Cost-effectiveness analysis of typhoid conjugate vaccines in an outbreak setting: a modeling study.
Economic evaluation
Preventive vaccination
Reactive vaccination
Typhoid conjugate vaccines
Typhoid fever
Journal
BMC infectious diseases
ISSN: 1471-2334
Titre abrégé: BMC Infect Dis
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968551
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
08 Mar 2023
08 Mar 2023
Historique:
received:
24
07
2022
accepted:
20
02
2023
entrez:
8
3
2023
pubmed:
9
3
2023
medline:
11
3
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Several prolonged typhoid fever epidemics have been reported since 2010 throughout eastern and southern Africa, including Malawi, caused by multidrug-resistant Salmonella Typhi. The World Health Organization recommends the use of typhoid conjugate vaccines (TCVs) in outbreak settings; however, current data are limited on how and when TCVs might be introduced in response to outbreaks. We developed a stochastic model of typhoid transmission fitted to data from Queen Elizabeth Central Hospital in Blantyre, Malawi from January 1996 to February 2015. We used the model to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of vaccination strategies over a 10-year time horizon in three scenarios: (1) when an outbreak is likely to occur; (2) when an outbreak is unlikely to occur within the next ten years; and (3) when an outbreak has already occurred and is unlikely to occur again. We considered three vaccination strategies compared to the status quo of no vaccination: (a) preventative routine vaccination at 9 months of age; (b) preventative routine vaccination plus a catch-up campaign to 15 years of age; and (c) reactive vaccination with a catch-up campaign to age 15 (for Scenario 1). We also explored variations in outbreak definitions, delays in implementation of reactive vaccination, and the timing of preventive vaccination relative to the outbreak. Assuming an outbreak occurs within 10 years, we estimated that the various vaccination strategies would prevent a median of 15-60% of disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs). Reactive vaccination was the preferred strategy for WTP values of $0-300 per DALY averted. For WTP values > $300, introduction of preventative routine TCV immunization with a catch-up campaign was the preferred strategy. Routine vaccination with a catch-up campaign was cost-effective for WTP values above $890 per DALY averted if no outbreak occurs and > $140 per DALY averted if implemented after the outbreak has already occurred. Countries for which the spread of antimicrobial resistance is likely to lead to outbreaks of typhoid fever should consider TCV introduction. Reactive vaccination can be a cost-effective strategy, but only if delays in vaccine deployment are minimal; otherwise, introduction of preventive routine immunization with a catch-up campaign is the preferred strategy.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Several prolonged typhoid fever epidemics have been reported since 2010 throughout eastern and southern Africa, including Malawi, caused by multidrug-resistant Salmonella Typhi. The World Health Organization recommends the use of typhoid conjugate vaccines (TCVs) in outbreak settings; however, current data are limited on how and when TCVs might be introduced in response to outbreaks.
METHODOLOGY
METHODS
We developed a stochastic model of typhoid transmission fitted to data from Queen Elizabeth Central Hospital in Blantyre, Malawi from January 1996 to February 2015. We used the model to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of vaccination strategies over a 10-year time horizon in three scenarios: (1) when an outbreak is likely to occur; (2) when an outbreak is unlikely to occur within the next ten years; and (3) when an outbreak has already occurred and is unlikely to occur again. We considered three vaccination strategies compared to the status quo of no vaccination: (a) preventative routine vaccination at 9 months of age; (b) preventative routine vaccination plus a catch-up campaign to 15 years of age; and (c) reactive vaccination with a catch-up campaign to age 15 (for Scenario 1). We also explored variations in outbreak definitions, delays in implementation of reactive vaccination, and the timing of preventive vaccination relative to the outbreak.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Assuming an outbreak occurs within 10 years, we estimated that the various vaccination strategies would prevent a median of 15-60% of disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs). Reactive vaccination was the preferred strategy for WTP values of $0-300 per DALY averted. For WTP values > $300, introduction of preventative routine TCV immunization with a catch-up campaign was the preferred strategy. Routine vaccination with a catch-up campaign was cost-effective for WTP values above $890 per DALY averted if no outbreak occurs and > $140 per DALY averted if implemented after the outbreak has already occurred.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Countries for which the spread of antimicrobial resistance is likely to lead to outbreaks of typhoid fever should consider TCV introduction. Reactive vaccination can be a cost-effective strategy, but only if delays in vaccine deployment are minimal; otherwise, introduction of preventive routine immunization with a catch-up campaign is the preferred strategy.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36890448
doi: 10.1186/s12879-023-08105-2
pii: 10.1186/s12879-023-08105-2
pmc: PMC9993384
doi:
Substances chimiques
Typhoid-Paratyphoid Vaccines
0
Vaccines, Conjugate
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
143Subventions
Organisme : Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
ID : OPP1151153
Informations de copyright
© 2023. This is a U.S. Government work and not under copyright protection in the US; foreign copyright protection may apply.
Références
Lancet Glob Health. 2021 Dec;9(12):e1688-e1696
pubmed: 34798028
PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2017 Feb 27;11(2):e0005376
pubmed: 28241011
Vaccine. 2017 Jun 14;35(27):3506-3514
pubmed: 28527687
Bull World Health Organ. 2004 May;82(5):346-53
pubmed: 15298225
PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2012;6(11):e1901
pubmed: 23145204
Proc Biol Sci. 2015 Jan 7;282(1798):20141341
pubmed: 25392464
N Engl J Med. 2021 Sep 16;385(12):1104-1115
pubmed: 34525285
Clin Infect Dis. 2015 Nov 1;61 Suppl 4:S251-8
pubmed: 26449939
PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2015 Apr 24;9(4):e0003748
pubmed: 25909750
J Clin Microbiol. 2015 Jan;53(1):262-72
pubmed: 25392358
J R Soc Interface. 2008 Jan 6;5(18):67-74
pubmed: 17504737
Clin Infect Dis. 2012 Apr;54(8):1091-9
pubmed: 22357703
Nature. 2006 Mar 2;440(7080):83-6
pubmed: 16511494
Clin Infect Dis. 2008 Apr 1;46(7):963-9
pubmed: 18444810
Lancet. 2012 Dec 15;380(9859):2129-43
pubmed: 23245605
Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2020 Jun;102(6):1296-1305
pubmed: 32228795
Lancet. 2021 Aug 21;398(10301):675-684
pubmed: 34384540
Lancet Infect Dis. 2019 Sep;19(9):930
pubmed: 31478515
BMJ Open. 2017 Jul 2;7(6):e016283
pubmed: 28674145
Clin Infect Dis. 2018 Aug 1;67(4):628-638
pubmed: 29522159
Med Decis Making. 2013 Aug;33(6):755-66
pubmed: 23275450
Stat Med. 2021 Nov 20;40(26):5853-5870
pubmed: 34428309
PLoS One. 2022 Nov 23;17(11):e0277419
pubmed: 36417455
J Infect Dis. 2018 Nov 10;218(suppl_4):S232-S242
pubmed: 29444257
N Engl J Med. 1970 Sep 24;283(13):686-91
pubmed: 4916913
Am J Epidemiol. 2014 Jan 15;179(2):245-51
pubmed: 24131555
Vaccine. 2015 Jun 19;33 Suppl 3:C42-54
pubmed: 25921288
Lancet. 2012 Dec 15;380(9859):2197-223
pubmed: 23245608
Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2014 May;90(5):945-54
pubmed: 24664784
Emerg Infect Dis. 2003 May;9(5):539-44
pubmed: 12737736
Am J Public Health Nations Health. 1943 Mar;33(3):221-30
pubmed: 18015749
PLoS Med. 2013;10(9):e1001512
pubmed: 24058301
J Infect. 2020 Dec;81(6):902-910
pubmed: 33144193
Cost Eff Resour Alloc. 2018 Mar 19;16:11
pubmed: 29559855
BMJ. 2013 Mar 25;346:f1049
pubmed: 23529982
Lancet Infect Dis. 2019 Jul;19(7):728-739
pubmed: 31130329
Vaccine. 2019 Jan 7;37(2):214-216
pubmed: 29661581
Lancet Glob Health. 2021 Nov;9(11):e1561-e1568
pubmed: 34678198
Lancet. 2018 Nov 10;392(10159):1923-1994
pubmed: 30496105
Int Health. 2010 Mar;2(1):65-8
pubmed: 24037053