Cargando…
Global impact and cost-effectiveness of one-dose versus two-dose human papillomavirus vaccination schedules: a comparative modelling analysis
BACKGROUND: To eliminate cervical cancer as a public health problem, the World Health Organization had recommended routine vaccination of adolescent girls with two doses of the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine before sexual initiation. However, many countries have yet to implement HPV vaccination...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10463590/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37635227 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12916-023-02988-3 |
_version_ | 1785098266870808576 |
---|---|
author | Prem, Kiesha Choi, Yoon Hong Bénard, Élodie Burger, Emily A. Hadley, Liza Laprise, Jean-François Regan, Mary Caroline Drolet, Mélanie Sy, Stephen Abbas, Kaja Portnoy, Allison Kim, Jane J. Brisson, Marc Jit, Mark |
author_facet | Prem, Kiesha Choi, Yoon Hong Bénard, Élodie Burger, Emily A. Hadley, Liza Laprise, Jean-François Regan, Mary Caroline Drolet, Mélanie Sy, Stephen Abbas, Kaja Portnoy, Allison Kim, Jane J. Brisson, Marc Jit, Mark |
author_sort | Prem, Kiesha |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: To eliminate cervical cancer as a public health problem, the World Health Organization had recommended routine vaccination of adolescent girls with two doses of the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine before sexual initiation. However, many countries have yet to implement HPV vaccination because of financial or logistical barriers to delivering two doses outside the infant immunisation programme. METHODS: Using three independent HPV transmission models, we estimated the long-term health benefits and cost-effectiveness of one-dose versus two-dose HPV vaccination, in 188 countries, under scenarios in which one dose of the vaccine gives either a shorter duration of full protection (20 or 30 years) or lifelong protection but lower vaccine efficacy (e.g. 80%) compared to two doses. We simulated routine vaccination with the 9-valent HPV vaccine in 10-year-old girls at 80% coverage for the years 2021–2120, with a 1-year catch-up campaign up to age 14 at 80% coverage in the first year of the programme. RESULTS: Over the years 2021–2120, one-dose vaccination at 80% coverage was projected to avert 115.2 million (range of medians: 85.1–130.4) and 146.8 million (114.1–161.6) cervical cancers assuming one dose of the vaccine confers 20 and 30 years of protection, respectively. Should one dose of the vaccine provide lifelong protection at 80% vaccine efficacy, 147.8 million (140.6–169.7) cervical cancer cases could be prevented. If protection wanes after 20 years, 65 to 889 additional girls would need to be vaccinated with the second dose to prevent one cervical cancer, depending on the epidemiological profiles of the country. Across all income groups, the threshold cost for the second dose was low: from 1.59 (0.14–3.82) USD in low-income countries to 44.83 (3.75–85.64) USD in high-income countries, assuming one dose confers 30-year protection. CONCLUSIONS: Results were consistent across the three independent models and suggest that one-dose vaccination has similar health benefits to a two-dose programme while simplifying vaccine delivery, reducing costs, and alleviating vaccine supply constraints. The second dose may become cost-effective if there is a shorter duration of protection from one dose, cheaper vaccine and vaccination delivery strategies, and high burden of cervical cancer. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12916-023-02988-3. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10463590 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-104635902023-08-30 Global impact and cost-effectiveness of one-dose versus two-dose human papillomavirus vaccination schedules: a comparative modelling analysis Prem, Kiesha Choi, Yoon Hong Bénard, Élodie Burger, Emily A. Hadley, Liza Laprise, Jean-François Regan, Mary Caroline Drolet, Mélanie Sy, Stephen Abbas, Kaja Portnoy, Allison Kim, Jane J. Brisson, Marc Jit, Mark BMC Med Research Article BACKGROUND: To eliminate cervical cancer as a public health problem, the World Health Organization had recommended routine vaccination of adolescent girls with two doses of the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine before sexual initiation. However, many countries have yet to implement HPV vaccination because of financial or logistical barriers to delivering two doses outside the infant immunisation programme. METHODS: Using three independent HPV transmission models, we estimated the long-term health benefits and cost-effectiveness of one-dose versus two-dose HPV vaccination, in 188 countries, under scenarios in which one dose of the vaccine gives either a shorter duration of full protection (20 or 30 years) or lifelong protection but lower vaccine efficacy (e.g. 80%) compared to two doses. We simulated routine vaccination with the 9-valent HPV vaccine in 10-year-old girls at 80% coverage for the years 2021–2120, with a 1-year catch-up campaign up to age 14 at 80% coverage in the first year of the programme. RESULTS: Over the years 2021–2120, one-dose vaccination at 80% coverage was projected to avert 115.2 million (range of medians: 85.1–130.4) and 146.8 million (114.1–161.6) cervical cancers assuming one dose of the vaccine confers 20 and 30 years of protection, respectively. Should one dose of the vaccine provide lifelong protection at 80% vaccine efficacy, 147.8 million (140.6–169.7) cervical cancer cases could be prevented. If protection wanes after 20 years, 65 to 889 additional girls would need to be vaccinated with the second dose to prevent one cervical cancer, depending on the epidemiological profiles of the country. Across all income groups, the threshold cost for the second dose was low: from 1.59 (0.14–3.82) USD in low-income countries to 44.83 (3.75–85.64) USD in high-income countries, assuming one dose confers 30-year protection. CONCLUSIONS: Results were consistent across the three independent models and suggest that one-dose vaccination has similar health benefits to a two-dose programme while simplifying vaccine delivery, reducing costs, and alleviating vaccine supply constraints. The second dose may become cost-effective if there is a shorter duration of protection from one dose, cheaper vaccine and vaccination delivery strategies, and high burden of cervical cancer. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12916-023-02988-3. BioMed Central 2023-08-28 /pmc/articles/PMC10463590/ /pubmed/37635227 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12916-023-02988-3 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Prem, Kiesha Choi, Yoon Hong Bénard, Élodie Burger, Emily A. Hadley, Liza Laprise, Jean-François Regan, Mary Caroline Drolet, Mélanie Sy, Stephen Abbas, Kaja Portnoy, Allison Kim, Jane J. Brisson, Marc Jit, Mark Global impact and cost-effectiveness of one-dose versus two-dose human papillomavirus vaccination schedules: a comparative modelling analysis |
title | Global impact and cost-effectiveness of one-dose versus two-dose human papillomavirus vaccination schedules: a comparative modelling analysis |
title_full | Global impact and cost-effectiveness of one-dose versus two-dose human papillomavirus vaccination schedules: a comparative modelling analysis |
title_fullStr | Global impact and cost-effectiveness of one-dose versus two-dose human papillomavirus vaccination schedules: a comparative modelling analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Global impact and cost-effectiveness of one-dose versus two-dose human papillomavirus vaccination schedules: a comparative modelling analysis |
title_short | Global impact and cost-effectiveness of one-dose versus two-dose human papillomavirus vaccination schedules: a comparative modelling analysis |
title_sort | global impact and cost-effectiveness of one-dose versus two-dose human papillomavirus vaccination schedules: a comparative modelling analysis |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10463590/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37635227 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12916-023-02988-3 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT premkiesha globalimpactandcosteffectivenessofonedoseversustwodosehumanpapillomavirusvaccinationschedulesacomparativemodellinganalysis AT choiyoonhong globalimpactandcosteffectivenessofonedoseversustwodosehumanpapillomavirusvaccinationschedulesacomparativemodellinganalysis AT benardelodie globalimpactandcosteffectivenessofonedoseversustwodosehumanpapillomavirusvaccinationschedulesacomparativemodellinganalysis AT burgeremilya globalimpactandcosteffectivenessofonedoseversustwodosehumanpapillomavirusvaccinationschedulesacomparativemodellinganalysis AT hadleyliza globalimpactandcosteffectivenessofonedoseversustwodosehumanpapillomavirusvaccinationschedulesacomparativemodellinganalysis AT laprisejeanfrancois globalimpactandcosteffectivenessofonedoseversustwodosehumanpapillomavirusvaccinationschedulesacomparativemodellinganalysis AT reganmarycaroline globalimpactandcosteffectivenessofonedoseversustwodosehumanpapillomavirusvaccinationschedulesacomparativemodellinganalysis AT droletmelanie globalimpactandcosteffectivenessofonedoseversustwodosehumanpapillomavirusvaccinationschedulesacomparativemodellinganalysis AT systephen globalimpactandcosteffectivenessofonedoseversustwodosehumanpapillomavirusvaccinationschedulesacomparativemodellinganalysis AT abbaskaja globalimpactandcosteffectivenessofonedoseversustwodosehumanpapillomavirusvaccinationschedulesacomparativemodellinganalysis AT portnoyallison globalimpactandcosteffectivenessofonedoseversustwodosehumanpapillomavirusvaccinationschedulesacomparativemodellinganalysis AT kimjanej globalimpactandcosteffectivenessofonedoseversustwodosehumanpapillomavirusvaccinationschedulesacomparativemodellinganalysis AT brissonmarc globalimpactandcosteffectivenessofonedoseversustwodosehumanpapillomavirusvaccinationschedulesacomparativemodellinganalysis AT jitmark globalimpactandcosteffectivenessofonedoseversustwodosehumanpapillomavirusvaccinationschedulesacomparativemodellinganalysis |