1
|
McElwee F, Newall A. The Value of Flexible Vaccine Manufacturing Capacity: Value Drivers, Estimation Methods, and Approaches to Value Recognition in Health Technology Assessment. PHARMACOECONOMICS 2024:10.1007/s40273-024-01396-6. [PMID: 38819720 DOI: 10.1007/s40273-024-01396-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 05/12/2024] [Indexed: 06/01/2024]
Abstract
Expanding flexible vaccine manufacturing capacity (FVMC) for routine vaccines could facilitate more timely access to novel vaccines during future pandemics. Vaccine manufacturing capacity is 'flexible' if it is built on a technology platform that allows rapid adaption to new infectious agents. The added value of routine vaccines produced using a flexible platform for pandemic preparedness is not currently recognised in conventional health technology assessment (HTA) methods. We start by examining the current state of play of incentives for FVMC and exploring the relation between flexible and spare capacity. We then establish the key factors for estimating FVMC and draw from established frameworks to identify relevant value drivers. The role of FVMC as a countermeasure against pandemic risks is deemed an additional value attribute that should be recognised. Next, we address the gap in the vaccine-valuation literature between the conceptual understanding of the value of additional FVMC and the availability of accurate and reliable tools for its estimation to facilitate integration into HTA. Three practical approaches for estimating the value of additional FVMC are discussed: stated and revealed preference studies, macroeconomic modelling, and benefit-cost analysis. Lastly, we review how value recognition of additional FVMC can be realised within the HTA process for routine vaccines manufactured on flexible platforms. We argue that, while the value of additional FVMC is uncertain and further research is needed to help to better estimate it, the value of increased pandemic preparedness is likely to be too large to be ignored.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Frederick McElwee
- Office of Health Economics, 2nd Floor, Goldings House, Hay's Galleria, London, SE1 2HB, UK.
- Health Economics Research Centre, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
| | - Anthony Newall
- School of Population Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Ruiz FJ, Torres-Rueda S, Pearson CAB, Bergren E, Okeke C, Procter SR, Madriz-Montero A, Jit M, Vassall A, Uzochukwu BSC. What, how and who: Cost-effectiveness analyses of COVID-19 vaccination to inform key policies in Nigeria. PLOS GLOBAL PUBLIC HEALTH 2023; 3:e0001693. [PMID: 36963054 PMCID: PMC10032534 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0001693] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/05/2022] [Accepted: 02/10/2023] [Indexed: 03/24/2023]
Abstract
While safe and efficacious COVID-19 vaccines have achieved high coverage in high-income settings, roll-out remains slow in sub-Saharan Africa. By April 2022, Nigeria, a country of over 200 million people, had only distributed 34 million doses. To ensure the optimal use of health resources, cost-effectiveness analyses can inform key policy questions in the health technology assessment process. We carried out several cost-effectiveness analyses exploring different COVID-19 vaccination scenarios in Nigeria. In consultation with Nigerian stakeholders, we addressed three key questions: what vaccines to buy, how to deliver them and what age groups to target. We combined an epidemiological model of virus transmission parameterised with Nigeria specific data with a costing model that incorporated local resource use assumptions and prices, both for vaccine delivery as well as costs associated with care and treatment of COVID-19. Scenarios of vaccination were compared with no vaccination. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were estimated in terms of costs per disability-adjusted life years averted and compared to commonly used cost-effectiveness ratios. Viral vector vaccines are cost-effective (or cost saving), particularly when targeting older adults. Despite higher efficacy, vaccines employing mRNA technologies are less cost-effective due to high current dose prices. The method of delivery of vaccines makes little difference to the cost-effectiveness of the vaccine. COVID-19 vaccines can be highly effective and cost-effective (as well as cost-saving), although an important determinant of the latter is the price per dose and the age groups prioritised for vaccination. From a health system perspective, viral vector vaccines may represent most cost-effective choices for Nigeria, although this may change with price negotiation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Francis J. Ruiz
- Department of Global Health & Development, Faculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom
- * E-mail:
| | - Sergio Torres-Rueda
- Department of Global Health & Development, Faculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom
| | - Carl A. B. Pearson
- Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom
- Centre for Mathematical Modelling of Infectious Diseases, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom
- South African DSI-NRF Centre of Excellence in Epidemiological Modelling and Analysis, Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch, Republic of South Africa
| | - Eleanor Bergren
- Department of Global Health & Development, Faculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom
| | - Chinyere Okeke
- Department of Community Medicine, University of Nigeria Nsukka, Enugu Campus, Nsukka, Nigeria
| | - Simon R. Procter
- Centre for Mathematical Modelling of Infectious Diseases, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom
| | - Andres Madriz-Montero
- Department of Global Health & Development, Faculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom
| | - Mark Jit
- Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom
- Centre for Mathematical Modelling of Infectious Diseases, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom
| | - Anna Vassall
- Department of Global Health & Development, Faculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom
| | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
Di Fusco M, Mendes D, Steuten L, Bloom DE, Drummond M, Hauck K, Pearson-Stuttard J, Power R, Salisbury D, Towse A, Roiz J, Szabo G, Yang J, Marczell K. The Societal Value of Vaccines: Expert-Based Conceptual Framework and Methods Using COVID-19 Vaccines as a Case Study. Vaccines (Basel) 2023; 11:234. [PMID: 36851112 PMCID: PMC9961127 DOI: 10.3390/vaccines11020234] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/03/2022] [Revised: 01/13/2023] [Accepted: 01/15/2023] [Indexed: 01/22/2023] Open
Abstract
Health technology assessments (HTAs) of vaccines typically focus on the direct health benefits to individuals and healthcare systems. COVID-19 highlighted the widespread societal impact of infectious diseases and the value of vaccines in averting adverse clinical consequences and in maintaining or resuming social and economic activities. Using COVID-19 as a case study, this research work aimed to set forth a conceptual framework capturing the broader value elements of vaccines and to identify appropriate methods to quantify value elements not routinely considered in HTAs. A two-step approach was adopted, combining a targeted literature review and three rounds of expert elicitation based on a modified Delphi method, leading to a conceptual framework of 30 value elements related to broader health effects, societal and economic impact, public finances, and uncertainty value. When applying the framework to COVID-19 vaccines in post-pandemic settings, 13 value elements were consensually rated highly important by the experts for consideration in HTAs. The experts reviewed over 10 methods that could be leveraged to quantify broader value elements and provided technical forward-looking recommendations. Limitations of the framework and the identified methods were discussed. This study supplements ongoing efforts aimed towards a broader recognition of the full societal value of vaccines.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Manuela Di Fusco
- Health Economics and Outcomes Research, Pfizer Inc., New York, NY 10017, USA
| | - Diana Mendes
- Health & Value, Pfizer Co., Ltd., Tadworth KT20 7NS, UK
| | | | - David E Bloom
- Department of Global Health and Population, Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA 02115, USA
| | - Michael Drummond
- Centre for Health Economics, Alcuin A Block, University of York, Heslington, York YO10 5DD, UK
| | - Katharina Hauck
- Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Faculty of Medicine, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, London W2 1PG, UK
| | - Jonathan Pearson-Stuttard
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, London W2 1PG, UK
- Health Analytics, Lane Clark & Peacock, London W1U 1DQ, UK
| | - Rachel Power
- The Patients Association, PO Box 935, Harrow HA1 3YJ, UK
| | - David Salisbury
- Programme for Global Health, Royal Institute of International Affairs, Chatham House, London SW1Y 4LE, UK
| | | | - Julie Roiz
- Evidence, Value and Access by PPD, Evidera, London W6 8BJ, UK
| | - Gabor Szabo
- Evidence, Value and Access by PPD, Evidera, H-1113 Budapest, Hungary
| | - Jingyan Yang
- Health Economics and Outcomes Research, Pfizer Inc., New York, NY 10017, USA
- Institute for Social and Economic Research and Policy, Graduate School of Arts and Science, Columbia University, New York, NY 10027, USA
| | - Kinga Marczell
- Evidence, Value and Access by PPD, Evidera, H-1113 Budapest, Hungary
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Pang Y. A theory of fiscal policy response to an epidemic. HEALTH ECONOMICS 2022; 31:2050-2071. [PMID: 35771194 PMCID: PMC9349544 DOI: 10.1002/hec.4564] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/10/2021] [Revised: 04/09/2022] [Accepted: 06/14/2022] [Indexed: 06/15/2023]
Abstract
Governments worldwide have issued massive amounts of debt to inject fiscal stimulus during the COVID-19 pandemic. This paper analyzes fiscal responses to an epidemic, in which interactions at work increase the risk of disease and mortality. Fiscal policies, which are designed to borrow against the future and provide transfers to individuals suffering economic hardship, can facilitate consumption smoothing while reduce hours worked and hence mitigate infections. We examine the optimal fiscal policy and characterize the condition under which fiscal policy improves social welfare. We then extend the model analyzing the static and dynamic pecuniary externalities under scale economies-the decrease in labor supply during the epidemic lowers the contemporaneous average wage rate while enhances the post-epidemic workforce health and productivity. We suggest that fiscal policy may not work effectively unless the government coordinates working time, and the optimal size of public debt is affected by production technology and disease severity and transmissibility.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yu Pang
- School of BusinessMacau University of Science and TechnologyTaipaMacau
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Carta MG, Orrù G, Peracchia A, Cossu G, Velluzzi F, Atzori L, Ferreli C, Ivan Aviles Gonzalez C, Romano F, Littera R, Puxeddu R, Chessa L, Firinu D, Del Giacco S, Restivo A, Deidda S, Scano A, Coghe F, Minerba L, Manconi M, Saba L. Differences in lethality and diffusion of Covid-19 in countries using different kinds of vaccines. J Public Health Res 2022; 11:22799036221107062. [PMID: 36105780 PMCID: PMC9465600 DOI: 10.1177/22799036221107062] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/19/2022] [Accepted: 05/19/2022] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
To verify if lethality and diffusivity of Covid-19 correlated with percentage of
people vaccinated in different countries and whether results on these indicators
were comparable under different types of vaccines. A linear regression analysis
was conducted between vaccines/inhabitant, new cases/inhabitants and ratio
deaths/cases. A comparison between the three indicators was carried out in
countries subdivided by kind of vaccine. The proportion of
vaccinations/inhabitants correlates negatively with proportion of deaths × 100
cases (R = −3.90, p < 0.0001), but didn’t
on incidence of new cases. Countries with prevalence of mRNA vaccines were
similar to others on incidence of new cases; but a lower lethality of Sars-Cov2
was found than in countries with prevalence of viral vehicle vaccines
(F = 6.064, p = 0.0174) but didn’t against
countries with prevalence of inactivated vaccines. The higher is the proportion
of vaccine/inhabitant in a given country, the less is the fraction of infected
people who die.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mauro Giovanni Carta
- Department of Medical Science and Public Health, University of Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy
| | - Germano Orrù
- Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy
| | - Ambra Peracchia
- Department of Medical Science and Public Health, University of Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy
| | - Giulia Cossu
- Department of Medical Science and Public Health, University of Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy
| | - Fernanda Velluzzi
- Department of Medical Science and Public Health, University of Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy
| | - Laura Atzori
- Department of Medical Science and Public Health, University of Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy
| | - Caterina Ferreli
- Department of Medical Science and Public Health, University of Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy
| | | | - Ferdinando Romano
- Department of Hygiene and Preventive Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Roberto Littera
- Department of Medical Genetic, R. Binaghi Hospital of Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy
| | - Roberto Puxeddu
- Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy
| | - Luchino Chessa
- Department of Medical Science and Public Health, University of Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy
| | - Davide Firinu
- Department of Medical Science and Public Health, University of Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy
| | - Stefano Del Giacco
- Department of Medical Science and Public Health, University of Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy
| | - Angelo Restivo
- Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy
| | - Simona Deidda
- Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy
| | - Alessandra Scano
- Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy
| | | | - Luigi Minerba
- Department of Medical Science and Public Health, University of Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy
| | - Maria Manconi
- Department of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy
| | - Luca Saba
- Department of Medical Science and Public Health, University of Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Rasmussen MK, Kronborg C, Fasterholdt I, Kidholm K. Economic evaluations of interventions against viral pandemics: a scoping review. Public Health 2022; 208:72-79. [PMID: 35724446 PMCID: PMC9212686 DOI: 10.1016/j.puhe.2022.05.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/30/2022] [Accepted: 05/04/2022] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
Objectives The COVID-19 pandemic has led to suggestions that cost-effectiveness analyses should adopt a broader perspective when estimating costs. This review aims to provide an overview of economic evaluations of interventions against viral pandemics in terms of the perspective taken, types of costs included, comparators, type of economic model, data sources and methods for estimating productivity costs. Study design Scoping literature review. Methods Publications were eligible if they conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis, cost-utility analysis, cost-benefit analysis or cost-minimisation analysis and evaluated interventions aimed at viral pandemics or for patients infected with viral pandemic disease. We searched PubMed, Embase and Scopus for relevant references and charted data from the selected full-text publications into a predefined spreadsheet based on research sub-questions, summary tables and figures. Results From 5410 references, 36 full-text publications fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The economic evaluations were mainly model based and included direct medical costs of hospital treatment. Around half of the studies included productivity costs and the proportion of total costs attributed to productivity costs ranged from 10% to 90%, depending on estimation methods, assumptions about valuation of time, type of intervention, severity of illness and degree of transmission. Conclusions Economic evaluations of interventions against viral pandemics differed in terms of estimation methods and reporting of productivity costs, even for similar interventions. Hence, the literature on economic evaluations for pandemic response would benefit from having standards for conducting and reporting economic evaluations, especially for productivity costs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M K Rasmussen
- Centre for Innovative Medical Technology, Odense University Hospital, And Department of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Denmark.
| | - C Kronborg
- Department of Economics, University of Southern Denmark, Denmark
| | - I Fasterholdt
- Centre for Innovative Medical Technology, Odense University Hospital, And Department of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Denmark
| | - K Kidholm
- Centre for Innovative Medical Technology, Odense University Hospital, And Department of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Denmark
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Acceptance and application of a broad population health perspective when evaluating vaccine. Vaccine 2022; 40:3395-3401. [PMID: 35525728 PMCID: PMC9068250 DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2022.04.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/16/2021] [Revised: 04/01/2022] [Accepted: 04/02/2022] [Indexed: 12/04/2022]
Abstract
The traditional health economic analysis is limited to estimating the impact on the treated patient. As vaccines are usually aimed at preventing infectious diseases, they may be associated with additional values for the non-treated wider population. Although there are valid reasons for treating vaccines differently, and a wide support for a broader perspective in the literature (i.e., beyond the net costs and health gain related to the outcome for the vaccinated individual), it remains unclear to what extent the Health Technology Assessment (HTA) agencies accept and apply a broader perspective. The purpose of this study is to examine and discuss what type of consequences are relevant for a health economic analysis of vaccines and which consequences are considered by HTA agencies. The study includes a strategic review of literature and HTA decisions in Sweden and other countries, online round-table discussions with stakeholders in Sweden, and a basic estimation of the value of a COVID-19 vaccination in Sweden. The study shows that, other than herd effect, broader economic consequences for the population are generally not included in the economic evaluation of vaccines. Also, all economic consequences for the treated patient (production loss) and caregiver (health loss) are not always considered. The perspective chosen can have a major impact on the outcome of the analysis. A vaccine for COVID-19 is estimated to provide a value of €744–€956 per dose when using a societal perspective including broader consequences for the population. Providing a complete and appropriate picture of the value of vaccination is of importance to allocate resources efficiently, to provide incentives for vaccine development, and to show the cost of delaying decisions to implement a new vaccine.
Collapse
|
8
|
Brouwer W, Huls S, Sajjad A, Kanters T, Roijen LHV, van Exel J. In Absence of Absenteeism: Some Thoughts on Productivity Costs in Economic Evaluations in a Post-corona Era. PHARMACOECONOMICS 2022; 40:7-11. [PMID: 34913141 PMCID: PMC8674022 DOI: 10.1007/s40273-021-01117-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 11/16/2021] [Indexed: 05/04/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Werner Brouwer
- Erasmus School of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, P.O. Box 1738, 3000 DR, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Samare Huls
- Erasmus School of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, P.O. Box 1738, 3000 DR, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Ayesha Sajjad
- Erasmus School of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, P.O. Box 1738, 3000 DR, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Tim Kanters
- Erasmus School of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, P.O. Box 1738, 3000 DR, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
- Institute for Medical Technology Assessment (iMTA), Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Leona Hakkaart-van Roijen
- Erasmus School of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, P.O. Box 1738, 3000 DR, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Job van Exel
- Erasmus School of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, P.O. Box 1738, 3000 DR, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|