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.

Vaccine Pub Date : 2025-01-12 Epub Date: 2024-12-06 DOI:10.1016/j.vaccine.2024.126567
Melissa Rosenthal, Charles Stoecker, Andrew J Leidner, Bo-Hyun Cho, Tamara Pilishvili, Miwako Kobayashi
{"title":"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.","authors":"Melissa Rosenthal, Charles Stoecker, Andrew J Leidner, Bo-Hyun Cho, Tamara Pilishvili, Miwako Kobayashi","doi":"10.1016/j.vaccine.2024.126567","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>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.</p>","PeriodicalId":94264,"journal":{"name":"Vaccine","volume":" ","pages":"126567"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vaccine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2024.126567","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

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.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信