Human papillomavirus vaccination for adults aged 30 to 45 years in the United States: A cost-effectiveness analysis.


Journal

PLoS medicine
ISSN: 1549-1676
Titre abrégé: PLoS Med
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101231360

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
03 2021
Historique:
received: 13 02 2020
accepted: 07 01 2021
entrez: 11 3 2021
pubmed: 12 3 2021
medline: 23 7 2021
Statut: epublish

Résumé

A nonavalent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine has been licensed for use in women and men up to age 45 years in the United States. The cost-effectiveness of HPV vaccination for women and men aged 30 to 45 years in the context of cervical cancer screening practice was evaluated to inform national guidelines. We utilized 2 independent HPV microsimulation models to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of extending the upper age limit of HPV vaccination in women (from age 26 years) and men (from age 21 years) up to age 30, 35, 40, or 45 years. The models were empirically calibrated to reflect the burden of HPV and related cancers in the US population and used standardized inputs regarding historical and future vaccination uptake, vaccine efficacy, cervical cancer screening, and costs. Disease outcomes included cervical, anal, oropharyngeal, vulvar, vaginal, and penile cancers, as well as genital warts. Both models projected higher costs and greater health benefits as the upper age limit of HPV vaccination increased. Strategies of vaccinating females and males up to ages 30, 35, and 40 years were found to be less cost-effective than vaccinating up to age 45 years, which had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) greater than a commonly accepted upper threshold of $200,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. When including all HPV-related outcomes, the ICER for vaccinating up to age 45 years ranged from $315,700 to $440,600 per QALY gained. Assumptions regarding cervical screening compliance, vaccine costs, and the natural history of noncervical HPV-related cancers had major impacts on the cost-effectiveness of the vaccination strategies. Key limitations of the study were related to uncertainties in the data used to inform the models, including the timing of vaccine impact on noncervical cancers and vaccine efficacy at older ages. Our results from 2 independent models suggest that HPV vaccination for adult women and men aged 30 to 45 years is unlikely to represent good value for money in the US.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
A nonavalent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine has been licensed for use in women and men up to age 45 years in the United States. The cost-effectiveness of HPV vaccination for women and men aged 30 to 45 years in the context of cervical cancer screening practice was evaluated to inform national guidelines.
METHODS AND FINDINGS
We utilized 2 independent HPV microsimulation models to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of extending the upper age limit of HPV vaccination in women (from age 26 years) and men (from age 21 years) up to age 30, 35, 40, or 45 years. The models were empirically calibrated to reflect the burden of HPV and related cancers in the US population and used standardized inputs regarding historical and future vaccination uptake, vaccine efficacy, cervical cancer screening, and costs. Disease outcomes included cervical, anal, oropharyngeal, vulvar, vaginal, and penile cancers, as well as genital warts. Both models projected higher costs and greater health benefits as the upper age limit of HPV vaccination increased. Strategies of vaccinating females and males up to ages 30, 35, and 40 years were found to be less cost-effective than vaccinating up to age 45 years, which had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) greater than a commonly accepted upper threshold of $200,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. When including all HPV-related outcomes, the ICER for vaccinating up to age 45 years ranged from $315,700 to $440,600 per QALY gained. Assumptions regarding cervical screening compliance, vaccine costs, and the natural history of noncervical HPV-related cancers had major impacts on the cost-effectiveness of the vaccination strategies. Key limitations of the study were related to uncertainties in the data used to inform the models, including the timing of vaccine impact on noncervical cancers and vaccine efficacy at older ages.
CONCLUSIONS
Our results from 2 independent models suggest that HPV vaccination for adult women and men aged 30 to 45 years is unlikely to represent good value for money in the US.

Identifiants

pubmed: 33705382
doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003534
pii: PMEDICINE-D-20-00445
pmc: PMC7951902
doi:

Substances chimiques

Papillomavirus Vaccines 0

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

e1003534

Subventions

Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : U01 CA199334
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : U01 CA253912
Pays : United States

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

I have read the journal’s policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: KC is the co-principal investigator of Compass (NCT02328872), an unrelated trial of cervical screening, which is conducted and funded by the VCS Foundation, a government-funded health promotion charity. The VCS Foundation has received equipment and a funding contribution for the Compass trial from Roche Molecular Systems but neither KC nor her institution on her behalf have received funding for this trial or any other project. MAS receives salary support from the National Health & Medical Research Council (Australia) and Cancer Institute NSW. KTS receives salary support from the Cancer Institute NSW. All other authors declare no conflicts.

Références

J Natl Cancer Inst. 2015 Apr 29;107(6):djv086
pubmed: 25925419
CA Cancer J Clin. 2012 May-Jun;62(3):147-72
pubmed: 22422631
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2014 May;23(5):765-73
pubmed: 24302677
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2013 Aug 30;62(34):685-93
pubmed: 23985496
Vaccine. 2020 Nov 25;38(50):8032-8039
pubmed: 33121846
Vaccine. 2018 Jul 5;36(29):4362-4368
pubmed: 29887325
Clin Infect Dis. 2017 Sep 15;65(6):893-899
pubmed: 28531261
Vaccine. 2014 Sep 3;32(39):5087-97
pubmed: 25018097
N Engl J Med. 2011 Feb 3;364(5):401-11
pubmed: 21288094
Lancet Public Health. 2016 Dec;1(2):e66-e75
pubmed: 29253419
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2009 Sep 18;58(36):997-1001
pubmed: 19763075
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2016 Oct 18;109(2):
pubmed: 27754955
Expert Rev Vaccines. 2018 Dec;17(12):1085-1091
pubmed: 30495978
N Engl J Med. 2014 Aug 28;371(9):796-7
pubmed: 25162885
Lancet. 2007 Jun 2;369(9576):1861-1868
pubmed: 17544766
Br J Cancer. 2011 Jun 28;105(1):28-37
pubmed: 21629249
MMWR Recomm Rep. 2014 Aug 29;63(RR-05):1-30
pubmed: 25167164
MMWR Recomm Rep. 2007 Mar 23;56(RR-2):1-24
pubmed: 17380109
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2020 Sep 1;112(9):955-963
pubmed: 31821501
Lancet. 2009 Jul 25;374(9686):301-14
pubmed: 19586656
N Engl J Med. 2007 May 10;356(19):1928-43
pubmed: 17494926
Med Care. 1998 Jun;36(6):778-92
pubmed: 9630120
Int J Cancer. 2013 Jan 1;132(1):198-207
pubmed: 22532127
Psychooncology. 2012 Oct;21(10):1071-81
pubmed: 21695747
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2015 Jul 31;64(29):784-92
pubmed: 26225476
Int J Cancer. 2015 Jun 15;136(12):2854-63
pubmed: 25447979
N Engl J Med. 2015 Feb 19;372(8):711-23
pubmed: 25693011
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2011 Aug 26;60(33):1117-23
pubmed: 21866084
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011 Jan 19;103(2):117-28
pubmed: 21228314
CA Cancer J Clin. 2007 Jan-Feb;57(1):7-28
pubmed: 17237032
Gynecol Oncol. 2014 Mar;132(3):628-35
pubmed: 24395062
J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2013 Apr;17(5 Suppl 1):S1-S27
pubmed: 23519301
JAMA. 2007 Aug 15;298(7):805-6
pubmed: 17699015
Gynecol Oncol. 2007 Jan;104(1):232-46
pubmed: 17084886
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2010 Aug 20;59(32):1018-23
pubmed: 20724968
JAMA. 2018 Aug 21;320(7):706-714
pubmed: 30140882
Ann Intern Med. 2020 Jan 7;172(1):22-29
pubmed: 31816629
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2016 Aug 26;65(33):850-8
pubmed: 27561081
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2019 Aug 16;68(32):698-702
pubmed: 31415491
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2015 Mar 27;64(11):300-4
pubmed: 25811679
Papillomavirus Res. 2019 Dec;8:100184
pubmed: 31505258
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2015 Jan;24(1):230-40
pubmed: 25363635
Lancet Infect Dis. 2016 Oct;16(10):1154-1168
pubmed: 27373900
JAMA. 2018 Aug 21;320(7):674-686
pubmed: 30140884

Auteurs

Jane J Kim (JJ)

Department of Health Policy and Management, Center for Health Decision Science, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.

Kate T Simms (KT)

Cancer Research Division, Cancer Council New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.

James Killen (J)

Cancer Research Division, Cancer Council New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.

Megan A Smith (MA)

Cancer Research Division, Cancer Council New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.

Emily A Burger (EA)

Department of Health Policy and Management, Center for Health Decision Science, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Department of Health Management and Health Economics, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.

Stephen Sy (S)

Department of Health Policy and Management, Center for Health Decision Science, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.

Catherine Regan (C)

Department of Health Policy and Management, Center for Health Decision Science, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.

Karen Canfell (K)

Cancer Research Division, Cancer Council New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH