Cost-utility of 20-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine compared to no vaccination and recommended alternative vaccines among Belgian adults

Systematic literature review of cost-effectiveness analyses of adult 15- and 20-valent pneumococcal vaccines

BACKGROUND

The economic and public health benefits of adult pneumococcal vaccines vary across countries due to different epidemiology and costs. We systematically reviewed and summarized findings and assumptions of cost-effectiveness analyses (CEA) of the recently introduced 15- and 20-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccines (PCV15 and PCV20) in adults.

METHODS

We performed a systematic search for CEA studies of PCV15 and/or PCV20 versus existing strategies via PubMed, EMBASE, CEA Registry, EconLit, HTA Database, and NITAG resource center through April 23, 2024. Study characteristics, methods, assumptions, and findings were extracted independently by two reviewers; quality was assessed using ECOBIAS. Results were synthesized qualitatively to summarize key attributes and conclusions.

RESULTS

Of 137 identified records, 26 studies were included; the majority (24/26) concerned high-income countries. All employed static Markov-type models comparing higher-valent PCVs used alone or in combination with 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPSV23) to current recommendations (PPSV23 alone, PCV13 alone, PCV13 + PPSV23, no vaccination). Most studies (22/26) concluded PCV20 used alone was cost-saving (dominant) or cost-effective compared to other adult pneumococcal strategies (PPSV23 alone, PCV13 ± PPSV23, PCV15 ± PPSV23, or no vaccination). PCVs were generally assumed to have serotype-specific effectiveness equal to PCV13 efficacy in the pivotal trial, though four studies used estimates from a Delphi panel; protection was assumed to last between 10 and 20 years. PPSV23 was assumed to have lower effectiveness against non-bacteremic pneumonia and shorter duration of protection. Herd effects from higher-valent PCVs in childhood (12/26), serotype replacement (2/26), or both (1/26) were included in half (13/26) of studies, which attenuated adult vaccine impact. Most studies were assessed as low risk of bias; five abstracts did not provide sufficient information for assessment.

CONCLUSION

Current evidence indicates that 20-valent PCV used alone is likely to be cost-effective or dominate other adult pneumococcal strategies. Future research is needed to address remaining uncertainties in assumptions and to support evidence-based policymaking.

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.

Cost-effectiveness of 15-valent or 20-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine for U.S. adults aged 65 years and older and adults 19 years and older with underlying conditions

BACKGROUND

In June 2021, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommended use of either 20-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV20) alone or 15-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV15) in series with 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPSV23) for all PCV-unvaccinated adults aged ≥65 years (age-based) and for adults aged 19-64 years with conditions that increase the risk for pneumococcal disease (risk-based). This recommendation replaced a previous recommendation for PPSV23 with or without 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV13) for these groups.

OBJECTIVE

We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis of age-based and risk-based use of either PCV15 in series with PPSV23 or PCV20 alone when compared to previous recommendations.

METHODS

We utilized probabilistic cohort models of all 65-year-olds (age-based) and 19-year-olds (risk-based through age 64 years and age-based at age 65 years). A spreadsheet-based Monte Carlo simulation software was used to estimate immunization costs, medical costs, non-medical costs, and overall disease burden under different vaccine strategies. The model tracked inpatient invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD) and non-bacteremic pneumonia (NBP) in inpatient and outpatient settings. One-way sensitivity analyses incorporated indirect effects of prospective pediatric vaccination with PCV15 and PCV20 on adult IPD and NBP incidence. Costs were reported in 2021 US dollars. All future costs and outcomes were discounted at 3 % per year.

RESULTS

Age-based use of either PCV20 alone or PCV15 in series with PPSV23 at age 65 years were both shown to be cost-saving (improved health outcomes and saved costs). Combined cost-effectiveness of risk-based (19-64 years) plus age-based (65 years) (risk-and-age-based) use of PCV20 alone was cost-saving, whereas use of PCV15 in series with PPSV23 increased quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) but cost $412,111 (95 % CI: 270,295, 694,869) per QALY gained.

CONCLUSION

In U.S. adults, replacing the previous recommendations with PCV20 alone or PCV15 in series with PPSV23 improved health outcomes. Except for risk-and-age-based use of PCV15 in series with PPSV23 that resulted in increased cost per QALY gained, the interventions also reduced costs.

Cost-Effectiveness of the Pneumococcal Vaccine in the Adult Population: A Systematic Review

Objectives: Pneumococcal disease (PD), caused by S. pneumoniae, is a serious global health issue, primarily for adults over 65, due to its high mortality and morbidity rates. Recently, broader-serotype vaccines have been introduced to cope with tremendous hospital costs and decreasing quality of life. Our study aims to systematically review the cost-effectiveness of current PCVs (pneumococcal conjugate vaccines) and PPVs (pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine) from 2018 to April 2024. Methods: Articles were identified through PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane. Key outcomes include an improved incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALY), with the article's quality assessed via the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards 2022 (CHEERS 2022). In total, 23 studies were included, with 22 studies of high quality and 1 of moderate quality. Results: These articles showed that PCV20 was the most cost-effective option compared with other vaccines, including PPV23, PCV13, PCV15, and PCV15/PPV23, for both young and older adults, regardless of risk factors. PCV20, when used alone, saved greater costs than PCV20, followed by PPV23. Conclusions: For countries applying lower-valency vaccines, switching to PCV20 as a single regimen would be the most beneficial for averting pneumococcal cases and reducing costs in adults aged 18-64 and over 65.

Higher-valency pneumococcal conjugate vaccines in older adults, taking into account indirect effects from childhood vaccination: a cost-effectiveness study for the Netherlands

BACKGROUND

New 15- and 20-valent pneumococcal vaccines (PCV15, PCV20) are available for both children and adults, while PCV21 for adults is in development. However, their cost-effectiveness for older adults, taking into account indirect protection and serotype replacement from a switch to PCV15 and PCV20 in childhood vaccination, remains unexamined.

METHODS

We used a static model for the Netherlands to assess the cost-effectiveness of different strategies with 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPV23), PCV15, PCV20, and PCV21 for a 65-year-old cohort from a societal perspective, over a 15-year time horizon. Childhood vaccination was varied from PCV10 to PCV13, PCV15, and PCV20. Indirect protection was assumed to reduce the incidence of vaccine serotypes in older adults by 80% (except for serotype 3, no effect), completely offset by an increase in non-vaccine serotype incidence due to serotype replacement.

RESULTS

Indirect effects from childhood vaccination reduced the cost-effectiveness of vaccination of older adults, depending on the serotype overlap between the vaccines. With PCV10, PCV13, or PCV15 in children, PCV20 was more effective and less costly for older adults than PPV23 and PCV15. PCV20 costs approximately €10,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained compared to no pneumococcal vaccination, which falls below the conventional Dutch €20,000/QALY gained threshold. However, with PCV20 in children, PCV20 was no longer considered cost-effective for older adults, costing €22,550/QALY gained. As indirect effects progressed over time, the cost-effectiveness of PCV20 for older adults further diminished for newly vaccinated cohorts. PPV23 was more cost-effective than PCV20 for cohorts vaccinated 3 years after the switch to PCV20 in children. PCV21 offered the most QALY gains, and its cost-effectiveness was minimally affected by indirect effects due to its coverage of 11 different serotypes compared to PCV20.

CONCLUSIONS

For long-term cost-effectiveness in the Netherlands, the pneumococcal vaccine for older adults should either include invasive serotypes not covered by childhood vaccination or become more affordable than its current pricing for individual use.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of adult pneumococcal conjugate vaccines for pneumococcal disease in Japan

BACKGROUND

The 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPSV23) is used in the Japanese National Immunization Program for older adults and adults with increased risk for pneumococcal disease, however, disease incidence and associated burden remain high. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of pneumococcal conjugate vaccines (PCVs) for adults aged 65 years and high-risk adults aged 60-64 years in Japan.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Using a Markov model, we evaluated lifetime costs using societal and healthcare payer perspectives and estimated quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and number of prevented cases and deaths caused by invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD) and non-IPD. The base case analysis used a societal perspective.

RESULTS

In comparison with PPSV23, the 20-valent PCV (PCV20) prevented 127 IPD cases 10,813 non-IPD cases (inpatients: 2,461, outpatients: 8,352) and 226 deaths, and gained more QALYs (+0.0015 per person) with less cost (-JPY22,513 per person). All sensitivity and scenario analyses including a payer perspective analysis indicated that the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were below the cost-effectiveness threshold value in Japan (JPY5 million/QALY).

CONCLUSIONS

PCV20 is both cost saving and more effective than PPSV23 for adults aged 65 years and high-risk adults aged 60-64 years in Japan.

Vaccination strategies for patients under monoclonal antibody and other biological treatments: an updated comprehensive review based on EMA authorisations to January 2024

INTRODUCTION

Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and other biological agents are being increasingly approved in the last years with very different indications. Their highly heterogeneous immunosuppressive effects, mechanisms of action and pharmacokinetics require comprehensive individualized vaccination schedules.

AREAS COVERED

Vaccination for immunocompromised patients. Prevention and treatment with mAbs and other biological therapies.

EXPERT OPINION

Current recommendations on vaccine schedules for patients under mAbs or other biological treatments are based on expert opinions and are not individualized according to each vaccine and treatment. No studies are focusing on the high heterogeneity of these agents, which are exponentially developed and used for many different indications. Recent paradigm changes in vaccine development (boosted by the COVID-19 pandemic) and in the mAbs use for prophylactic purposes (changing 'vaccination' by 'immunization' schedules) has been witnessed in the last years. We aimed at collecting all mAbs used for treatment or prevention, approved as of 1 January 2024, by the EMA. Based on available data on mAbs and vaccines, we propose a comprehensive guide for personalizing vaccination. Recent vaccine developments and current population strategies (e.g. zoster vaccination or prophylactic nirsevimab) are discussed. This review aims to be a practical guideline for professionals working in vaccine consultations for immunosuppressed patients.