Cost-effectiveness of pharmaceutical strategies to prevent respiratory syncytial virus disease in young children: a decision-support model for use in low-income and middle-income countries.
Economic evaluation
LMICs
Maternal vaccine
Monoclonal antibody
RSV
Journal
BMC medicine
ISSN: 1741-7015
Titre abrégé: BMC Med
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101190723
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
11 04 2023
11 04 2023
Historique:
received:
08
09
2022
accepted:
10
03
2023
medline:
12
4
2023
entrez:
10
4
2023
pubmed:
11
4
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is a leading cause of respiratory disease in young children. A number of mathematical models have been used to assess the cost-effectiveness of RSV prevention strategies, but these have not been designed for ease of use by multidisciplinary teams working in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). We describe the UNIVAC decision-support model (a proportionate outcomes static cohort model) and its approach to exploring the potential cost-effectiveness of two RSV prevention strategies: a single-dose maternal vaccine and a single-dose long-lasting monoclonal antibody (mAb) for infants. We identified model input parameters for 133 LMICs using evidence from the literature and selected national datasets. We calculated the potential cost-effectiveness of each RSV prevention strategy (compared to nothing and to each other) over the lifetimes of all children born in the year 2025 and compared our results to a separate model published by PATH. We ran sensitivity and scenario analyses to identify the inputs with the largest influence on the cost-effectiveness results. Our illustrative results assuming base case input assumptions for maternal vaccination ($3.50 per dose, 69% efficacy, 6 months protection) and infant mAb ($3.50 per dose, 77% efficacy, 5 months protection) showed that both interventions were cost-saving compared to status quo in around one-third of 133 LMICs, and had a cost per DALY averted below 0.5 times the national GDP per capita in the remaining LMICs. UNIVAC generated similar results to a separate model published by PATH. Cost-effectiveness results were most sensitive to changes in the price, efficacy and duration of protection of each strategy, and the rate (and cost) of RSV hospital admissions. Forthcoming RSV interventions (maternal vaccines and infant mAbs) are worth serious consideration in LMICs, but there is a good deal of uncertainty around several influential inputs, including intervention price, efficacy, and duration of protection. The UNIVAC decision-support model provides a framework for country teams to build consensus on data inputs, explore scenarios, and strengthen the local ownership and policy-relevance of results.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is a leading cause of respiratory disease in young children. A number of mathematical models have been used to assess the cost-effectiveness of RSV prevention strategies, but these have not been designed for ease of use by multidisciplinary teams working in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs).
METHODS
We describe the UNIVAC decision-support model (a proportionate outcomes static cohort model) and its approach to exploring the potential cost-effectiveness of two RSV prevention strategies: a single-dose maternal vaccine and a single-dose long-lasting monoclonal antibody (mAb) for infants. We identified model input parameters for 133 LMICs using evidence from the literature and selected national datasets. We calculated the potential cost-effectiveness of each RSV prevention strategy (compared to nothing and to each other) over the lifetimes of all children born in the year 2025 and compared our results to a separate model published by PATH. We ran sensitivity and scenario analyses to identify the inputs with the largest influence on the cost-effectiveness results.
RESULTS
Our illustrative results assuming base case input assumptions for maternal vaccination ($3.50 per dose, 69% efficacy, 6 months protection) and infant mAb ($3.50 per dose, 77% efficacy, 5 months protection) showed that both interventions were cost-saving compared to status quo in around one-third of 133 LMICs, and had a cost per DALY averted below 0.5 times the national GDP per capita in the remaining LMICs. UNIVAC generated similar results to a separate model published by PATH. Cost-effectiveness results were most sensitive to changes in the price, efficacy and duration of protection of each strategy, and the rate (and cost) of RSV hospital admissions.
CONCLUSIONS
Forthcoming RSV interventions (maternal vaccines and infant mAbs) are worth serious consideration in LMICs, but there is a good deal of uncertainty around several influential inputs, including intervention price, efficacy, and duration of protection. The UNIVAC decision-support model provides a framework for country teams to build consensus on data inputs, explore scenarios, and strengthen the local ownership and policy-relevance of results.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37038127
doi: 10.1186/s12916-023-02827-5
pii: 10.1186/s12916-023-02827-5
pmc: PMC10088159
doi:
Substances chimiques
Antibodies, Monoclonal
0
Pharmaceutical Preparations
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
138Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
Lancet Glob Health. 2015 Nov;3(11):e712-23
pubmed: 26475018
Eur Respir J. 2021 Oct 1;58(3):
pubmed: 33888523
Vaccine. 2013 Jul 02;31 Suppl 3:C19-29
pubmed: 23777686
Lancet. 2016 Feb 6;387(10018):587-603
pubmed: 26794078
Lancet Glob Health. 2019 Nov;7(11):e1541-e1552
pubmed: 31607466
Vaccine. 2016 Jan 4;34(2):190-197
pubmed: 26100926
Lancet Glob Health. 2019 Dec;7(12):e1664-e1674
pubmed: 31708147
Pharmacoeconomics. 2014 Jun;32(6):525-31
pubmed: 24791735
Lancet Glob Health. 2019 Aug;7(8):e1031-e1045
pubmed: 31303294
BMJ Open. 2021 Apr 24;11(4):e046563
pubmed: 33895717
Vaccine. 2020 Jul 14;38(33):5139-5147
pubmed: 32586761
BMJ Glob Health. 2018 Nov 5;3(6):e000964
pubmed: 30483412
Vaccine. 2015 May 7;33 Suppl 1:A135-42
pubmed: 25919154
Bull World Health Organ. 2016 Dec 1;94(12):925-930
pubmed: 27994285
J Med Virol. 2017 Jul;89(7):1151-1157
pubmed: 28092107
Lancet Infect Dis. 2021 Sep;21(9):1303-1312
pubmed: 33965062
PLoS One. 2017 Nov 30;12(11):e0186735
pubmed: 29190684
J Infect. 2022 Feb;84(2):216-226
pubmed: 34953903
BMC Infect Dis. 2016 May 21;16:218
pubmed: 27207342
Vaccine. 2015 Nov 25;33(47):6473-8
pubmed: 26247900
Pediatrics. 2014 Aug;134(2):e620-38
pubmed: 25070304
Lancet. 2022 May 28;399(10340):2047-2064
pubmed: 35598608
Clin Infect Dis. 2008 Jan 1;46(1):50-7
pubmed: 18171213
Vaccine. 2022 Jun 9;40(26):3506-3510
pubmed: 35184927
Lancet. 2009 May 2;373(9674):1543-9
pubmed: 19303633
PLoS Pathog. 2018 Feb 15;14(2):e1006770
pubmed: 29447284
J Pediatric Infect Dis Soc. 2019 Sep 25;8(4):325-333
pubmed: 29931284
Pediatrics. 1998 Sep;102(3):531-7
pubmed: 9724660
N Engl J Med. 2020 Jul 30;383(5):415-425
pubmed: 32726528
Lancet. 2017 Sep 2;390(10098):946-958
pubmed: 28689664
Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2022 Dec 31;18(1):2040329
pubmed: 35240926
Thorax. 2014 Dec;69(12):1149-51
pubmed: 24590803
Lancet Respir Med. 2020 Aug;8(8):795-806
pubmed: 32763206
Vaccine. 2017 Jan 5;35(2):403-409
pubmed: 27914740
Vaccine. 2019 Nov 28;37(50):7355-7362
pubmed: 28302410
Vaccine. 2010 Mar 8;28(11):2356-9
pubmed: 19567247
BMC Med. 2019 Aug 19;17(1):163
pubmed: 31422772
Value Health. 2018 Jul;21(7):759-761
pubmed: 30005746
Lancet Infect Dis. 2019 Jul;19(7):717-727
pubmed: 31178289
Am J Dis Child. 1979 Aug;133(8):798-802
pubmed: 463835
J Glob Health. 2016 Jun;6(1):010408
pubmed: 27231544
Children (Basel). 2021 Dec 06;8(12):
pubmed: 34943339
Vaccine. 2015 May 7;33 Suppl 1:A21-7
pubmed: 25919164
Influenza Other Respir Viruses. 2020 Nov;14(6):647-657
pubmed: 31670892
Influenza Other Respir Viruses. 2020 Nov;14(6):630-637
pubmed: 31206246
J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2010 Nov;126(5):926-38
pubmed: 20926125
BMC Med. 2020 Apr 6;18(1):82
pubmed: 32248817
Clin Infect Dis. 2019 Aug 30;69(6):1071-1078
pubmed: 30689799
Vaccine. 2015 May 7;33 Suppl 1:A8-10
pubmed: 25919181
Epidemics. 2021 Jun;35:100444
pubmed: 33662812
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2022 Mar 22;119(12):e2112410119
pubmed: 35286196
N Engl J Med. 2013 May 9;368(19):1791-9
pubmed: 23656644