Cost-effectiveness of rotavirus vaccination in the Philippines: A modeling study.
Cost-effectiveness
Philippines
Rotavirus
Vaccination
Journal
Vaccine
ISSN: 1873-2518
Titre abrégé: Vaccine
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 8406899
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
26 11 2021
26 11 2021
Historique:
received:
13
07
2021
revised:
08
09
2021
accepted:
29
09
2021
pubmed:
11
11
2021
medline:
27
1
2022
entrez:
10
11
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Rotavirus gastroenteritis (RVGE) remains a leading cause of hospitalization and death in children under five years of age in the Philippines. Rotavirus (RV) vaccination was introduced into the national immunization program (NIP) in 2012 but has since been limited to one region due to cost considerations and conflicting local cost-effectiveness estimates. Updated estimates of the cost-effectiveness of RV vaccination are required to inform prioritization of national immunization activities. We calculated the potential costs and benefits of rotavirus vaccination over a 10-year-period (2021-2031) from a government and societal perspective, comparing four alternative rotavirus vaccines: Rotavac, Rotasiil, Rotarix and Rotateq. For each vaccine, a proportionate outcomes model was used to calculate the expected number of disease events, DALYs, vaccination program costs, and healthcare costs, with and without vaccination. The primary outcome measure was the cost per DALY averted. Assuming each product would generate similar benefits, the dominant (lowest cost) product was identified. We then calculated the cost-effectiveness (US$ per Disability Adjusted Life Year [DALY] averted) of the least costly product and compared it to willingness-to-pay thresholds of 0.5 and 1 times the national GDP per capita ($3,485), and ran deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Introducing any of the four rotavirus vaccines would avert around 40% of RVGE visits, hospitalizations, and deaths over the period 2021-2031. Over the same ten-year period, the incremental cost of vaccination from a government perspective was estimated to be around $104, $105, $220, and $277 million for Rotavac, Rotasiil, Rotarix and Rotateq, respectively. The equivalent cost from a societal perspective was $58, $60, $178 and $231 million. The cost-effectiveness of the least costly product (Rotavac) was $1,148 ($830-$1682) from a government perspective and $646 ($233-1277) from a societal perspective. All other products offered similar benefits but at a higher cost. There is a >99% probability that Rotavac would be cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold set at 0.5 times the national GDP per capita. Both Rotavac and Rotasiil are likely to be cost-effective options in the Philippines, but it is not possible to say definitively which product should be preferred. Rotarix and Rotateq are expected to offer similar benefits at more cost, so would need to be priced far more competitively to be considered for introduction.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34753614
pii: S0264-410X(21)01290-1
doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2021.09.075
pmc: PMC8631456
pii:
doi:
Substances chimiques
Rotavirus Vaccines
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
7091-7100Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
Références
Int J Epidemiol. 2019 Aug 1;48(4):1316-1326
pubmed: 30879038
Clin Infect Dis. 2016 May 1;62 Suppl 2:S96-S105
pubmed: 27059362
PLoS One. 2017 Sep 11;12(9):e0183392
pubmed: 28892480
J Public Health Policy. 2021 Mar;42(1):53-70
pubmed: 33398056
Lancet. 2018 Nov 10;392(10159):1789-1858
pubmed: 30496104
Health Aff (Millwood). 2018 Feb;37(2):316-324
pubmed: 29401021
Lancet Infect Dis. 2019 Jul;19(7):717-727
pubmed: 31178289
Vaccine. 2019 Feb 4;37(6):798-807
pubmed: 30639458
J Infect Dis. 2009 Nov 1;200 Suppl 1:S174-81
pubmed: 19817598
Open Forum Infect Dis. 2019 Mar 08;6(4):ofz117
pubmed: 31049363
BMC Public Health. 2011 May 25;11:389
pubmed: 21612640
PLoS One. 2014 Apr 09;9(4):e93427
pubmed: 24718483
Lancet Infect Dis. 2020 Jan;20(1):37-59
pubmed: 31678029
BMC Res Notes. 2018 Oct 22;11(1):749
pubmed: 30348211
Sci Rep. 2018 Sep 24;8(1):14291
pubmed: 30250267
Lancet Glob Health. 2021 Jul;9(7):e942-e956
pubmed: 33891885
Lancet Glob Health. 2019 Nov;7(11):e1541-e1552
pubmed: 31607466
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Oct 28;2019(10):
pubmed: 31684685
Wkly Epidemiol Rec. 2009 Dec 18;84(50):533-40
pubmed: 20034143
Lancet Glob Health. 2019 Dec;7(12):e1664-e1674
pubmed: 31708147
Vaccine. 2020 Jul 6;38(32):5049-5059
pubmed: 32522415
Curr Opin Infect Dis. 2019 Oct;32(5):435-444
pubmed: 31305493