BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES:
Pertussis incidence is increasing, possibly due to the introduction of acellular vaccines, which may have decreased the durability of immune response. We sought to evaluate and compare the duration of protective immunity conferred by a childhood immunization series with 3 or 5 doses of diphtheria-tetanus-acellular pertussis (DTaP).
METHODS:
We searched Medline and Embase for articles published before October 10, 2013. Included studies contained a measure of long-term immunity to pertussis after 3 or 5 doses of DTaP. Twelve articles were eligible for inclusion; 11 of these were included in the meta-analysis. We assessed study quality and used meta-regression models to evaluate the relationship between the odds of pertussis and time since last dose of DTaP and to estimate the probability of vaccine failure through time.
RESULTS:
We found no significant difference between the annual odds of pertussis for the 3- versus 5-dose DTaP regimens. For every additional year after the last dose of DTaP, the odds of pertussis increased by 1.33 times (95% confidence interval: 1.23–1.43). Assuming 85% vaccine efficacy, we estimated that 10% of children vaccinated with DTaP would be immune to pertussis 8.5 years after the last dose. Limitations included the statistical model extrapolated from data and the different study designs included, most of which were observational study designs.
CONCLUSIONS:
Although acellular pertussis vaccines are considered safer, the adoption of these vaccines may necessitate earlier booster vaccination and repeated boosting strategies to achieve necessary “herd effects” to control the spread of pertussis.
ObjectivesIn Canada, incidences of herpes zoster (HZ) and postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) are increasing, posing a significant burden on the healthcare system. This study aimed to determine the public health impact and cost effectiveness of an adjuvanted recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV) compared to no vaccination and to the live attenuated vaccine (ZVL) in Canadians aged 60 years and older.MethodsA multi-cohort Markov model has been adapted to the Canadian context using recent demographic and epidemiologic data. Simulations consisted of age-cohorts annually transitioning between health states. Health outcomes and costs were discounted at 1.5% per year. The perspective of the Canadian healthcare payer was adopted. A coverage of 80% for the first RZV and ZVL dose and a compliance of 75% for the second RZV dose were assumed.ResultsRZV was estimated to be cost effective compared with no vaccination with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $28,360 (Canadian dollars) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) in persons aged ≥ 60 years, avoiding 554,504 HZ and 166,196 PHN cases. Compared with ZVL, RZV accrued more QALYs through the remaining lifetime and an increase in costs of approximately $50 million resulting in an average ICER of $2396. Results were robust under deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. HZ incidence rate and persistence of vaccine efficacy had the largest impact on cost effectiveness.ConclusionsThe cost-utility analysis suggested that RZV would be cost effective in the Canadian population compared with no vaccination and vaccination with ZVL at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1007/s40258-019-00491-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Our results suggest PMB is not cost-effective in Canada by commonly used thresholds. However, given the rarity of CF and relatively small budget impact, consideration may be given for the selective use of PMB for immunoprophylaxis of RSV in high-risk CF infants on a case-by-case scenario basis.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.