IntroductionIn Germany, a 23-valent polysaccharide pneumococcal vaccine (PPSV23) is recommended for elderly (60+) and patients 16+ with chronic diseases not associated with immune suppression. For all other patients at risk, sequential immunization with a 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV13) first, followed by PPSV23 is recommended. Repeated vaccination with PPSV23 is recommended every 6 years after individual assessment by the physician. This was adopted into the vaccination directive with binding reimbursement and funding. However, additional voluntary services allow statutory health insurances to differentiate from each other. Aim of this study is to estimate the cost-effectiveness of voluntary service scenarios compared to the strategy in place to support informed decision making.MethodsA microsimulation framework with Markov-type process of a population susceptible to pneumococcal disease over a lifetime horizon was developed to compare effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of different vaccination strategies. We simulated 1,000 iterations for seven scenarios. Assumptions were derived from published literature and probabilistic sensitivity analysis was run to show the robustness of the model.ResultsOur study indicates that all voluntary service strategies could prevent further clinical cases compared to the existing policy. Depending on the scenario, 48–142 invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD), 24,000–45,000 hospitalized all-cause nonbacteremic pneumonia (NBP), 15,000–45,000 outpatient NBP cases, and 4,000–8,000 deaths could be avoided on average. This refers to potential savings of €115 Mio. - €187 Mio. for medical and non-medical costs. Additional costs per patient for the payer are €2.48 to €7.13 and for the society €2.20 to €6.85. The ICER per LYG ranged from €3,662 to €23,061 (payer) and €3,258 to €29,617 (societal). All but one scenario was cost-effective in ≥60% of the generated 1,000 simulations.ConclusionCompared to the vaccination strategy in place, the different hypothetical scenarios can be considered cost-effective and suitable as additional voluntary services.

Background Extracorporeal photopheresis (ECP) is a blood‐based therapeutic procedure increasingly used for modulation of immune dysregulation in various underlying disease settings. The aim of this study was to compare the procedure times and blood collection efficiencies between the two approaches currently utilized in European centers: the integrated versus the multistep nonintegrated procedures. Methods A retrospective data analysis was conducted, comparing treatment data from patients who received ECP therapy at the Central Institute for Blood Transfusion & Department of Immunology (ZIB) of the Tirol Kliniken GmbH, where the integrated and multistep nonintegrated procedures are routinely used in an approximated setup. Results During the observation period, a total of 15 patients who were treated with alternating systems on 2 consecutive days were identified. This allowed treatment pair comparisons with minimal interpatient variabilities, similar to a cross‐over design even though analyzed retrospectively. Total average procedure times with the integrated system were 99.3 vs 122.0 minutes with the multistep nonintegrated procedures, respectively. Significant differences were observed for all steps of the ECP procedure: (a) time for buffy coat collection, 66.5 vs 74.7; (b) handling/transfer, 2.8 vs 18.7; (c) irradiation, 20.3 vs 11.7; and (d) reinfusion/handling time, 9.6 vs 16.3 minutes. The calculated collection throughput was 7.79 mL/min for the integrated and 7.84 mL/min for the multistep nonintegrated procedures, and with a white blood cell (WBC) collection efficiency of 34.2% and 21.0%, respectively. Conclusion The data presented in this study show a significant shorter overall procedure time and higher WBC collection efficiency for the integrated ECP system.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract