The Cost-Effectiveness of Universal Varicella Vaccination in Italy: A Model-Based Assessment of Vaccination Strategies.
Italy
MMRV
chickenpox
cost-effectiveness
health-economics
vaccination
varicella
varicella zoster virus
Journal
ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR
ISSN: 1178-6981
Titre abrégé: Clinicoecon Outcomes Res
Pays: New Zealand
ID NLM: 101560564
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2020
2020
Historique:
received:
13
09
2019
accepted:
16
02
2020
entrez:
2
7
2020
pubmed:
2
7
2020
medline:
2
7
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
In 2017, varicella vaccination became mandatory for all children in Italy, based on a two-dose schedule administered at 12-15 months of age and 5 to 6 years of age. Varicella vaccines are available in different formulations (as a single vaccine or as a combination vaccine together with measles, mumps, and rubella) and are made by multiple manufacturers with different effectiveness profiles. This study calculates the cost-effectiveness of a range of varicella vaccination strategies to identify the optimal strategy for Italy. A dynamic transmission cost-effectiveness model was applied in Italy to simulate the long-term (50 years) costs and outcomes associated with different varicella vaccination strategies. Five vaccination strategies were evaluated using the model: two doses of two different combination Measles-Mumps-Rubella-Varicella vaccines (either Vaccine A (MSD) [denoted QQVa] or Vaccine B (GSK) [denoted QQVb]); a first dose of a single Varicella vaccine followed by a second dose of a combination vaccine (either Vaccine C (MSD) followed by Vaccine A [denoted MQVa] or Vaccine D (GSK) followed by Vaccine B [denoted MQVb]); or no vaccine at all (NV). The model was adapted for Italy using publicly available Italian data and expert opinion. Over the 50-year time-horizon, in the absence of universal varicella vaccination, there would be 34.8 million varicella cases, 142 varicella-infection-related deaths, and €23 billion in societal costs. The cost per capita from a societal perspective ranged from €164.55 to €392.18 with NV being the most expensive and QQVa the least expensive. The most effective strategy was QQVa, which resulted in a 66% decrease in varicella cases and 30% reduction in varicella-related deaths compared to NV strategy. QQVa led to a net saving in societal cost around €13 billion compared to NV as the cost of vaccination was more than offset by the savings that resulted from the reduced burden of illness. Varicella vaccination has a major impact on reducing varicella incidence, prevalence, and societal costs. This analysis supports the policy for universal varicella vaccination in Italy as the NV strategy was the most expensive and resulted in the poorest outcomes. QQVa offers the greatest benefits at the lowest cost and should be considered as a potential priority strategy for Italian population.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
In 2017, varicella vaccination became mandatory for all children in Italy, based on a two-dose schedule administered at 12-15 months of age and 5 to 6 years of age. Varicella vaccines are available in different formulations (as a single vaccine or as a combination vaccine together with measles, mumps, and rubella) and are made by multiple manufacturers with different effectiveness profiles. This study calculates the cost-effectiveness of a range of varicella vaccination strategies to identify the optimal strategy for Italy.
METHODS
METHODS
A dynamic transmission cost-effectiveness model was applied in Italy to simulate the long-term (50 years) costs and outcomes associated with different varicella vaccination strategies. Five vaccination strategies were evaluated using the model: two doses of two different combination Measles-Mumps-Rubella-Varicella vaccines (either Vaccine A (MSD) [denoted QQVa] or Vaccine B (GSK) [denoted QQVb]); a first dose of a single Varicella vaccine followed by a second dose of a combination vaccine (either Vaccine C (MSD) followed by Vaccine A [denoted MQVa] or Vaccine D (GSK) followed by Vaccine B [denoted MQVb]); or no vaccine at all (NV). The model was adapted for Italy using publicly available Italian data and expert opinion.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Over the 50-year time-horizon, in the absence of universal varicella vaccination, there would be 34.8 million varicella cases, 142 varicella-infection-related deaths, and €23 billion in societal costs. The cost per capita from a societal perspective ranged from €164.55 to €392.18 with NV being the most expensive and QQVa the least expensive. The most effective strategy was QQVa, which resulted in a 66% decrease in varicella cases and 30% reduction in varicella-related deaths compared to NV strategy. QQVa led to a net saving in societal cost around €13 billion compared to NV as the cost of vaccination was more than offset by the savings that resulted from the reduced burden of illness.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Varicella vaccination has a major impact on reducing varicella incidence, prevalence, and societal costs. This analysis supports the policy for universal varicella vaccination in Italy as the NV strategy was the most expensive and resulted in the poorest outcomes. QQVa offers the greatest benefits at the lowest cost and should be considered as a potential priority strategy for Italian population.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32606844
doi: 10.2147/CEOR.S229685
pii: 229685
pmc: PMC7294569
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
273-283Informations de copyright
© 2020 Azzari et al.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
CA, VB, and SG report financial support from Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA, RG and EOB are employees of Evidera, Modelling and Simulation, Inc, and participated in the study under contract to Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USAND (at the time of the study), VJD and LJW are employees of Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA, who may own stock and/or hold stock options in Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA. The authors report no other conflicts of interest in this work.
Références
J Infect Dis. 1995 Sep;172(3):706-12
pubmed: 7658062
Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2002 Oct;21(10):931-5
pubmed: 12394815
J Math Biol. 1989;27(3):233-58
pubmed: 2746140
Pharmacoeconomics. 2004;22(13):839-55
pubmed: 15329030
Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2004 Feb;23(2):132-7
pubmed: 14872179
Vaccine. 2014 Feb 3;32(6):645-50
pubmed: 24374498
N Engl J Med. 1957 Oct 31;257(18):843-8
pubmed: 13477399
Vaccine. 2012 Feb 1;30(6):1225-34
pubmed: 22119592
J Infect. 2019 Mar;78(3):220-225
pubmed: 30528868
Expert Rev Vaccines. 2018 Apr;17(4):351-362
pubmed: 29388450
Epidemiology. 2019 Sep;30(5):723-736
pubmed: 31274572
Pediatrics. 2004 Sep;114(3):786-92
pubmed: 15342855
Lancet. 2006 Oct 14;368(9544):1365-76
pubmed: 17046469
Respiration. 1992;59(6):339-43
pubmed: 1488571
J Med Microbiol. 2015 Nov;64(11):1387-1394
pubmed: 25813818
Vaccine. 2015 Jul 17;33(31):3636-49
pubmed: 26073015
J Infect Dis. 2008 Mar 1;197 Suppl 2:S185-90
pubmed: 18419395
Am J Infect Control. 2018 Jan;46(1):e1-e7
pubmed: 28935482
JAMA. 1994 Feb 2;271(5):375-81
pubmed: 8283587
Curr Med Res Opin. 2007 Dec;23(12):2945-54
pubmed: 17937842
Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2012 Dec;31(12):1263-8
pubmed: 23188098
Pharmacoeconomics. 2018 Jul;36(7):745-758
pubmed: 29779120
Euro Surveill. 2016 Jun 16;21(24):
pubmed: 27336188
Pediatrics. 2016 Mar;137(3):e20153741
pubmed: 26908671
BMC Infect Dis. 2019 Feb 6;19(1):126
pubmed: 30727971
Lancet Infect Dis. 2015 May;15(5):565-80
pubmed: 25744474
Clin Ther. 2015 Apr 1;37(4):830-841.e7
pubmed: 25721380
N Engl J Med. 1991 Nov 28;325(22):1539-44
pubmed: 1944438
Lancet Infect Dis. 2019 Mar;19(3):287-297
pubmed: 30765242
Neurol Sci. 2015 Sep;36(9):1667-73
pubmed: 25926071
Vaccine. 2008 Nov 5;26(47):6006-12
pubmed: 18761386
Clin Ther. 2015 Apr 1;37(4):816-829.e10
pubmed: 25726457
Lancet. 2014 Apr 12;383(9925):1313-1324
pubmed: 24485548
Hum Vaccin. 2007 Jan-Feb;3(1):14-22
pubmed: 17245134
BMC Infect Dis. 2018 Mar 5;18(1):103
pubmed: 29506477
Pediatrics. 2011 Aug;128(2):214-20
pubmed: 21788222
J Infect Dis. 2002 Oct 15;186 Suppl 1:S91-8
pubmed: 12353193
N Engl J Med. 2005 Feb 3;352(5):450-8
pubmed: 15689583
BMC Infect Dis. 2018 May 2;18(1):199
pubmed: 29716545
Vaccine. 2010 Jan 8;28(3):686-91
pubmed: 19874924
Sci Rep. 2018 Nov 21;8(1):17192
pubmed: 30464186
Vaccine. 2018 Mar 7;36(11):1435-1443
pubmed: 29428176
JAMA. 2005 Aug 17;294(7):797-802
pubmed: 16106004
BMC Public Health. 2016 Oct 21;16(1):1103
pubmed: 27769206
Pediatrics. 2011 Feb;127(2):238-45
pubmed: 21199857
Vaccine. 2018 Aug 28;36(36):5402-5407
pubmed: 28757060
PLoS One. 2019 Aug 13;14(8):e0220921
pubmed: 31408505
Vaccine. 2017 Jan 5;35(2):208-211
pubmed: 27923519
PLoS Comput Biol. 2012;8(9):e1002673
pubmed: 23028275
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2005 Sep 16;54(36):893-7
pubmed: 16163262
Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2015;11(1):236-9
pubmed: 25483542
Epidemiol Prev. 2014 Nov-Dec;38(6 Suppl 2):57-61
pubmed: 25759345
Pediatrics. 1986 Oct;78(4 Pt 2):728-35
pubmed: 3093966