Dataset Information

Cost-effectiveness of HPV vaccination in 195 countries: A meta-regression analysis.

ABSTRACT: Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) is a well-known, but resource intensive, method for comparing the costs and health outcomes of health interventions. To build on available evidence, researchers are developing methods to transfer CEA across settings; previous methods do not use all available results nor quantify differences across settings. We conducted a meta-regression analysis of published CEAs of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination to quantify the effects of factors at the country, intervention, and method-level, and predict incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for HPV vaccination in 195 countries. We used 613 ICERs reported in 75 studies from the Tufts University's Cost-Effectiveness Analysis (CEA) Registry and the Global Health CEA Registry, and extracted an additional 1,215 one-way sensitivity analyses. A five-stage, mixed-effects meta-regression framework was used to predict country-specific ICERs. The probability that HPV vaccination is cost-saving in each country was predicted using a logistic regression model. Covariates for both models included methods and intervention characteristics, and each country's cervical cancer burden and gross domestic product per capita. ICERs are positively related to vaccine cost, and negatively related to cervical cancer burden. The mean predicted ICER for HPV vaccination is 2017 US$4,217 per DALY averted (95% uncertainty interval (UI): US$773-13,448) globally, and below US$800 per DALY averted in 64 countries. Predicted ICERs are lowest in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia, with a population-weighted mean ICER across 46 countries of US$706 per DALY averted (95% UI: $130-2,245), and across five countries of US$489 per DALY averted (95% UI: $90-1,557), respectively. Meta-regression analyses can be conducted on CEA, where one-way sensitivity analyses are used to quantify the effects of factors at the intervention and method-level. Building on all published results, our predictions support introducing and expanding HPV vaccination, especially in countries that are eligible for subsidized vaccines from GAVI, the Vaccine Alliance, and Pan American Health Organization.

SUBMITTER: Rosettie KL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8687557 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCurrent prophylactic vaccines against human papillomavirus (HPV) target two of the most oncogenic types, HPV-16 and -18, which contribute to roughly 70% of cervical cancers worldwide. Second-generation HPV vaccines include a 9-valent vaccine, which targets five additional oncogenic HPV types (i.e., 31, 33, 45, 52, and 58) that contribute to another 15-30% of cervical cancer cases. The objective of this study was to determine a range of vaccine costs for which the 9-valent vaccine would be cost-effective in comparison to the current vaccines in two less developed countries (i.e., Kenya and Uganda).Methods and findingsThe analysis was performed using a natural history disease simulation model of HPV and cervical cancer. The mathematical model simulates individual women from an early age and tracks health events and resource use as they transition through clinically-relevant health states over their lifetime. Epidemiological data on HPV prevalence and cancer incidence were used to adapt the model to Kenya and Uganda. Health benefit, or effectiveness, from HPV vaccination was measured in terms of life expectancy, and costs were measured in international dollars (I$). The incremental cost of the 9-valent vaccine included the added cost of the vaccine counterbalanced by costs averted from additional cancer cases prevented. All future costs and health benefits were discounted at an annual rate of 3% in the base case analysis. We conducted sensitivity analyses to investigate how infection with multiple HPV types, unidentifiable HPV types in cancer cases, and cross-protection against non-vaccine types could affect the potential cost range of the 9-valent vaccine. In the base case analysis in Kenya, we found that vaccination with the 9-valent vaccine was very cost-effective (i.e., had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio below per-capita GDP), compared to the current vaccines provided the added cost of the 9-valent vaccine did not exceed I$9.7 per vaccinated girl. To be considered very cost-effective, the added cost per vaccinated girl could go up to I$5.2 and I$16.2 in the worst-case and best-case scenarios, respectively. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of three times per-capita GDP where the 9-valent vaccine would be considered cost-effective, the thresholds of added costs associated with the 9-valent vaccine were I$27.3, I$14.5 and I$45.3 per vaccinated girl for the base case, worst-case and best-case scenarios, respectively. In Uganda, vaccination with the 9-valent vaccine was very cost-effective when the added cost of the 9-valent vaccine did not exceed I$8.3 per vaccinated girl. To be considered very cost-effective, the added cost per vaccinated girl could go up to I$4.5 and I$13.7 in the worst-case and best-case scenarios, respectively. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of three times per-capita GDP, the thresholds of added costs associated with the 9-valent vaccine were I$23.4, I$12.6 and I$38.4 per vaccinated girl for the base case, worst-case and best-case scenarios, respectively.ConclusionsThis study provides a threshold range of incremental costs associated with the 9-valent HPV vaccine that would make it a cost-effective intervention in comparison to currently available HPV vaccines in Kenya and Uganda. These prices represent a 71% and 61% increase over the price offered to the GAVI Alliance ($5 per dose) for the currently available 2- and 4-valent vaccines in Kenya and Uganda, respectively. Despite evidence of cost-effectiveness, critical challenges around affordability and feasibility of HPV vaccination and other competing needs in low-resource settings such as Kenya and Uganda remain.

Project description:ObjectiveTo investigate whether a single optimal vaccination strategy exists across countries to deal with a future influenza pandemic by comparing the cost effectiveness of different strategies in various pandemic scenarios for three European countries.DesignEconomic and epidemic modelling study.SettingsGeneral populations in Germany, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom.Data sourcesCountry specific patterns of social contact and demographic data.ModelAn age structured susceptible-exposed-infected-recovered transmission model that describes how an influenza A virus will spread in the populations of Germany, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom.InterventionsComparison of four vaccination strategies: no vaccination, blanket vaccination, vaccination of elderly people (≥ 65 years), and vaccination of high transmitters (5-19 years). The four strategies were evaluated for scenarios in which a vaccine became available early or at the peak of the pandemic, and in which either everyone was initially susceptible or older age groups had pre-existing immunity.Main outcome measureCost per quality adjusted life years (QALYs) gained.ResultsAll vaccination strategies were cost effective (incremental cost per QALY gained, comparing intervention with non-intervention). In scenarios where the vaccine became available at the peak of the pandemic and there was pre-existing immunity among elderly people the incremental cost effectiveness ratios for vaccinating high transmitters were €7325 (£5815; $10,470) per QALY gained for Germany, €10,216 per QALY gained for the Netherlands, and €7280 per QALY gained for the United Kingdom. The most cost effective strategy not only differed across the pandemic scenarios but also between countries. Specifically, when the vaccine was available early in the pandemic and there was no pre-existing immunity, in Germany it would be most cost effective to vaccinate elderly people ( €940 per QALY gained), whereas it would be most cost effective to vaccinate high transmitters in both the Netherlands (€525 per QALY gained) and the United Kingdom (€163 per QALY gained). This difference in optimal strategies was due to differences in the demographic characteristics of the countries: Germany has a significantly higher proportion of elderly people compared with the Netherlands and the United Kingdom.ConclusionsNo single vaccination strategy was most cost effective across countries. With aging populations, pre-existing immunity in particular could be of crucial importance for the cost effectiveness of options to mitigate a future influenza pandemic.

Project description:The availability of human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA testing and vaccination against HPV types 16 and 18 (HPV-16,18) motivates questions about the cost-effectiveness of cervical cancer prevention in the United States for unvaccinated older women and for girls eligible for vaccination.An empirically calibrated model was used to assess the quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), lifetime costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (2004 US dollars per QALY) of screening, vaccination of preadolescent girls, and vaccination combined with screening. Screening varied by initiation age (18, 21, or 25 years), interval (every 1, 2, 3, or 5 years), and test (HPV DNA testing of cervical specimens or cytologic evaluation of cervical cells with a Pap test). Testing strategies included: 1) cytology followed by HPV DNA testing for equivocal cytologic results (cytology with HPV test triage); 2) HPV DNA testing followed by cytology for positive HPV DNA results (HPV test with cytology triage); and 3) combined HPV DNA testing and cytology. Strategies were permitted to switch once at age 25, 30, or 35 years.For unvaccinated women, triennial cytology with HPV test triage, beginning by age 21 years and switching to HPV testing with cytology triage at age 30 years, cost $78,000 per QALY compared with the next best strategy. For girls vaccinated before age 12 years, this same strategy, beginning at age 25 years and switching at age 35 years, cost $41,000 per QALY with screening every 5 years and $188,000 per QALY screening triennially, each compared with the next best strategy. These strategies were more effective and cost-effective than screening women of all ages with cytology alone or cytology with HPV triage annually or biennially.For both vaccinated and unvaccinated women, age-based screening by use of HPV DNA testing as a triage test for equivocal results in younger women and as a primary screening test in older women is expected to be more cost-effective than current screening recommendations.

Project description:BackgroundIncreasingly, countries have introduced female vaccination against human papillomavirus (HPV), causally linked to several cancers and genital warts, but few have recommended vaccination of boys. Declining vaccine prices and strong evidence of vaccine impact on reducing HPV-related conditions in both women and men prompt countries to reevaluate whether HPV vaccination of boys is warranted.MethodsA previously-published dynamic model of HPV transmission was empirically calibrated to Norway. Reductions in the incidence of HPV, including both direct and indirect benefits, were applied to a natural history model of cervical cancer, and to incidence-based models for other non-cervical HPV-related diseases. We calculated the health outcomes and costs of the different HPV-related conditions under a gender-neutral vaccination program compared to a female-only program.ResultsVaccine price had a decisive impact on results. For example, assuming 71% coverage, high vaccine efficacy and a reasonable vaccine tender price of $75 per dose, we found vaccinating both girls and boys fell below a commonly cited cost-effectiveness threshold in Norway ($83,000/quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained) when including vaccine benefit for all HPV-related diseases. However, at the current market price, including boys would not be considered 'good value for money.' For settings with a lower cost-effectiveness threshold ($30,000/QALY), it would not be considered cost-effective to expand the current program to include boys, unless the vaccine price was less than $36/dose. Increasing vaccination coverage to 90% among girls was more effective and less costly than the benefits achieved by vaccinating both genders with 71% coverage.ConclusionsAt the anticipated tender price, expanding the HPV vaccination program to boys may be cost-effective and may warrant a change in the current female-only vaccination policy in Norway. However, increasing coverage in girls is uniformly more effective and cost-effective than expanding vaccination coverage to boys and should be considered a priority.

Dataset Information

Cost-effectiveness of HPV vaccination in 195 countries: A meta-regression analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets