prior analyses. Costs were from published sources. Vaccines prices were projected to decline over time reflecting historical procurement trends.ResultsOver the modeling horizon there are a projected 11,438 IMD cases and 1,195 IMD deaths with MCV-C/C; expected total costs are $597.5 million. MCV-C/4 is projected to reduce cases of IMD by 1,826 (16%) and IMD deaths by 161 (13%). Vaccination costs are increased by $32 million but direct and indirect IMD costs are projected to be reduced by $46 million. MCV-C/4 is therefore dominant vs. MCV-C/C in the base case. Cost-effectiveness of MCV-4/4 was $111,286 per QALY gained versus MCV-C/4 (2575/206 IMD cases/deaths prevented; incremental costs $68 million).ConclusionsIf historical trends in Canadian vaccines prices continue, use of MCV-4 instead of MCV-C in adolescents may be cost-effective. From an economic perspective, switching to MCV-4 as the adolescent booster should be considered.

Project description:Enterovirus 71 (EV71) and coxsackieviruses (CV) are the major causative agents of hand, foot and mouth disease (HFMD). There is not currently a vaccine available against HFMD, even though a newly developed formalin-inactivated EV71 (FI-EV71) vaccine has been tested in clinical trial and has shown efficacy against EV71. We have designed and genetically engineered a recombinant adenovirus Ad-EVVLP with the EV71 P1 and 3CD genes inserted into the E1/E3-deleted adenoviral genome. Ad-EVVLP were produced in HEK-293A cells. In addition to Ad-EVVLP particles, virus-like particles (VLPs) formed from the physical association of EV71 capsid proteins, VP0, VP1, and VP3 expressed from P1 gene products. They were digested by 3CD protease and confirmed to be produced by Ad-EVVLP-producing cells, as determined using transmission electron microscopy and western blotting. Mouse immunogenicity studies showed that Ad-EVVLP-immunized antisera neutralized the EV71 B4 and C2 genotypes. Activation of VLP-specific CD4+ and CD8+/IFN-? T cells associated with Th1/Th2-balanced IFN-?, IL-17, IL-4, and IL-13 was induced; in contrast, FI-EV71 induced only Th2-mediated neutralizing antibody against EV71 and low VLP-specific CD4+ and CD8+ T cell responses. The antiviral immunity against EV71 was clearly demonstrated in mice vaccinated with Ad-EVVLP in a hSCARB2 transgenic (hSCARB2-Tg) mouse challenge model. Ad-EVVLP-vaccinated mice were 100% protected and demonstrated reduced viral load in both the CNS and muscle tissues. Ad-EVVLP successfully induced anti-CVA16 immunities. Although antisera had no neutralizing activity against CVA16, the 3C-specific CD4+ and CD8+/IFN-? T cells were identified, which could mediate protection against CVA16 challenge. FI-EV71 did not induce 3C-mediated immunity and had no efficacy against the CVA16 challenge. These results suggest that Ad-EVVLP can enhance neutralizing antibody and protective cellular immune responses to prevent EV71 infection and cellular immune responses against CV infection.

Dataset Information

Cost-effectiveness of bivalent versus monovalent vaccines against hand, foot and mouth disease.

Publications

Cost-effectiveness of bivalent versus monovalent vaccines against hand, foot and mouth disease.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets