table1_Health Impact and Cost-Effectiveness of Implementing Gender-Neutral Vaccination With the 9-Valent Human Papillomavirus Vaccine in Belgium.docx
Background: Routine human papillomavirus (HPV) immunization in Belgium is currently regionally managed, with school-aged girls receiving the 9-valent HPV (9vHPV) vaccine in Flanders and Wallonia-Brussels with a national catch-up program for females only. This study will assess whether expanding these programs to gender-neutral vaccination (GNV) with the 9vHPV vaccine is a cost-effective strategy in Belgium.
Methods: A validated HPV-type transmission dynamic model estimated the potential health and economic impact of regional vaccination programs, comparing GNV versus female-only vaccination (FOV) with the 9vHPV vaccine in individuals aged 11–12 years in Flanders, GNV with the 9vHPV vaccine versus FOV with the 2-valent HPV (2vHPV) vaccine in individuals aged 12–13 years in Wallonia-Brussels, and national catch-up GNV versus FOV with the 9vHPV vaccine for those aged 12–18 years. Vaccination coverage rates of 90, 50, and 50% in both males and females were used in the base cases for the three programs, respectively, and sensitivity analyses were conducted. All costs are from the third-party payer perspective, and outcome measures were reported over a 100-year time horizon.
Results: GNV with the 9vHPV vaccine was projected to decrease the cumulative incidence of HPV 6/11/16/18/31/33/45/52/58-related diseases relative to FOV in both Flanders and Wallonia-Brussels. Further reductions were also projected for catch-up GNV with the 9vHPV vaccine, including reductions of 6.8% (2,256 cases) for cervical cancer, 7.1% (386 cases) and 18.8% (2,784 cases) for head and neck cancer in females and males, respectively, and 30.3% (82,103 cases) and 44.6% (102,936 cases) for genital warts in females and males, respectively. As a result, a GNV strategy would lead to reductions in HPV-related deaths. Both regional and national catch-up GNV strategies were projected to reduce cumulative HPV-related disease costs and were estimated to be cost-effective compared with FOV with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of €8,062, €4,179, and €6,127 per quality-adjusted life-years in the three programs, respectively. Sensitivity analyses were consistent with the base cases.
Conclusions: A GNV strategy with the 9vHPV vaccine can reduce the burden of HPV-related disease and is cost-effective compared with FOV for both regional vaccination programs and the national catch-up program in Belgium.
History
References
- https://doi.org//10.1093/infdis/jir851
- https://doi.org//10.3111/13696990801961611
- https://doi.org//10.1016/S0140-6736(07)60852-6
- https://doi.org//10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-17-0853
- https://doi.org//10.2471/BLT.15.164418
- https://doi.org//10.1186/s12879-016-1483-5
- https://doi.org//10.1016/S2468-2667(16)30001-9
- https://doi.org//10.1016/S2214-109X(16)30099-7
- https://doi.org//10.1371/journal.pone.0089974
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.otohns.2010.08.005
- https://doi.org//10.1080/21645515.2016.1140288
- https://doi.org//10.1007/s10198-004-0242-5
- https://doi.org//10.1093/epirev/mxj006
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.vaccine.2012.08.034
- https://doi.org//10.1371/journal.pone.0206501
- https://doi.org//10.1186/s12879-019-4108-y
- https://doi.org//10.1080/21645515.2018.1560770
- https://doi.org//10.1002/ijc.30716
- https://doi.org//10.1093/jncics/pky045
- https://doi.org//10.1186/1471-2458-13-1065
- https://doi.org//10.1371/journal.pone.0132404
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.ijporl.2009.09.004
- https://doi.org//10.1093/infdis/jix499
- https://doi.org//10.1001/jama.297.8.813
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.vaccine.2010.08.030
- https://doi.org//10.3201/eid1301.060438
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.vaccine.2012.07.055
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.rmed.2017.03.030
- https://doi.org//10.1093/aje/kwg067
- https://doi.org//10.1056/NEJMoa061760
- https://doi.org//10.1086/597071
- https://doi.org//10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-08-0151
- https://doi.org//10.1002/ijc.29082
- https://doi.org//10.1056/NEJMoa0909537
- https://doi.org//10.1001/jamaoncol.2015.0735
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.oooo.2015.10.035
- https://doi.org//10.1186/s13027-017-0129-6
- https://doi.org//10.1186/1471-2407-12-30
- https://doi.org//10.1371/journal.pone.0068329
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.ajog.2008.03.064
- https://doi.org//10.1111/j.1749-4486.2011.02363.x
- https://doi.org//10.1056/NEJMoa1405044
- https://doi.org//10.1016/S0140-6736(07)60777-6
- https://doi.org//10.1186/s12889-020-08840-0
- https://doi.org//10.1136/bmj.k3237
- https://doi.org//10.1080/14737167.2016.1208087
- https://doi.org//10.1093/cid/ciw845
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.vaccine.2020.10.089
- https://doi.org//10.1002/lary.27993
- https://doi.org//10.1186/s12879-018-3260-0
- https://doi.org//10.1093/cid/ciy1081
- https://doi.org//10.1186/s12962-017-0073-8
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.vaccine.2008.06.013
- https://doi.org//10.1016/S1470-2045(14)70471-1
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.vaccine.2018.03.024
- https://doi.org//10.1093/infdis/jix498
- https://doi.org//10.1093/infdis/jiq021
- https://doi.org//10.1002/lary.23327
- https://doi.org//10.1056/NEJMoa1010971
- https://doi.org//10.1016/S2468-2667(20)30209-7
- https://doi.org//10.1043/1543-2165(2003)127
- https://doi.org//10.1177/0272989X11401031
- https://doi.org//10.1007/s00103-018-2791-2
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.jval.2016.09.1525
- https://doi.org//10.1093/cid/ciy274
- https://doi.org//10.1177/0003489418821695
CC BY 4.0