No abstract

Background Despite the burden of varicella, there is no universal varicella vaccination (UVV) programme in the United Kingdom (UK) due to concerns this could increase herpes zoster (HZ) incidence. This study assessed the cost-utility of a first-dose monovalent (V) or quadrivalent (MMRV) followed by a second-dose quadrivalent (MMRV) UVV programmes. GSK and MSD varicella-containing vaccines (VCVs) were considered. Methods A dynamic transmission and cost-effectiveness models were adapted to the UK. Outcomes measured included varicella and HZ incidences, the incremental cost-utility ratio (ICURs) over a lifetime horizon. The payer and societal perspectives were evaluated. Results The impact of V-MMRV and MMRV-MMRV UVV programmes on varicella incidence was comparable between both VCVs at equilibrium. HZ incidence increased by 1.6%-1.7% over seven years after UVV start, regardless of the strategies, then decreased by >95% at equilibrium. ICURs ranged from £5,665 (100 years) to £18,513 (20 years) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained with V-MMRV; and from £9,220 to £27,101 per QALY gained with MMRV-MMRV (payer perspective). MMRV-MMRV was cost-effective in medium- and long-terms with GSK VCV, and only cost-effective at long-term with MSD VCV at £20,000 per QALY gained threshold. Without the exogenous boosting hypothesis, HZ incidence decreased through UVV implementation. ICURs were most sensitive to discount rates and MMRV price. Conclusions A 2-dose UVV was demonstrated to be a cost-effective alternative to no vaccination. With comparable effectiveness as MSD VCV at lower costs, GSK VCV may offer higher value for money.

Introduction:The hexavalent vaccine DT3aP-HBV-IPV-Hib (Infanrix hexa, GSK) was first licensed in Europe in 2000. DT2aP-HBV-IPV-Hib (Hexyon/Hexacima/Hexaxim, Sanofi Pasteur), and DT5aP-HBV-IPV-Hib (Vaxelis, MCM Vaccine Company) were licensed in the EU in 2013 and 2016, respectively, based largely on studies demonstrating non-inferiority to DT3aP-HBV-IPV-Hib for immunogenicity and comparable reactogenicity profiles. Methods: We conducted a systematic literature review looking for direct head-to-head trials comparing DT2aP-HBV-IPV-Hib and DT5aP-HBV-IPV-Hib with DT3aP-HBV-IPV-Hib. The incidence of solicited local and systemic reactions following primary series administration of DT3aP-HBV-IPV-Hib or DT2aP-HBV-IPV -Hib were meta-analyzed. Results: A total of 317 unique records were retrieved from the search; nine met the predefined inclusion criteria; seven reported studies comparing DT3aP-HBV-IPV-Hib and DT2aP-HBV-IPV-Hib. Six trials assessing outcomes of the primary vaccination series were identified. Odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals (OR; 95%CI) were computed for DT3aP-HBV-

No abstract

No abstract