Public Health Impact of the Adjuvanted RSVPreF3 Vaccine for Respiratory Syncytial Virus Prevention Among Older Adults in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is an important cause of lower respiratory tract disease in older adults, resulting in substantial morbidity and mortality. METHODS: This study estimates the public health impact of vaccination with the adjuvanted RSVPreF3 vaccine among adults aged ≥ 60 years in the United States (US). A static, multi-cohort Markov model was used to estimate RSV-related outcomes over a 3-year time horizon for scenarios with and without one-time RSV vaccination. The base-case analysis assumed the same vaccination coverage as for influenza vaccines, with key epidemiology and vaccine inputs obtained from the published literature and phase 3 clinical trial results for the adjuvanted RSVPreF3 vaccine. Model outcomes included the clinical burden of RSV (symptomatic RSV acute respiratory illness [RSV-ARI] cases [classified as upper or lower respiratory tract disease], pneumonia complications, and mortality) and RSV-related healthcare resource use (hospitalizations, emergency department visits, outpatient visits, and antibiotic prescriptions). RESULTS: In the base-case analysis, approximately 56.7 million adults aged ≥ 60 years received the vaccine, resulting in 2,954,465 fewer symptomatic RSV-ARI cases over 3 years compared with no vaccination, including 321,019 fewer X-ray confirmed pneumonia cases and 16,660 fewer RSV-related deaths. Vaccination also prevented a substantial number of RSV-related hospitalizations (203,891), emergency department visits (164,060), outpatient visits (1,577,586), and antibiotic prescriptions (1,343,915) over the 3-year period. A considerable public health impact was observed across a range of sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: These findings highlight the potential of the adjuvanted RSVPreF3 vaccine to substantially reduce RSV disease burden among US older adults aged ≥ 60 years.

Cost-effectiveness analysis measuring the total costs against the health benefits of three different rotavirus vaccines for Mexico.

Rotavirus (RV) infection causes acute rotavirus gastroenteritis (RVGE) in infants. Safe and effective RV vaccines are available, of which Mexico has included one in its national immunization program (NIP) since 2007. Health outcome gains, expressed in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and cost improvements are important additional factors for the selection of a NIP vaccine. These two factors were analyzed here for Mexico over one year implementing three RV vaccines: 2-dose Rotarix (HRV), versus 3-dose RotaTeq (HBRV), and 3-dose Rotasiil (BRV-PV), presented in a 1-dose or 2-dose vial). HRV would annually result in discounted QALY gains of 263 extra years compared with the other vaccines by averting an extra 24,022 homecare cases, 10,779 medical visits, 392 hospitalizations, and 12 deaths. From a payer's perspective and compared with HRV, BRV-PV 2-dose vial and BRV-PV 1-dose vial would annually result in $13,548,179 and $4,633,957 net savings, respectively, while HBRV would result in $3,403,309 extra costs. The societal perspective may also show savings compared with HRV for BRV-PV 2-dose vial of $4,875,860, while BRV-PV 1-dose vial and HBRV may show extra costs of $4,038,363 and $12,075,629 respectively. HRV and HBRV were both approved in Mexico, with HRV requiring less investment than HBRV with higher QALY gains and cost savings. The HRV vaccine produced those higher health gains due to its earlier protection and greater coverage achieved after its schedule completion with two doses only, providing full protection at four months of age instead of longer periods for the other vaccines.

Rotavirus (RV) infection causes acute diarrhea in infants and can be life-threatening. Several safe and effective vaccines against RV and its complications exist. For many governments choosing vaccines for national immunization programs, total costs or savings and health gains are important factors in the selection process. We compared the costs and health benefits of three RV vaccines for Mexico: HRV, HBRV, and BRV-PV, that have different dosing schedules: two doses for HRV and three doses for HBRV and BRV-PV. HRV is currently part of the national immunization program in Mexico. HRV would result in more health benefits as it incurs fewer RV-related cases, medical visits, hospitalizations, and infant deaths than the other vaccines due to its early protection achieved after only two doses to complete its schedule. However, from a payer's perspective, the least expensive vaccine was BRV-PV, while HRV was less expensive than HBRV. From a societal perspective, also accounting for families' costs and loss in income due to an infant's RV disease, and the families' costs and loss in income when accompanying the infant to the vaccination center, the HRV vaccine was less expensive than HBRV and BRV-PV presented in a 1-dose vial, while more expensive than BRV-PV presented in a 2-dose vial. HRV and HBRV are both approved in Mexico, although HBRV requires a greater investment at lower health benefits than HRV, from both a payer's and a societal perspective. A 2-dose vaccination scheme is an important asset for the economic value of this vaccination program.

Cost-utility analysis of increasing uptake of universal seasonal quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV) in children aged 6 months and older in Germany.

Seasonal influenza causes many cases and related deaths in Europe annually, despite ongoing vaccination programs for older adults and people at high-risk of complications. Children have the highest risk of infection and play a key role in disease transmission. Our cost-utility analysis, based on a dynamic transmission model, estimated the impact of increasing the current vaccination coverage with inactivated quadrivalent influenza vaccine in Germany to all (healthy and high-risk) children under 5 years of age (40% uptake), or under 18 years (40% uptake), or only high-risk children under 18 years (90% uptake). Eight influenza complications were modeled, hospitalization and death rates were based on age and risk status. All three vaccination strategies provided more health benefits than the existing vaccination situation, reducing influenza cases, complications, hospitalizations and deaths across the entire population. The strategy targeting all children under 5 years was highly cost-effective (€6/quality-adjusted life-year gained, payer perspective). The other strategies were cost saving from the payer and societal perspectives. The vaccination strategy targeting all children under 18 years was estimated to provide the most health benefits (preventing on average 1.66 million cases, 179,000 complications, 14,000 hospitalizations and 3,600 deaths due to influenza annually) and the most cost savings (annually €20.5 million and €731.3 million from payer and societal perspectives, respectively). Our analysis provides policy decision-makers with evidence supporting strategies to expand childhood influenza vaccination, to directly protect children, and indirectly all other unvaccinated age groups, in order to reduce the humanistic and economic burden on healthcare systems and society.

What is the context? Every winter, millions of people in Europe become ill due to influenza (flu), and some need to be hospitalized for complications that can sometimes lead to death.While mainly older adults and people with chronic illness are at higher risk of complications from influenza, children have the highest risk of infection and of transmitting the disease.Current vaccination policies in Europe, including Germany, target older adults and high-risk populations (pregnant women, children and other age groups with chronic diseases).What is new? This analysis simulates the effects of expanding current German vaccination programs in high-risk children to include healthy children, and of increasing vaccination coverage rates, for direct protection against infection, and to reduce the disease transmission in the rest of the population.We modeled three vaccination strategies: vaccinating 40% of all (healthy and high- risk) children under 5 years old;vaccinating 40% of all (healthy and high-risk) children under 18 years old;vaccinating 90% of high-risk children under 18 years old.What is the impact? All three strategies resulted in health gains, as more influenza cases, complications and deaths were prevented in all age groups of the population compared to the current situation.The strategies targeting both healthy and high-risk children provided the greatest health benefits. In particular, a vaccination policy targeting all children under 18 years old was predicted to provide the most health benefits as well as the highest cost savings: the increased costs of vaccination were more than offset by the savings in disease management costs as a result of having fewer influenza patients.Vaccinating healthy children against influenza is expected to significantly reduce the disease burden in the total population while saving costs, due to reduced transmission of the disease.

Constrained Optimization for Pneumococcal Vaccination in Brazil.

OBJECTIVES: To identify the most cost-efficient combination of pneumococcal vaccines in infants and aging adults for a 10-year period in Brazil. METHODS: Constrained optimization (CO) prioritized 9 pneumococcal vaccine regimens according to their gain in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and their related costs over a prespecified time horizon with defined constraints for 2 age groups, infants and aging adults. The analysis starts from the current universal infant vaccination of pneumococcal non-typeable Haemophilus influenzae protein D conjugate vaccine (PHiD-CV), 2 primary and 1 booster dose at 2, 4, and 12 months, respectively. Key constraints are the fixed annual vaccine budget increase and the relative return on investment (ROIR) per regimen, which must be > 1, the reference intervention being the current vaccination strategy in infants and the most cost-efficient one in aging adults. RESULTS: The CO analysis including all the constraints indicates that over 10 years the maximum extra health gain is 126 194 QALYs for an extra budget of $974 million Brazilian reals (ROIR = 1.15). Results could be improved with a higher proportion of the at-risk population in aging adults, less herd effect, and better QALY scores. CONCLUSION: The study shows that with 4 constraints on budget, time horizon, vaccine coverage, and cost efficiency, a CO analysis could identify the most cost-efficient overall pneumococcal vaccination strategy for Brazil, allowing for limited vaccine budget increase while obtaining appropriate health gain.

Constrained Optimization for the Selection of Influenza Vaccines to Maximize the Population Benefit: A Demonstration Project.

BACKGROUND: Influenza is an infectious disease causing a high annual economic and public health burden. The most efficient management of the disease is through prevention with vaccination. Many influenza vaccines are available, with varying efficacy and cost, targeting different age groups. Therefore, strategic decision-making about which vaccine to deliver to whom is warranted to improve efficiency. OBJECTIVE: We present the use of a constrained optimization (CO) model to evaluate targeted strategies for providing influenza vaccines in three adult age groups in the USA. METHODS: CO was considered for identifying an influenza vaccine provision strategy that maximizes the benefits at constrained annual budgets, by prioritizing vaccines based on return on investment. The approach optimizes a set of predefined outcome measures over several years resulting from an increasing investment using the best combination of influenza vaccines. RESULTS: Results indicate the importance of understanding the relative differences in benefits for each vaccine type within and across age groups. Scenario and threshold analyses demonstrate the impact of changing budget distribution over time, price setting per vaccine type, and selection of outcome measure to optimize. CONCLUSION: Significant gains in cost efficiency can be realized for a decision maker using a CO model, especially for a disease like influenza with many vaccine options. Testing the model under different scenarios offers powerful insights into maximum achievable benefit overall and per age group within the predefined constraints of a vaccine budget.

Economic Impact of Introducing the RTS,S Malaria Vaccine: Cost-Effectiveness and Budget Impact Analysis in 41 Countries.

Background. Malaria is a major public health burden in sub-Saharan Africa. This study estimated the cost-effectiveness and budget impact of adding four-dose malaria vaccination in infants or children to existing interventions in 41 endemic countries in sub-Saharan Africa. Methods. A static Markov cohort model followed a simulated 2017 birth cohort (36.5 million children) for 15 years in 5-day cycles, comparing three strategies: child vaccination (doses at ages 6, 7.5, 9, and 27 months); infant vaccination (doses at ages 6, 10, and 14 weeks and 21 months); no malaria vaccination. The base-case analysis was conducted from the health system perspective with vaccine price assumed at USD5/dose and annual discounting of 3% for costs and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs). Efficacy was based on the Phase III RTS,S clinical trial. Results. The model projected that 24.6 million children, or 26.2 million infants, would be vaccinated. Compared with no vaccination, child (infant) vaccination was projected to avert 16.8 million (16 million) cases of malaria and 113,000 (107,000) malaria deaths in the birth cohort over the 15-year period. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was USD200/DALY averted (USD225/DALY averted) for child (infant) vaccination, which represents 14% (17%) of the gross domestic product (GDP) per capita threshold. The estimated budget impact was overall larger for infant vaccination but mixed situations occurred across countries. Vaccine price, discount rate, and parasite prevalence had the largest effect on cost-effectiveness. Conclusions. Child vaccination with RTS,S would be more cost-effective than infant vaccination across countries. Adding RTS,S malaria vaccination to existing interventions would be cost-effective assuming one GDP per capita threshold for both child and infant vaccination in all examined countries except for 6 countries with lower transmission.

Reducing Malaria Mortality at the Lowest Budget: An Optimization Tool for Selecting Malaria Preventative Interventions Applied to Ghana.

Background. Preventative malaria interventions include long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs), indoor residual spraying (IRS), and seasonal malaria chemoprevention (SMC). The RTS,S vaccine candidate is now also approved for pilot introduction. This analysis estimates the optimal approach when combining current interventions with the vaccine to reduce under-five malaria mortality in Ghana at the lowest cost. Methods. A vector model was combined with a static human cohort model, using country-specific unit costs. Current coverage of each intervention was used as baseline. The base-case vaccine price was US$5/dose, with US$2 or US$10 tested in sensitivity analysis. Model simulations used a goal for extra mortality reduction in children aged <5 years, and identified the optimal combination of interventions to reach that goal at the lowest cost. The time horizon was 5 years. Results. The optimal sequence of investments would be the following: (1) introduce RTS,S; (2) introduce SMC; (3) increase LLINs and IRS concurrently. RTS,S introduction was associated with mortality reduction of 16% for a budget increase of US$15.6 million. Adding SMC with a partial coverage of 4% further reduced mortality by 1% at an additional budget of US$1.4 million. Subsequently scaling-up IRS, LLINs, and SMC at their maximum achievable coverage further reduced mortality by 82% (total reduction 98%) at an additional budget of US$474 million. At an RTS,S price of US$10/dose, SMC was first in the optimal sequence. A lower RTS,S price maintained the sequence but reduced the budget need. Conclusions. In Ghana, RTS,S introduction in addition to the existing measures would be the optimal first step for reducing under-five malaria mortality at the lowest cost, followed by SMC in relevant areas, and then further scaling-up of IRS and LLINs.

Is adding maternal vaccination to prevent whooping cough cost-effective in Australia?

Pertussis or whooping cough, a highly infectious respiratory infection, causes significant morbidity and mortality in infants. In adolescents and adults, pertussis presents with atypical symptoms often resulting in under-diagnosis and under-reporting, increasing the risk of transmission to more vulnerable groups. Maternal vaccination against pertussis protects mothers and newborns. This evaluation assessed the cost-effectiveness of adding maternal dTpa (reduced antigen diphtheria, Tetanus, acellular pertussis) vaccination to the 2016 nationally-funded pertussis program (DTPa [Diphtheria, Tetanus, acellular Pertussis] at 2, 4, 6, 18 months, 4 years and dTpa at 12-13 years) in Australia. A static cross-sectional population model was developed using a one-year period at steady-state. The model considered the total Australian population, stratified by age. Vaccine effectiveness against pertussis infection was assumed to be 92% in mothers and 91% in newborns, based on observational and case-control studies. The model included conservative assumptions around unreported cases. With 70% coverage, adding maternal vaccination to the existing pertussis program would prevent 8,847 pertussis cases, 422 outpatient cases, 146 hospitalizations and 0.54 deaths per year at the population level. With a 5% discount rate, 138.5 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) would be gained at an extra cost of AUS$ 4.44 million and an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of AUS$ 32,065 per QALY gained. Sensitivity and scenario analyses demonstrated that outcomes were most sensitive to assumptions around vaccine effectiveness, duration of protection in mothers, and disutility of unreported cases. In conclusion, dTpa vaccination in the third trimester of pregnancy is likely to be cost-effective from a healthcare payer perspective in Australia.

Cost-utility of quadrivalent versus trivalent influenza vaccine in Brazil - comparison of outcomes from different static model types.

BACKGROUND: Influenza burden in Brazil is considerable with 4.2-6.4 million cases in 2008 and influenza-like-illness responsible for 16.9% of hospitalizations. Cost-effectiveness of influenza vaccination may be assessed by different types of models, with limitations due to data availability, assumptions, and modelling approach. OBJECTIVE: To understand the impact of model complexity, the cost-utility of quadrivalent versus trivalent influenza vaccines in Brazil was estimated using three distinct models: a 1-year decision tree population model with three age groups (FLOU); a more detailed 1-year population model with five age groups (FLORA); and a more complex lifetime multi-cohort Markov model with nine age groups (FLORENCE). METHODS: Analysis 1 (impact of model structure) compared each model using the same data inputs (i.e., best available data for FLOU). Analysis 2 (impact of increasing granularity) compared each model populated with the best available data for that model. RESULTS: Using the best data for each model, the discounted cost-utility ratio of quadrivalent versus trivalent influenza vaccine was R$20,428 with FLOU, R$22,768 with FLORA (versus R$20,428 in Analysis 1), and, R$19,257 with FLORENCE (versus R$22,490 in Analysis 1) using a lifetime horizon. Conceptual differences between FLORA and FLORENCE meant the same assumption regarding increased all-cause mortality in at-risk individuals had an opposite effect on the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio in Analysis 2 versus 1, and a proportionally higher number of vaccinated elderly in FLORENCE reduced this ratio in Analysis 2. DISCUSSION: FLOU provided adequate cost-effectiveness estimates with data in broad age groups. FLORA increased insights (e.g., in healthy versus at-risk, paediatric, respiratory/non-respiratory complications). FLORENCE provided greater insights and precision (e.g., in elderly, costs and complications, lifetime cost-effectiveness). CONCLUSION: All three models predicted a cost per quality-adjusted life year gained for quadrivalent versus trivalent influenza vaccine in the range of R$19,257 (FLORENCE) to R$22,768 (FLORA) with the best available data in Brazil (Appendix A).

Cost-utility of quadrivalent versus trivalent influenza vaccine in Brazil - comparison of outcomes from different static model types

ABSTRACT Background: Influenza burden in Brazil is considerable with 4.2-6.4 million cases in 2008 and influenza-like-illness responsible for 16.9% of hospitalizations. Cost-effectiveness of influenza vaccination may be assessed by different types of models, with limitations due to data availability, assumptions, and modelling approach. Objective: To understand the impact of model complexity, the cost-utility of quadrivalent versus trivalent influenza vaccines in Brazil was estimated using three distinct models: a 1-year decision tree population model with three age groups (FLOU); a more detailed 1-year population model with five age groups (FLORA); and a more complex lifetime multi-cohort Markov model with nine age groups (FLORENCE). Methods: Analysis 1 (impact of model structure) compared each model using the same data inputs (i.e., best available data for FLOU). Analysis 2 (impact of increasing granularity) compared each model populated with the best available data for that model. Results: Using the best data for each model, the discounted cost-utility ratio of quadrivalent versus trivalent influenza vaccine was R$20,428 with FLOU, R$22,768 with FLORA (versus R$20,428 in Analysis 1), and, R$19,257 with FLORENCE (versus R$22,490 in Analysis 1) using a lifetime horizon. Conceptual differences between FLORA and FLORENCE meant the same assumption regarding increased all-cause mortality in at-risk individuals had an opposite effect on the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio in Analysis 2 versus 1, and a proportionally higher number of vaccinated elderly in FLORENCE reduced this ratio in Analysis 2. Discussion: FLOU provided adequate cost-effectiveness estimates with data in broad age groups. FLORA increased insights (e.g., in healthy versus at-risk, paediatric, respiratory/non-respiratory complications). FLORENCE provided greater insights and precision (e.g., in elderly, costs and complications, lifetime cost-effectiveness). Conclusion: All three models predicted a cost per quality-adjusted life year gained for quadrivalent versus trivalent influenza vaccine in the range of R$19,257 (FLORENCE) to R$22,768 (FLORA) with the best available data in Brazil (Appendix A).

Cost-Utility of Quadrivalent Versus Trivalent Influenza Vaccine in Germany, Using an Individual-Based Dynamic Transmission Model.

BACKGROUND: Seasonal influenza infection is primarily caused by circulation of two influenza A strain subtypes and strains from two B lineages that vary each year. Trivalent influenza vaccine (TIV) contains only one of the two B-lineage strains, resulting in mismatches between vaccine strains and the predominant circulating B lineage. Quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV) includes both B-lineage strains. The objective was to estimate the cost-utility of introducing QIV to replace TIV in Germany. METHODS: An individual-based dynamic transmission model (4Flu) using German data was used to provide realistic estimates of the impact of TIV and QIV on age-specific influenza infections. Cases were linked to health and economic outcomes to calculate the cost-utility of QIV versus TIV, from both a societal and payer perspective. Costs and effects were discounted at 3.0 and 1.5 % respectively, with 2014 as the base year. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Using QIV instead of TIV resulted in additional quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and cost savings from the societal perspective (i.e. it represents the dominant strategy) and an incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) of €14,461 per QALY from a healthcare payer perspective. In all univariate analyses, QIV remained cost-effective (ICUR <€50,000). In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, QIV was cost-effective in >98 and >99 % of the simulations from the societal and payer perspective, respectively. CONCLUSION: This analysis suggests that QIV in Germany would provide additional health gains while being cost-saving to society or costing €14,461 per QALY gained from the healthcare payer perspective, compared with TIV.

Potential public health impact of RTS,S malaria candidate vaccine in sub-Saharan Africa: a modelling study.

BACKGROUND: Adding malaria vaccination to existing interventions could help to reduce the health burden due to malaria. This study modelled the potential public health impact of the RTS,S candidate malaria vaccine in 42 malaria-endemic countries in sub-Saharan Africa. METHODS: An individual-based Markov cohort model was constructed with three categories of malaria transmission intensity and six successive malaria immunity levels. The cycle time was 5 days. Vaccination was assumed to reduce the risk of infection, with no other effects. Vaccine efficacy was assumed to wane exponentially over time. Malaria incidence and vaccine efficacy data were taken from a Phase III trial of the RTS,S vaccine with 18 months of follow-up (NCT00866619). The model was calibrated to reproduce the malaria incidence in the control arm of the trial in each transmission category and published age distribution data. Individual-level heterogeneity in malaria exposure and vaccine protection was accounted for. Parameter uncertainty and variability were captured by using stochastic model transitions. The model followed a cohort from birth to 10 years of age without malaria vaccination, or with RTS,S malaria vaccination administered at age 6, 10 and 14 weeks or at age 6, 7-and-a-half and 9 months. Median and 95% confidence intervals were calculated for the number of clinical malaria cases, severe cases, malaria hospitalizations and malaria deaths expected to be averted by each vaccination strategy. Univariate sensitivity analysis was conducted by varying the values of key input parameters. RESULTS: Vaccination assuming the coverage of diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis (DTP3) at age 6, 10 and 14 weeks is estimated to avert over five million clinical malaria cases, 119,000 severe malaria cases, 98,600 malaria hospitalizations and 31,000 malaria deaths in the 42 countries over the 10-year period. Vaccination at age 6, 7-and-a-half and 9 months with 75% of DTP3 coverage is estimated to avert almost 12.5 million clinical malaria cases, 250,000 severe malaria cases, 208,000 malaria hospitalizations and 65,400 malaria deaths in the 42 countries. Univariate sensitivity analysis indicated that for both vaccination strategies, the parameters with the largest impact on the malaria mortality estimates were waning of vaccine efficacy and malaria case-fatality rate. CONCLUSIONS: Addition of RTS,S malaria vaccination to existing malaria interventions is estimated to reduce substantially the incidence of clinical malaria, severe malaria, malaria hospitalizations and malaria deaths across 42 countries in sub-Saharan Africa.

The potential cost-effectiveness of quadrivalent versus trivalent influenza vaccine in elderly people and clinical risk groups in the UK: a lifetime multi-cohort model.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the potential cost-effectiveness of quadrivalent influenza vaccine compared with trivalent influenza vaccine in the UK. METHODS: A lifetime, multi-cohort, static Markov model was constructed, with nine age groups each divided into healthy and at-risk categories. Influenza A and B were accounted for separately. The model was run in one-year cycles for a lifetime (maximum age: 100 years). The analysis was from the perspective of the UK National Health Service. Costs and benefits were discounted at 3.5%. 2010 UK vaccination policy (vaccination of people at risk and those aged ≥65 years) was applied. Herd effect was not included. Inputs were derived from national databases and published sources where possible. The quadrivalent influenza vaccine price was not available when the study was conducted. It was estimated at £6.72,15% above the trivalent vaccine price of £5.85. Sensitivity analyses used an incremental price of up to 50%. RESULTS: Compared with trivalent influenza vaccine, the quadrivalent influenza vaccine would be expected to reduce the numbers of influenza cases by 1,393,720, medical visits by 439,852 complications by 167,357, hospitalisations for complications by 26,424 and influenza deaths by 16,471. The estimated base case incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was £5,299/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). Sensitivity analyses indicated that the ICER was sensitive to changes in circulation of influenza virus subtypes and vaccine mismatch; all other parameters had little effect. In 96% of simulations the ICER was <£20,000/QALY. Since this analysis was completed, quadrivalent influenza vaccine has become available in the UK at a list price of £9.94. Using this price in the model, the estimated ICER for quadrivalent compared with trivalent vaccination was £27,378/QALY, still within the NICE cost-effectiveness threshold (£20,000-£30,000). CONCLUSIONS: Quadrivalent influenza vaccine could reduce influenza disease burden and would be cost-effective compared with trivalent influenza vaccine in elderly people and clinical risk groups in the UK.

An approximation of herd effect due to vaccinating children against seasonal influenza - a potential solution to the incorporation of indirect effects into static models.

BACKGROUND: Indirect herd effect from vaccination of children offers potential for improving the effectiveness of influenza prevention in the remaining unvaccinated population. Static models used in cost-effectiveness analyses cannot dynamically capture herd effects. The objective of this study was to develop a methodology to allow herd effect associated with vaccinating children against seasonal influenza to be incorporated into static models evaluating the cost-effectiveness of influenza vaccination. METHODS: Two previously published linear equations for approximation of herd effects in general were compared with the results of a structured literature review undertaken using PubMed searches to identify data on herd effects specific to influenza vaccination. A linear function was fitted to point estimates from the literature using the sum of squared residuals. RESULTS: The literature review identified 21 publications on 20 studies for inclusion. Six studies provided data on a mathematical relationship between effective vaccine coverage in subgroups and reduction of influenza infection in a larger unvaccinated population. These supported a linear relationship when effective vaccine coverage in a subgroup population was between 20% and 80%. Three studies evaluating herd effect at a community level, specifically induced by vaccinating children, provided point estimates for fitting linear equations. The fitted linear equation for herd protection in the target population for vaccination (children) was slightly less conservative than a previously published equation for herd effects in general. The fitted linear equation for herd protection in the non-target population was considerably less conservative than the previously published equation. CONCLUSIONS: This method of approximating herd effect requires simple adjustments to the annual baseline risk of influenza in static models: (1) for the age group targeted by the childhood vaccination strategy (i.e. children); and (2) for other age groups not targeted (e.g. adults and/or elderly). Two approximations provide a linear relationship between effective coverage and reduction in the risk of infection. The first is a conservative approximation, recommended as a base-case for cost-effectiveness evaluations. The second, fitted to data extracted from a structured literature review, provides a less conservative estimate of herd effect, recommended for sensitivity analyses.