西班牙儿科人群中20价抗肺炎球菌疫苗的成本-效果分析

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Franciso Álvarez García, Federico Martinón-Torres, Valentí Pineda, Alejandra López-Ibáñez de Aldecoa, Paulina Gálvez, An Ta, Johnna Perdrizet
{"title":"西班牙儿科人群中20价抗肺炎球菌疫苗的成本-效果分析","authors":"Franciso Álvarez García, Federico Martinón-Torres, Valentí Pineda, Alejandra López-Ibáñez de Aldecoa, Paulina Gálvez, An Ta, Johnna Perdrizet","doi":"10.1080/14737167.2025.2521445","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of implementing different pneumococcal conjugate vaccines (PCV) - 20-valent (PCV20; 3 + 1), 13-valent (PCV13; 2 + 1), and 15-valent (PCV15; 2 + 1) - into the Spanish pediatric national immunization program (NIP) for pneumococcal disease prevention.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A Markov model adopting a Spanish National Healthcare System perspective and annual cycles estimated the health and cost impact of PCV20, PCV13, and PCV15 over 10 years among children. Epidemiological, cost, and utility inputs were derived from published literature and official databases; vaccine efficacy inputs were based on PCV13 clinical effectiveness and 7-valent PCV efficacy and impact studies. Sensitivity analyses evaluated model robustness.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>PCV20 implementation was predicted to reduce the pneumococcal disease burden, preventing > 1,000,000 pneumococcal disease cases and > 150 deaths, versus both comparators. The adoption of PCV20 was estimated to result in cost-savings of approximately €1 billion versus PCV13 and PCV15. PCV20 demonstrated dominance over both alternatives, with 100% of 1,000 probabilistic sensitivity analysis iterations indicating PCV20 dominance.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Incorporating PCV20 3 + 1 into the Spanish pediatric NIP was predicted to be more effective at a lower cost than PCV13 2 + 1 and PCV15 2 + 1 due to its broader serotype coverage and enhanced protection against pneumococcal disease.</p>","PeriodicalId":12244,"journal":{"name":"Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research","volume":" ","pages":"1101-1113"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cost-effectiveness analysis of 20-valent anti-pneumococcal vaccination in the Spanish pediatric population.\",\"authors\":\"Franciso Álvarez García, Federico Martinón-Torres, Valentí Pineda, Alejandra López-Ibáñez de Aldecoa, Paulina Gálvez, An Ta, Johnna Perdrizet\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14737167.2025.2521445\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of implementing different pneumococcal conjugate vaccines (PCV) - 20-valent (PCV20; 3 + 1), 13-valent (PCV13; 2 + 1), and 15-valent (PCV15; 2 + 1) - into the Spanish pediatric national immunization program (NIP) for pneumococcal disease prevention.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A Markov model adopting a Spanish National Healthcare System perspective and annual cycles estimated the health and cost impact of PCV20, PCV13, and PCV15 over 10 years among children. Epidemiological, cost, and utility inputs were derived from published literature and official databases; vaccine efficacy inputs were based on PCV13 clinical effectiveness and 7-valent PCV efficacy and impact studies. Sensitivity analyses evaluated model robustness.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>PCV20 implementation was predicted to reduce the pneumococcal disease burden, preventing > 1,000,000 pneumococcal disease cases and > 150 deaths, versus both comparators. The adoption of PCV20 was estimated to result in cost-savings of approximately €1 billion versus PCV13 and PCV15. PCV20 demonstrated dominance over both alternatives, with 100% of 1,000 probabilistic sensitivity analysis iterations indicating PCV20 dominance.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Incorporating PCV20 3 + 1 into the Spanish pediatric NIP was predicted to be more effective at a lower cost than PCV13 2 + 1 and PCV15 2 + 1 due to its broader serotype coverage and enhanced protection against pneumococcal disease.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12244,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1101-1113\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14737167.2025.2521445\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/6/24 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14737167.2025.2521445","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/6/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:我们评估了实施不同肺炎球菌结合疫苗(PCV)的成本效益- 20价(PCV20;3 + 1), 13价(PCV13;2 + 1)和15价(PCV15;2 + 1) -纳入西班牙儿童国家免疫计划(NIP)预防肺炎球菌病。方法:采用西班牙国家卫生保健系统视角和年周期的马尔可夫模型估计PCV20、PCV13和PCV15在10年内对儿童的健康和成本影响。流行病学、成本和效用输入来自已发表的文献和官方数据库;疫苗有效性输入基于PCV13的临床有效性和7价PCV13的有效性和影响研究。敏感性分析评估了模型的稳健性。结果:与两个比较组相比,PCV20的实施预计可减少肺炎球菌疾病负担,预防100万例肺炎球菌疾病病例和150万例死亡。与PCV13和PCV15相比,采用PCV20预计可节省约10亿欧元的成本。PCV20在两种替代方案中都表现出优势,1000次概率敏感性分析迭代的100%表明PCV20的优势。结论:与PCV13 2 + 1和PCV152 + 1相比,将PCV20 3 + 1纳入西班牙儿科疫苗计划,由于其更广泛的血清型覆盖范围和对肺炎球菌疾病的增强保护,预计其更有效,成本更低。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Cost-effectiveness analysis of 20-valent anti-pneumococcal vaccination in the Spanish pediatric population.

Objectives: We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of implementing different pneumococcal conjugate vaccines (PCV) - 20-valent (PCV20; 3 + 1), 13-valent (PCV13; 2 + 1), and 15-valent (PCV15; 2 + 1) - into the Spanish pediatric national immunization program (NIP) for pneumococcal disease prevention.

Methods: A Markov model adopting a Spanish National Healthcare System perspective and annual cycles estimated the health and cost impact of PCV20, PCV13, and PCV15 over 10 years among children. Epidemiological, cost, and utility inputs were derived from published literature and official databases; vaccine efficacy inputs were based on PCV13 clinical effectiveness and 7-valent PCV efficacy and impact studies. Sensitivity analyses evaluated model robustness.

Results: PCV20 implementation was predicted to reduce the pneumococcal disease burden, preventing > 1,000,000 pneumococcal disease cases and > 150 deaths, versus both comparators. The adoption of PCV20 was estimated to result in cost-savings of approximately €1 billion versus PCV13 and PCV15. PCV20 demonstrated dominance over both alternatives, with 100% of 1,000 probabilistic sensitivity analysis iterations indicating PCV20 dominance.

Conclusion: Incorporating PCV20 3 + 1 into the Spanish pediatric NIP was predicted to be more effective at a lower cost than PCV13 2 + 1 and PCV15 2 + 1 due to its broader serotype coverage and enhanced protection against pneumococcal disease.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research
Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
4.30%
发文量
68
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research (ISSN 1473-7167) provides expert reviews on cost-benefit and pharmacoeconomic issues relating to the clinical use of drugs and therapeutic approaches. Coverage includes pharmacoeconomics and quality-of-life research, therapeutic outcomes, evidence-based medicine and cost-benefit research. All articles are subject to rigorous peer-review. The journal adopts the unique Expert Review article format, offering a complete overview of current thinking in a key technology area, research or clinical practice, augmented by the following sections: Expert Opinion – a personal view of the data presented in the article, a discussion on the developments that are likely to be important in the future, and the avenues of research likely to become exciting as further studies yield more detailed results Article Highlights – an executive summary of the author’s most critical points.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信