A Scoping Review of Investment Cases for Vaccines and Immunization Programs

A Practical Guide to Full Value of Vaccine Assessments

Articulating the wide range of health, social and economic benefits that vaccines offer may help to overcome obstacles in the vaccine development pipeline. A framework to guide the assessment and communication of the value of a vaccine-the Full Value of Vaccine Assessment (FVVA)-has been developed by the WHO. The FVVA framework offers a holistic assessment of the value of vaccines, providing a synthesis of evidence to inform the public health need of a vaccine, describing the supply and demand aspects, its market and its impact from a health, financial and economic perspective. This paper provides a practical guide to how FVVAs are developed and used to support investment in vaccines, ultimately leading to sustained implementation in countries. The FVVA includes a range of elements that can be broadly categorised as synthesis, vaccine development narrative and defining vaccine impact and value. Depending on the features of the disease/vaccine in question, different elements may be emphasised; however, a standardised set of elements is recommended for each FVVA. The FVVA should be developed by an expert group who represent a range of stakeholders, perspectives and geographies and ensure a fair, coherent and evidence-based assessment of vaccine value.

Meningococcal Disease in the Post-COVID-19 Era: A Time to Prepare

The global invasive meningococcal disease (IMD) landscape changed considerably during the COVID-19 pandemic, as evidenced by decreased incidence rates due to COVID-19 mitigation measures, such as limited social contact, physical distancing, mask wearing, and hand washing. Vaccination rates were also lower during the pandemic relative to pre-pandemic levels. Although policymakers may have shifted their focus away from IMD vaccination programs to COVID-19 vaccination programs, strong arguments support implementation and prioritization of IMD vaccination programs; IMD cases have increased in some countries and IMD rates may even have exceeded pre-pandemic levels. Additional concerns include increased susceptibility due to vaccination coverage gaps, increased incidence of other respiratory pathogens, immunity debt from lockdown restrictions, and increased IMD epidemiologic variability. The full range of benefits of widely available and effective meningococcal vaccines needs to be considered, especially in health technology assessments, where the broad benefits of these vaccines are neither accurately quantified nor captured in implementation policy decisions. Importantly, implementation of meningococcal vaccination programs in the current IMD climate also appeals to broader healthcare principles, including preparedness rather than reactive approaches, generally accepted benefit-risk approaches to vaccination, historical precedent, and the World Health Organization's goal of defeating meningitis by 2030. Countries should therefore act swiftly to bolster existing meningococcal vaccination strategies to provide broad coverage across age groups and serogroups given the recent increases in IMD incidence.

Analyses of the return on investment of public health interventions: a scoping review and recommendations for future studies

Return on investment (ROI) analysis is increasingly being used for evaluating the value for money of public health interventions. Given its potential role for informing health policies, it is important that there is a more comprehensive understanding of ROI analysis within the global health field. To address this gap in the literature, we conducted a scoping review of recent research articles reporting an ROI metric for a health intervention within the public sector in any country setting. The database search was limited to literature published in English and studies published between 1 January 2018 and 14 June 2021. Uses and settings where the ROI metric is being applied, key methodological features of the calculations and the types of economic benefits included were extracted. 118 relevant studies were included within this scoping review. We found that ROI analyses of health interventions differed between those that only included fiscal savings (such as prevented medical expenses) and those which incorporated a wider range of benefits (such as monetised health benefits). This highlights the variation in the definition of ROI analyses and supports the finding that ROI analyses are used for a range of different research questions/purposes within the healthcare sector. We also found that the methodologies used in ROI calculations were inconsistent and often poorly reported. This review demonstrates that there is notable variation in the methodology surrounding recent ROI calculations of healthcare interventions, as well as the definition of ROI analysis. We recommend that ROI metrics should be carefully interpreted before they are used to inform policy decisions regarding the allocation of healthcare resources. To improve the consistency of future studies, we also set out recommended use cases for ROI analysis and a reporting checklist.

The Full Value of Vaccine Assessments (FVVA): a framework for assessing and communicating the value of vaccines for investment and introduction decision-making

BACKGROUND

Several economic obstacles can deter the development and use of vaccines. This can lead to limited product options for some diseases, delays in new product development, and inequitable access to vaccines. Although seemingly distinct, these obstacles are actually interrelated and therefore need to be addressed through a single over-arching strategy encompassing all stakeholders.

METHODS

To help overcome these obstacles, we propose a new approach, the Full Value of Vaccines Assessments (FVVA) framework, to guide the assessment and communication of the value of a vaccine. The FVVA framework is designed to facilitate alignment across key stakeholders and to enhance decision-making around investment in vaccine development, policy-making, procurement, and introduction, particularly for vaccines intended for use in low- and middle-income countries.

RESULTS

The FVVA framework has three key elements. First, to enhance assessment, existing value-assessment methods and tools are adapted to include broader benefits of vaccines as well as opportunity costs borne by stakeholders. Second, to improve decision-making, a deliberative process is required to recognize the agency of stakeholders and to ensure country ownership of decision-making and priority setting. Third, the FVVA framework provides a consistent and evidence-based approach that facilitates communication about the full value of vaccines, helping to enhance alignment and coordination across diverse stakeholders.

CONCLUSIONS

The FVVA framework provides guidance for stakeholders organizing global-level efforts to promote investment in vaccines that are priorities for LMICs. By providing a more holistic view of the benefits of vaccines, its application also has the potential to encourage greater take-up by countries, thereby leading to more sustainable and equitable impacts of vaccines and immunization programmes.

Healthcare provider perspectives on delivering next generation rotavirus vaccines in five low-to-middle-income countries

BACKGROUND

Live oral rotavirus vaccines (LORVs) have significantly reduced rotavirus hospitalizations and deaths worldwide. However, LORVs are less effective in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Next-generation rotavirus vaccines (NGRVs) may be more effective but require administration by injection or a neonatal oral dose, adding operational complexity. Healthcare providers (HPs) were interviewed to assess rotavirus vaccine preferences and identify delivery issues as part of an NGRV value proposition.

OBJECTIVE

Determine HP vaccine preferences about delivering LORVs compared to injectable (iNGRV) and neonatal oral (oNGRV) NGRVs.

METHODS

64 HPs from Ghana, Kenya, Malawi, Peru, and Senegal were interviewed following a mixed-method guide centered on three vaccine comparisons: LORV vs. iNGRV; LORV vs. oNGRV; oNGRV vs. iNGRV. HPs reviewed attributes for each vaccine in the comparisons, then indicated and explained their preference. Additional questions elicited views about co-administering iNGRV+LORV for greater public health impact, a possible iNGRV-DTP-containing combination vaccine, and delivering neonatal doses.

RESULTS

Almost all HPs preferred oral vaccine options over iNGRV, with many emphasizing an aversion to additional injections. Despite this strong preference, HPs described challenges delivering oral doses. Preferences for LORV vs. oNGRV were split, marked by disparate views on rotavirus disease epidemiology and the safety, need, and feasibility of delivering neonatal vaccines. Although overwhelmingly enthusiastic about an iNGRV-DTP-containing combination option, several HPs had concerns. HP views were divided on the feasibility of co-administering iNGRV+LORV, citing challenges around logistics and caregiver sensitization.

CONCLUSION

Our findings provide valuable insights on delivering NGRVs in routine immunization. Despite opposition to injectables, openness to co-administering LORV+iNGRV to improve efficacy suggests future HP support of iNGRV if adequately informed of its advantages. Rationales for LORV vs. oNGRV underscore needs for training on rotavirus epidemiology and stronger service integration. Expressed challenges delivering existing LORVs merit further examination and indicate need for improved delivery.

Public Health Value of a Hypothetical Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine (PCV) Introduction: A Case Study

Background: Understanding the public health value of a vaccine at an early stage of development helps in valuing and prioritizing the investment needed. Here we present the potential cost-effectiveness of an upcoming 12 valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV 12) in the case study country, Thailand. Methods: The cost-effectiveness analysis included a hypothetical scenario of three doses (2 + 1 regimen) PCV12 introduction in the national immunization program of Thailand compared to no PCV, PCV10, and PCV13 among <6 months old from a societal perspective with a lifetime horizon and one-year cycle length. Data from Thailand, as well as assumptions supported by the literature, were used in the analysis. The price of PCV12 was assumed similar to that of PCV10 or PCV13 for GAVI’s eligible countries based on inputs from stakeholder meeting. A one-way sensitivity analysis was conducted using 0.5−1.5 times the base price of PCV12. Results were presented in incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) in terms of monetary value per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. Results: Vaccination with PCV12 among a hypothetical cohort of 100,000 Thai children is expected to avert a total of 5358 cases which includes 5 pneumococcal meningitis, 43 pneumococcal bacteremia, 5144 all-cause pneumonia, and 166 all-cause acute otitis media compared to no vaccination. The national PCV12 vaccination program is a cost-saving strategy compared to the other three strategies. The one-way sensitivity analysis showed PCV12 is a cost-saving strategy when 1.5 times the base price of PCV12 was assumed. Conclusions: Within the limitations of hypothetical assumptions and price points incorporated, the study indicates the potential public health value of PCV12 in Thailand.

National stakeholder preferences for next-generation rotavirus vaccines: Results from a six-country study

BACKGROUND

Currently available live, oral rotavirus vaccines (LORVs) have significantly reduced severe rotavirus hospitalizations and deaths worldwide. However, LORVs are not as effective in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) where rotavirus disease burden is highest. Next-generation rotavirus vaccine (NGRV) candidates in development may have a greater public health impact where they are needed most. The feasibility and acceptability of possible new rotavirus vaccines were explored as part of a larger public health value proposition for injectable NGRVs in LMICs.

OBJECTIVE

To assess national stakeholder preferences for currently available LORVs and hypothetical NGRVs and understand rationales and drivers for stated preferences.

METHODS

Interviews were conducted with 71 national stakeholders who influence vaccine policy and national programming. Stakeholders from Ghana, Kenya, Malawi, Peru, Senegal, and Sri Lanka were interviewed using a mixed-method guide. Vaccine preferences were elicited on seven vaccine comparisons involving LORVs and hypothetical NGRVs based on information presented comparing the vaccines' attributes. Reasons for vaccine preference were elicited in open-ended questions, and the qualitative data were analyzed on key preference drivers.

RESULTS

Nearly half of the national stakeholders interviewed preferred a highly effective standalone, injectable NGRV over current LORVs. When presented as having similar efficacy to the LORV, however, very few stakeholders preferred the injectable NGRV, even at substantially lower cost. Similarly, a highly effective standalone injectable NGRV was generally not favored over an equally effective oral NGRV following a neonatal-infant schedule, despite higher cost of the neonatal option. An NGRV-DTP-containing combination vaccine was strongly preferred over all other options, whether delivered alone with efficacy similar to current LORVs or co-administered alongside an LORV (LORV + NGRV-DTP) to increase efficacy.

CONCLUSION

Results from these national stakeholder interviews provide valuable insights to inform ongoing and future NGRV research and development.

Does Anybody Want an Injectable Rotavirus Vaccine, and Why? Understanding the Public Health Value Proposition of Next-Generation Rotavirus Vaccines

Routine infant immunization with live, oral rotavirus vaccines (LORVs) has had a major impact on severe gastroenteritis disease. Nevertheless, in high morbidity and mortality settings rotavirus remains an important cause of disease, partly attributable to the sub-optimal clinical efficacy of LORVs in those settings. Regardless of the precise immunological mechanism(s) underlying the diminished efficacy, the introduction of injectable next-generation rotavirus vaccines (iNGRV), currently in clinical development, could offer a potent remedy. In addition to the potential for greater clinical efficacy, precisely how iNGRVs are delivered (multiple doses to young infants; alongside LORVs or as a booster; co-formulated with Diphtheria-Tetanus-Pertussis (DTP)-containing vaccines), their pricing, and their storage and cold chain characteristics could each have major implications on the resultant health outcomes, on cost-effectiveness as well as on product preferences by national stakeholders and healthcare providers. To better understand these implications, we critically assessed whether there is a compelling public health value proposition for iNGRVs based on potential (but still hypothetical) vaccine profiles. Our results suggest that the answer is highly dependent on the specific use cases and potential attributes of such novel vaccines. Notably, co-formulation of iNGRVs with similar or greater efficacy than LORVs with a DTP-containing vaccine, such as DTP-Hib-HepB, scored especially high on potential impact, cost-effectiveness, and strength of preference by national stakeholders and health care providers in lower and middle income countries.

Leveraging on the genomics and immunopathology of SARS-CoV-2 for vaccines development: prospects and challenges

The incidence and case-fatality rates (CFRs) of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, the etiological agent for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), have been rising unabated. Even though the entire world has been implementing infection prevention and control measures, the pandemic continues to spread. It has been widely accepted that preventive vaccination strategies are the public health measures for countering this pandemic. This study critically reviews the latest scientific advancement in genomics, replication pattern, pathogenesis, and immunopathology of SARS-CoV-2 infection and how these concepts could be used in the development of vaccines. We also offer a detailed discussion on the anticipated potency, efficacy, safety, and pharmaco-economic issues that are and will be associated with candidate COVID-19 vaccines.