Cost-effectiveness of influenza vaccination with a high dose quadrivalent vaccine of the elderly population in Belgium, Finland, and Portugal

Enhanced influenza vaccination for older adults in Europe: a review of the current situation and expert recommendations for the future

INTRODUCTION

Influenza causes considerable morbidity and mortality in Europe, particularly among older adults due to comorbidities, as well as immunosenescence and inflammaging, which contribute to a diminished immune response. Vaccination remains the most effective way to prevent poor outcomes; however, uptake is suboptimal and many countries recommend standard vaccines despite evidence supporting better protection with enhanced (adjuvanted and high-dose) vaccines.

AREAS COVERED

A multidisciplinary group of experts reviewed the burden of influenza in Europe and evaluated data on enhanced vaccines, providing recommendations for their use in older adults. The group discussed barriers to vaccination and strategies to increase uptake.

EXPERT OPINION

Improving protection of older adults against influenza relies upon increasing vaccine uptake and ensuring access to vaccines that overcome age-related immunological decline. Achieving higher uptake requires national policies that facilitate equitable access and clear communication about vaccine eligibility. Based on available evidence, enhanced vaccines offer better protection than standard vaccines against hospitalization and complications in older adults. National recommendations should prioritize the use of enhanced influenza vaccines over standard vaccines in older adults. Limitations to interpretation of evidence include discrepancies in reporting of influenza-related medical encounters and underreporting of influenza-related complications.

Cost-effectiveness and public health impact of using high dose influenza vaccine in the Japanese older adults

BACKGROUND

High-dose (HD) influenza vaccine, which has demonstrated superior efficacy and acceptable safety compared to standard-dose (SD), has market authorization in many countries. This study evaluated the public-health impact and cost-effectiveness of HD versus SD in Japanese older-adults (OAs) from healthcare payer-perspective.

METHODS

Decision-tree model was employed assessing health outcomes for each vaccination strategy, simulating influenza cases, outpatient/emergency department (ED) visits, hospitalizations, and mortality, over one-year time-horizon. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were assessed at Japanese willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold. Base-case analysis considered influenza vaccines effective against influenza hospitalizations only, whereas complementary analyses reflected their efficacies against Pneumonia and Influenza (P&I), respiratory and cardiorespiratory hospitalizations possibly related to influenza among individuals ≥65 years. Scenario analysis extended target population to at-risk individuals aged 60-64 years. Uncertainty was assessed using sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

In base-case, switching from SD to HD prevented 174,863 influenza cases, 121,084 outpatient and 614 ED visits, annually. Further, 5,777 influenza hospitalizations, and 2,406 deaths related to influenza were avoided with HD vaccine. The HD vaccine was found to be a cost-effective strategy at WTP threshold of ¥5,000,000/Quality-Adjusted-Life-Years (QALY) with ICER of ¥4,876,512/(QALY). Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of these findings. Complementary analyses showed notably improved outcomes, in terms of public-health, economic impact, and ICERs, when considering efficacy of influenza vaccines against P&I, respiratory, and cardiorespiratory hospitalizations possibly related to influenza.

CONCLUSION

These results indicate that HD vaccine has a high economic value in Japan compared to SD. Implementing HD vaccine could effectively alleviate the burden on healthcare facilities for Japanese OAs.

Real-world cost-effectiveness of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir as treatment for SARS-CoV-2 infection in the Belgian setting with omicron variant

Background

Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir is an oral treatment for SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients who are at high risk of developing severe COVID-19 disease. This antiviral has proven to significantly reduce the risk of hospitalization and death compared to no anti-SARS-CoV-2 treatment in this target population. This paper aims to assess the cost-effectiveness of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir in Belgium using real-world evidence.

Methods

A static decision tree model was developed to capture the health progression of patients infected with the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Outcomes were expressed in Quality Adjusted-Life Years (QALYs), hospitalizations, Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admissions, deaths and Long Covid cases, derived from epidemiological data over the first full year of the Omicron variant's circulation (2022). Costs were calculated for the year 2023 from the healthcare payer's perspective. Extensive sensitivity analyses were conducted to test the robustness of the cost-effectiveness results.

Results

In a cohort of 1,000 patients, treatment with nirmatrelvir-ritonavir is projected to save 95 QALYs and €82,658 compared to no anti-SARS-CoV-2 treatment over a lifetime horizon. These savings primarily stem from the reduction in hospitalizations among vulnerable patients who typically require a longer recovery time. The analysis also indicates 5 fewer ICU admissions and 8 fewer premature deaths per 1,000 infected patients.

Conclusion

In the context of Omicron SARS-CoV-2 infection, administering nirmatrelvir-ritonavir to patients at high risk of severe disease improves health outcomes and reduces costs. Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir is 100% likely to be cost-effective at a willingness to pay of €2,000 per QALY.

Vaccine uptake, associated factors and reasons for vaccination status among the South African elderly; findings and next steps

OBJECTIVES

The elderly are particularly prone to complications from a number of vaccine-preventable diseases. However, there are limited data on vaccine uptake for this vulnerable population in South Africa. Consequently, this study investigated influenza, pneumococcal and shingles vaccine uptake among elderly people in South Africa; reasons for their vaccination status; and factors associated with their uptake.

METHODS

Cross-sectional study using an interviewer-administered questionnaire to survey 985 consenting adults aged ≥65 years in 2018. Participants were recruited from across South Africa. Bivariate analysis was used to identify socio-demographic variables associated with vaccine uptake, with multivariate logistic regression analysis used to identify key factors associated with vaccine uptake.

RESULTS

Influenza vaccine uptake was 32.3% (318/985), with uptake highest in those aged 85-90 years. Pneumococcal and shingles vaccine uptake was 3.8% (37/985) and 0.4% (4/985) respectively, being highest among those aged >90 years. The strongest statistically significant predictors for influenza vaccination were previous influenza vaccination (OR: 8.42 [5.61-12.64]); identifying as 'Coloured' (OR: 8.39 [3.98-17.69]); and residing in Gauteng Province (OR: 5.44 [3.30-9.02]). The strongest statistically significant predictors of receiving pneumococcal vaccination included receiving influenza vaccination (OR = 10.67 [3.27-37.83]); residing in the Western Cape Province (OR: 7.34 [1.49-36.22]); identifying as 'Indian' (OR: 5.85 [2.53-13.55]); and having a university education (OR: 5.56 [1.25-24.77]). Statistically significant barriers to receiving influenza vaccination included following the Traditional African religion (OR: 0.08 [0.01-0.62]) and residing in Limpopo Province (OR: 0.16 [0.04-0.71]). The main reasons for non-vaccination were considering influenza as a mild illness (36.6%; 242/661), and lack of knowledge about the pneumococcal (93.4%; 886/948) and shingles (95.2%; 934/981) vaccines.

CONCLUSION

Vaccine uptake for all vaccines was sub-optimal, with multiple non-modifiable factors predicting vaccine uptake. These pre-COVID-19 data provide a baseline for measuring the effectiveness of future interventions to increase vaccine uptake and safeguard the health of the elderly.

Cost-effectiveness of recombinant influenza vaccine compared with standard dose influenza vaccine in adults 18-64 years of age

BACKGROUND

The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) uses the Evidence to Recommendations Framework that includes cost-effectiveness analyses (CEA) for determining vaccine recommendations. ACIP's preference for protecting adults ≥ 65 years is enhanced vaccines, including recombinant influenza vaccine (RIV4), adjuvanted or high dose influenza vaccine. Less is known about the CEA of enhanced vaccines for younger adults.

METHODS

We used decision analysis modeling from a societal perspective to determine the cost-effectiveness, measured in quality adjusted life years (QALYs), of RIV4 compared with standard dose quadrivalent influenza vaccine (SD-IIV4) in adults 18-64 years old. Model inputs included 2018-2020 vaccine effectiveness (VE) estimates based on medical record data from a large local health system, 2019-2020 national vaccination and influenza epidemic parameters, with costs and population distributions fitted to the season.

RESULTS

Among adults ages 18-64 years, RIV4 cost $94,186/QALY gained, compared to SD-IIV4. Among those 50-64 years old, RIV4 was relatively more cost-effective ($61,329/QALY gained). Cost-effectiveness estimates for 18-64-year-olds were sensitive to the absolute difference in VE between SD-IIV4 and RIV4, among other parameters. Use of RIV4 in 18-64-year-olds would result in fewer cases (669,984), outpatient visits (261,293), hospitalizations (20,046) and deaths (1,018) annually. The majority (59 %; 597 of 1018) of the decreases in deaths occurred in the 50-64-year-olds.

CONCLUSIONS

While RIV4 was effective and cost-effective relative to SD-IIV4 for both 50-64-year-old and 18-64-year-old adults, cost-effectiveness was sensitive to small changes in parameters among 18-64-year-olds. Because substantial public health benefits occur with enhanced vaccines, health systems and policy makers may opt for preferential product use in select age/risk groups (e.g., 50-64 year olds) to maximize their cost-benefit ratios.

New Vaccines for Chronic Respiratory Patients

Chronic respiratory diseases (CRD) are responsible for more than four million deaths worldwide and have become especially prevalent in developed countries. Although the current therapies help manage daily symptoms and improve patients' quality of life, there is a major need to prevent exacerbations triggered mainly by respiratory infections. Therefore, CRD patients are a prime target for vaccination against infectious agents. In the present manuscript we review the state of the art of available vaccines specifically indicated in patients with CRDs. In addition to pneumococcus, influenza, pertussis, and SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, recently added immunization options like vaccines and monoclonal antibodies against respiratory syncytial virus, are particularly interesting in CRD patients. As new products reach the market, health authorities must be agile in updating immunization recommendations and in the programming of the vaccination of vulnerable populations such as patients with CRDs. Organizational and educational strategies might prove useful to increase vaccine uptake by CRD patients.

Protecting the elderly from influenza in the context of immune system senescence. Elderly aged 65 and over are vulnerable to influenza and its associated complications.: Position paper by the Romanian Society of Gerontology and Geriatrics

Influenza affects millions globally each year, often causing severe complications, hospitalizations, and deaths, particularly among the elderly. As the global population ages, infections will pose a growing health risk. Annual vaccination remains the most effective way to prevent influenza and its complications. After the age of 65, people suffering from chronic diseases become the majority of this population category. All the data support that most of the population over 65 years old, whose immune system goes through immunosenescence, presents multimorbidity, requiring age-appropriate anti-influenza protection. The immune response to the traditional influenza vaccine has been proven to be lower in the elderly, highlighting the need for a more immunogenic vaccine specifically tailored to the elderly population group. Therefore, high-dose (HD) influenza vaccines have demonstrated their safety and are more effective in preventing influenza and its associated complications compared to standard-dose (SD) vaccines in the elderly in the context of immunosenescence. These recommendations focus on the safety, effectiveness, and efficacy of HD influenza vaccines, adapted to the elderly and available on the Romanian market, to increase the vaccination rate and, thus, protect against influenza infection and its complications. Therefore, strategies such as increased accessibility and free immunizations, as well as ensuring that flu vaccines for the elderly are prescribed without restrictions based on the number of comorbidities, should be used.

Cost-effectiveness of high-dose influenza vaccination in the Netherlands: Incorporating the impact on both respiratory and cardiovascular hospitalizations

OBJECTIVES

We assess the cost-effectiveness of switching from standard-dose quadrivalent influenza vaccination (SD-QIV) to high-dose vaccination (HD-QIV) for Dutch adults aged 60 years and older.

METHODS

A health-economic model was used to compare the scenario where HD-QIV was implemented compared to the current standard, SD-QIV. This model used a lifetime horizon and assessed the cost-effectiveness from a societal perspective. A recently published meta-analysis was used to incorporate the benefits of HD-QIV, including cardiorespiratory hospitalizations, in analyses considering RCT only or combining RCT and RWE estimates in a scenario analysis.

RESULTS

Implementing HD-QIV is cost effective at its list price, with an ICER of €5,400 per QALY gained. The main driver of these results is the prevention of cardiorespiratory hospitalizations. Other public health benefits are the prevention of GP consults and deaths. HD-QIV is highly likely to be cost-effective, reaching a 100% probability of being cost effective at the Dutch willingness-to-pay threshold of €20,000 per QALY.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementing HD-QIV for adults aged 60 and over within the existing influenza vaccination campaign is highly cost effective. HD-QIV may support alleviating potential capacity issues in Dutch hospitals in the winter respiratory season.

Public health and economic benefits of seasonal influenza vaccination in risk groups in France, Italy, Spain and the UK: state of play and perspectives

BACKGROUND

Seasonal influenza epidemics have a substantial public health and economic burden, which can be alleviated through vaccination. The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends a 75% vaccination coverage rate (VCR) in: older adults (aged ≥ 65 years), individuals with chronic conditions, pregnant women, children aged 6-24 months and healthcare workers. However, no European country achieves this target in all risk groups. In this study, potential public health and economic benefits achieved by reaching 75% influenza VCR was estimated in risk groups across four European countries: France, Italy, Spain, and the UK.

METHODS

A static epidemiological model was used to estimate the averted public health and economic burden of increasing the 2021/2022 season VCR to 75%, using the efficacy data of standard-dose quadrivalent influenza vaccine. For each country and risk group, the most recent data on population size, VCR, pre-pandemic influenza epidemiology, direct medical costs and absenteeism were identified through a systematic literature review, supplemented by manual searching. Outcomes were: averted influenza cases, general practitioner (GP) visits, hospitalisations, case fatalities, number of days of work lost, direct medical costs and absenteeism-related costs.

RESULTS

As of the 2021/2022 season, the UK achieved the highest weighted VCR across risk groups (65%), followed by Spain (47%), France (44%) and Italy (44%). Based on modelling, the 2021/2022 VCR prevented an estimated 1.9 million influenza cases, avoiding 375,200 GP visits, 73,200 hospitalisations and 38,400 deaths. To achieve the WHO 75% VCR target, an additional 24 million at-risk individuals would need to be vaccinated, most of which being older adults and patients with chronic conditions. It was estimated that this could avoid a further 918,200 influenza cases, 332,000 GP visits, 16,300 hospitalisations and 6,300 deaths across the four countries, with older adults accounting for 52% of hospitalisations and 80% of deaths. An additional €84 million in direct medical costs and €79 million in absenteeism costs would be saved in total, with most economic benefits delivered in France.

CONCLUSIONS

Older adults represent most vaccine-preventable influenza cases and deaths, followed by individuals with chronic conditions. Health authorities should prioritise vaccinating these populations for maximum public health and economic benefits.

Cost-effectiveness and public health impact of using high dose quadrivalent influenza vaccine in the French older adults population

BACKGROUND

Seasonal influenza outbreaks in France cause a surge in patients, exacerbating the overburdened healthcare system each winter. Older adults are particularly vulnerable to serious events related to influenza. Quadrivalent influenza high dose (QIV HD) vaccines have been developed to offer better clinical protection in older adults, who often exhibit suboptimal immune response to quadrivalent influenza standard dose vaccines (QIV SD). This study aims to evaluate the public health impact and cost-effectiveness of administering HD versus SD vaccines to individuals aged 65+ in France.

METHODOLOGY

Using a static model and decision-tree approach, the study analyzed health outcomes such as influenza cases, GP (general practitioner) visits, hospitalizations, and mortality; relative vaccine efficacy (rVE) estimates were derived from a pivotal randomized-controlled trial and a meta-analysis comparing HD to SD vaccines. Two approaches were implemented to model hospitalizations (conditional on influenza or not), and analyses on bed occupancy were performed.

RESULTS

Results showed that using QIV HD instead of QIV SD during an average influenza season in France led to the prevention of 57,209 additional cases of influenza, 13,704 GP visits, and 764 influenza-related deaths. Moreover, switching to QIV HD resulted in an additional 1,728-15,970 hospitalizations avoided and 15,124-138,367 reduced days of hospitalization depending on the hospitalization approach used. The cost-utility analysis showed a cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained ranging from 24,020 €/QALY to 5,036 €/QALY.

CONCLUSIONS

Switching to QIV HD in older adults was shown to be cost-effective, with even greater public health benefits at a higher coverage rate, regardless of the season severity.

Cost-effectiveness of the adjuvanted quadrivalent influenza vaccine in the elderly Belgian population

BACKGROUND

Between 2015 and 2019, when 62% of Belgian adults aged ≥ 65 years were vaccinated with standard quadrivalent influenza vaccines, influenza caused an average of 3,905 hospitalizations and 347 premature deaths per year in older adults. The objective of the present analysis was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of the adjuvanted quadrivalent influenza vaccine (aQIV) compared to the standard (SD-QIV) and high-dose (HD-QIV) vaccines in elderly Belgians.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

The analysis was based on a static cost-effectiveness model that captured the evolution of patients infected with influenza and was customized with available national data.

RESULTS

Vaccinating adults aged ≥ 65 years with aQIV instead of SD-QIV would decrease the number of hospitalizations by 530 and the number of deaths by 66 in the 2023-2024 influenza season. aQIV was cost-effective compared to SD-QIV with an incremental cost of €15,227/quality-adjusted life year (QALY). aQIV is cost-saving when compared to HD-QIV in the subgroup of institutionalized elderly adults who were granted reimbursement for this vaccine.

CONCLUSION

In a health care system striving to improve the prevention of infectious diseases, a cost-effective vaccine such as aQIV is a key asset to reduce the number of influenza-related hospitalizations and premature deaths in older adults.

PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY

A flu vaccine containing a unique immune boosting additive reduces medical spending by reducing flu hospitalizations and early deaths in the elderly.

Real-World Evidence in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Enhanced Influenza Vaccines in Adults ≥ 65 Years of Age: Literature Review and Expert Opinion

Influenza vaccination can benefit most populations, including adults ≥ 65 years of age, who are at greater risk of influenza-related complications. In many countries, enhanced vaccines, such as adjuvanted, high-dose, and recombinant trivalent/quadrivalent influenza vaccines (aTIV/aQIV, HD-TIV/HD-QIV, and QIVr, respectively), are recommended in older populations to provide higher immunogenicity and increased relative vaccine efficacy/effectiveness (rVE) than standard-dose vaccines. This review explores how efficacy and effectiveness data from randomized controlled trials and real-world evidence (RWE) are used in economic evaluations. Findings from published cost-effectiveness analyses (CEA) on enhanced influenza vaccines for older adults are summarized, and the assumptions and approaches used in these CEA are assessed alongside discussion of the importance of RWE in CEA. Results from many CEA showed that adjuvanted and high-dose enhanced vaccines were cost-effective compared with standard vaccines, and that differences in rVE estimates and acquisition price may drive differences in cost-effectiveness estimates between enhanced vaccines. Overall, RWE and CEA provide clinical and economic rationale for enhanced vaccine use in people ≥ 65 years of age, an at-risk population with substantial burden of disease. Countries that consider RWE when making vaccine recommendations have preferentially recommended aTIV/aQIV, as well as HD-TIV/HD-QIV and QIVr, to protect older individuals.