Cost effectiveness of pediatric pneumococcal conjugate vaccines: a comparative assessment of decision-making tools

BACKGROUND: Several decision support tools have been developed to aid policymaking regarding the adoption of pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV) into national pediatric immunization programs. The lack of critical appraisal of these tools makes it difficult for decision makers to understand and choose between them. With the aim to guide policymakers on their optimal use, we compared publicly available decision-making tools in relation to their methods, influential parameters and results. METHODS: The World Health Organization (WHO) requested access to several publicly available cost-effectiveness (CE) tools for PCV from both public and private provenance. All tools were critically assessed according to the WHO's guide for economic evaluations of immunization programs. Key attributes and characteristics were compared and a series of sensitivity analyses was performed to determine the main drivers of the results. The results were compared based on a standardized set of input parameters and assumptions. RESULTS: Three cost-effectiveness modeling tools were provided, including two cohort-based (Pan-American Health Organization (PAHO) ProVac Initiative TriVac, and PneumoADIP) and one population-based model (GlaxoSmithKline's SUPREMES). They all compared the introduction of PCV into national pediatric immunization program with no PCV use. The models were different in terms of model attributes, structure, and data requirement, but captured a similar range of diseases. Herd effects were estimated using different approaches in each model. The main driving parameters were vaccine efficacy against pneumococcal pneumonia, vaccine price, vaccine coverage, serotype coverage and disease burden. With a standardized set of input parameters developed for cohort modeling, TriVac and PneumoADIP produced similar incremental costs and health outcomes, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. CONCLUSIONS: Vaccine cost (dose price and number of doses), vaccine efficacy and epidemiology of critical endpoint (for example, incidence of pneumonia, distribution of serotypes causing pneumonia) were influential parameters in the models we compared. Understanding the differences and similarities of such CE tools through regular comparisons could render decision-making processes in different countries more efficient, as well as providing guiding information for further clinical and epidemiological research. A tool comparison exercise using standardized data sets can help model developers to be more transparent about their model structure and assumptions and provide analysts and decision makers with a more in-depth view behind the disease dynamics. Adherence to the WHO guide of economic evaluations of immunization programs may also facilitate this process. Please see related article: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7007/9/55

Public health and economic impact of vaccination with 7-valent pneumococcal vaccine (PCV7) in the context of the annual influenza epidemic and a severe influenza pandemic

Background: Influenza pandemic outbreaks occurred in the US in 1918, 1957, and 1968. Historical evidence suggests that the majority of influenza-related deaths during the 1918 US pandemic were attributable to bacterial pneumococcal infections. The 2009 novel influenza A (H1N1) outbreak highlights the importance of interventions that may mitigate the impact of a pandemic. Methods: A decision-analytic model was constructed to evaluate the impact of 7-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV7) on pneumococcal disease incidence and mortality during a typical influenza season (13/100) and a severe influenza pandemic (30/100). Outcomes were compared for current PCV7 vaccination practices vs. no vaccination. The model was estimated using published sources and includes indirect (herd) protection of non-vaccinated persons. Results: The model predicts that PCV7 vaccination in the US is cost saving for a normal influenza season, reducing pneumococcal-related costs by $1.6 billion. In a severe influenza pandemic, vaccination would save$7.3 billion in costs and prevent 512,000 cases of IPD, 719,000 cases of pneumonia, 62,000 IPD deaths, and 47,000 pneumonia deaths; 84% of deaths are prevented due to indirect (herd) protection in the unvaccinated. Conclusions: PCV7 vaccination is highly effective and cost saving in both normal and severe pandemic influenza seasons. Current infant vaccination practices may prevent >1 million pneumococcal-related deaths in a severe influenza pandemic, primarily due to herd protection

Health economics of infectious diseases.

Due to technical innovations and demographic changes, many industrialized countries are facing problems in financing health-care costs. One way to guide decision maker in the allocation of their limited health-care budget is the use of economic evaluation . The economic evaluation of health technologies is a special discipline of health economics, which compares the technical efficiency of technologies in the health-care sector. The term technology covers everything from drugs to medical equipment to the design of intervention programs. Technical efficiency is achieved if with a minimum input (of resources) a given output is produced or if with a specific input a maximum of output (e.g., life years) is produced. Hence, technical efficiency considers both effectiveness and resource utilization. Only an effective technology can be efficient. Typically, in economic evaluations the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of a technology is estimated. The ICER is a measure for the technical efficiency of a technology and can be expressed, for example, as € 30,000 per life year gained (LYG) or US $ 15,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained, reflecting the net costs (costs minus savings) of gaining one life year or QALY, respectively