The study results indicated that 96% of the serotypes involved in severe pneumococcal diseases were included in the 23-valent vaccine and that S. pneumoniae resistance to penicillin was moderate.

Background: The phased withdrawal of oral polio vaccine (OPV) and the introduction of inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV) is central to the polio 'end-game' strategy. Methods: We analyzed the cost implications in Chile of a switch from the vaccination scheme consisting of a pentavalent vaccine with whole-cell pertussis component (wP) plus IPV/OPV vaccines to a scheme with a hexavalent vaccine with acellular pertussis component (aP) and IPV (Hexaxim®) from a societal perspective. Cost data were collected from a variety of sources including national estimates and previous vaccine studies. All costs were expressed in 2017 prices (US$ 1.00 = $Ch 666.26). Results: The overall costs associated with the vaccination scheme (4 doses of pentavalent vaccine plus 1 dose IPV and 3 doses OPV) from a societal perspective was estimated to be US$ 12.70 million, of which US$ 8.84 million were associated with the management of adverse events related to wP. In comparison, the cost associated with the 4-dose scheme with a hexavalent vaccine (based upon the PAHO reference price) was US$ 19.76 million. The cost of switching to the hexavalent vaccine would be an additional US$ 6.45 million. Overall, depending on the scenario, the costs of switching to the hexavalent scheme would range from an additional US$ 2.62 million to US$ 6.45 million compared with the current vaccination scheme. Conclusions: The switch to the hexavalent vaccine schedule in Chile would lead to additional acquisition costs, which would be partially offset by improved logistics, and a reduction in adverse events associated with the current vaccines.

We evaluated the cost-utility of replacing trivalent influenza vaccine (TIV) with quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV) in the current target populations in Uruguay. An existing decision-analytic static cost-effectiveness model was adapted for Uruguay. The population was stratified into age groups. Costs and outcomes were estimated for an average influenza season, based on observed rates from 2013 to 2019 inclusive. Introducing QIV instead of TIV in Uruguay would avoid around 740 additional influenza cases, 500 GP consultations, 15 hospitalizations, and three deaths, and save around 300 workdays, for the same vaccination coverage during an average influenza season. Most of the influenza-related consultations and hospitalizations would be avoided among children ≤4 and adults ≥65 years of age. Using QIV rather than TIV would cost an additional ~US$729,000, but this would be partially offset by savings in consultations and hospitalization costs. The incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained with QIV would be in the order of US$18,000 for both the payor and societal perspectives, for all age groups, and around US$12,000 for adults ≥65 years of age. The main drivers influencing the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio were the vaccine efficacy against the B strains and the percentage of match each season with the B strain included in TIV. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that switching to QIV would provide a favorable cost-utility ratio for 50% of simulations at a willingness-to-pay per QALY of US$20,000. A switch to QIV is expected to be cost-effective for the current target populations in Uruguay, particularly for older adults.

No abstract