Cargando…

Cost-effectiveness analysis of vaccinating children in Malawi with RTS,S vaccines in comparison with long-lasting insecticide-treated nets

BACKGROUND: New RTS,S malaria vaccines may soon be licensed, yet its cost-effectiveness is unknown. Before the widespread introduction of RTS,S vaccines, cost-effectiveness studies are needed to help inform governments in resource-poor settings about how best to prioritize between the new vaccine an...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Seo, Mikyung Kelly, Baker, Peter, Ngo, Karen Ngoc-Lan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4016032/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24564883
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1475-2875-13-66
_version_ 1782315451820277760
author Seo, Mikyung Kelly
Baker, Peter
Ngo, Karen Ngoc-Lan
author_facet Seo, Mikyung Kelly
Baker, Peter
Ngo, Karen Ngoc-Lan
author_sort Seo, Mikyung Kelly
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: New RTS,S malaria vaccines may soon be licensed, yet its cost-effectiveness is unknown. Before the widespread introduction of RTS,S vaccines, cost-effectiveness studies are needed to help inform governments in resource-poor settings about how best to prioritize between the new vaccine and existing malaria interventions. METHODS: A Markov model simulated malaria progression in a hypothetical Malawian birth cohort. Parameters were based on published data. Three strategies were compared: no intervention, vaccination at one year, and long-lasting, insecticide-treated nets (LLINs) at birth. Both health service and societal perspectives were explored. Health outcomes were measured in disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) averted and costed in 2012 US$. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated and extensive sensitivity analyses were conducted. Three times GDP per capita ($1,095) per DALY averted was used for a cost-effectiveness threshold, whilst one times GDP ($365) was considered ‘very cost-effective’. RESULTS: From a societal perspective the vaccine strategy was dominant. It averted 0.11 more DALYs than LLINs and 0.372 more DALYs than the no intervention strategy per person, while costing $10.04 less than LLINs and $59.74 less than no intervention. From a health service perspective the vaccine’s ICER was $145.03 per DALY averted, and thus can be considered very cost-effective. The results were robust to changes in all variables except the vaccine and LLINs’ duration of efficacy. Vaccines remained cost-effective even at the lowest assumed efficacy levels of 49.6% (mild malaria) and 14.2% (severe malaria), and the highest price of $15. However, from a societal perspective, if the vaccine duration efficacy was set below 2.69 years or the LLIN duration of efficacy was greater than 4.24 years then LLINs became the more cost-effective strategy. CONCLUSION: The results showed that vaccinating Malawian children with RTS,S vaccines was very cost-effective from both a societal and a health service perspective. This result was robust to changes in most variables, including vaccine price and vaccine efficacy, but was sensitive to the duration of efficacy of the vaccine and LLINs. Given the best evidence currently available, vaccines can be considered as a very cost-effective component of Malawi’s future malaria control programmes. However, long-term follow-up studies on both interventions are needed.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4016032
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-40160322014-05-10 Cost-effectiveness analysis of vaccinating children in Malawi with RTS,S vaccines in comparison with long-lasting insecticide-treated nets Seo, Mikyung Kelly Baker, Peter Ngo, Karen Ngoc-Lan Malar J Research BACKGROUND: New RTS,S malaria vaccines may soon be licensed, yet its cost-effectiveness is unknown. Before the widespread introduction of RTS,S vaccines, cost-effectiveness studies are needed to help inform governments in resource-poor settings about how best to prioritize between the new vaccine and existing malaria interventions. METHODS: A Markov model simulated malaria progression in a hypothetical Malawian birth cohort. Parameters were based on published data. Three strategies were compared: no intervention, vaccination at one year, and long-lasting, insecticide-treated nets (LLINs) at birth. Both health service and societal perspectives were explored. Health outcomes were measured in disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) averted and costed in 2012 US$. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated and extensive sensitivity analyses were conducted. Three times GDP per capita ($1,095) per DALY averted was used for a cost-effectiveness threshold, whilst one times GDP ($365) was considered ‘very cost-effective’. RESULTS: From a societal perspective the vaccine strategy was dominant. It averted 0.11 more DALYs than LLINs and 0.372 more DALYs than the no intervention strategy per person, while costing $10.04 less than LLINs and $59.74 less than no intervention. From a health service perspective the vaccine’s ICER was $145.03 per DALY averted, and thus can be considered very cost-effective. The results were robust to changes in all variables except the vaccine and LLINs’ duration of efficacy. Vaccines remained cost-effective even at the lowest assumed efficacy levels of 49.6% (mild malaria) and 14.2% (severe malaria), and the highest price of $15. However, from a societal perspective, if the vaccine duration efficacy was set below 2.69 years or the LLIN duration of efficacy was greater than 4.24 years then LLINs became the more cost-effective strategy. CONCLUSION: The results showed that vaccinating Malawian children with RTS,S vaccines was very cost-effective from both a societal and a health service perspective. This result was robust to changes in most variables, including vaccine price and vaccine efficacy, but was sensitive to the duration of efficacy of the vaccine and LLINs. Given the best evidence currently available, vaccines can be considered as a very cost-effective component of Malawi’s future malaria control programmes. However, long-term follow-up studies on both interventions are needed. BioMed Central 2014-02-24 /pmc/articles/PMC4016032/ /pubmed/24564883 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1475-2875-13-66 Text en Copyright © 2014 Seo et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Seo, Mikyung Kelly
Baker, Peter
Ngo, Karen Ngoc-Lan
Cost-effectiveness analysis of vaccinating children in Malawi with RTS,S vaccines in comparison with long-lasting insecticide-treated nets
title Cost-effectiveness analysis of vaccinating children in Malawi with RTS,S vaccines in comparison with long-lasting insecticide-treated nets
title_full Cost-effectiveness analysis of vaccinating children in Malawi with RTS,S vaccines in comparison with long-lasting insecticide-treated nets
title_fullStr Cost-effectiveness analysis of vaccinating children in Malawi with RTS,S vaccines in comparison with long-lasting insecticide-treated nets
title_full_unstemmed Cost-effectiveness analysis of vaccinating children in Malawi with RTS,S vaccines in comparison with long-lasting insecticide-treated nets
title_short Cost-effectiveness analysis of vaccinating children in Malawi with RTS,S vaccines in comparison with long-lasting insecticide-treated nets
title_sort cost-effectiveness analysis of vaccinating children in malawi with rts,s vaccines in comparison with long-lasting insecticide-treated nets
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4016032/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24564883
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1475-2875-13-66
work_keys_str_mv AT seomikyungkelly costeffectivenessanalysisofvaccinatingchildreninmalawiwithrtssvaccinesincomparisonwithlonglastinginsecticidetreatednets
AT bakerpeter costeffectivenessanalysisofvaccinatingchildreninmalawiwithrtssvaccinesincomparisonwithlonglastinginsecticidetreatednets
AT ngokarenngoclan costeffectivenessanalysisofvaccinatingchildreninmalawiwithrtssvaccinesincomparisonwithlonglastinginsecticidetreatednets