Ellen Wolff1, K Miriam Elfström2, Hedda Haugen Cange3, Sofie Larsson4, Helene Englund5, Pär Sparén6, Adam Roth7. 1. Public Health Agency of Sweden, Nobels väg 18, 171 82 Solna, Sweden; Gothenburg University, Institute of Medicine, Medicinaregatan 3, 405 30 Gothenburg, Sweden. Electronic address: ellen.wolff@folkhalsomyndigheten.se. 2. Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm Nobels väg 6, 171 77 Stockholm, Sweden; Regional Cancer Centre of Stockholm-Gotland, Västgötagatan 2, Sweden. 3. Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Dept. of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Östra, SE 416 85 Gothenburg, Sweden. 4. Public Health Agency of Sweden, Nobels väg 18, 171 82 Solna, Sweden; Gothenburg University, Institute of Medicine, Medicinaregatan 3, 405 30 Gothenburg, Sweden. 5. Public Health Agency of Sweden, Nobels väg 18, 171 82 Solna, Sweden. 6. Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm Nobels väg 6, 171 77 Stockholm, Sweden. 7. Public Health Agency of Sweden, Nobels väg 18, 171 82 Solna, Sweden; Institution for Translational Medicine, Lund University, J Waldenströms g 35, CRC, hus 92, plan 11, Malmö, Sweden.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The aim was to assess cost-effectiveness of expanding the Swedish HPV-vaccination program to include preadolescent boys, by comparing health-effects and costs of HPV-related disease, with a sex-neutral vaccination program versus only vaccinating girls. METHODS: We used a dynamic compartmental model to simulate the burden of HPV16/18-related disease in Sweden, accounting for indirect effects of vaccination through herd-immunity. The model accounted for sexual behaviour, such as age preferences and men who have sex with men. The main outcome was number of individuals with HPV-related cancers (cervical, genital, anal and oropharyngeal cancer) and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN). Costs included in the analysis were those incurred when treating HPV-related cancer and CIN, production losses during sick-leave, and acquisition and administration of vaccine. Health effects were measured as quality-adjusted life years (QALY). The time horizon was set to 100 years, and both effects and costs were discounted by 3% annually. Health effects and costs were accumulated over the time horizon and used to create an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. RESULTS: A sex-neutral vaccination program would reduce HPV-related cancer and CIN, both due to direct effects among vaccinated as well as through herd-immunity, further decreasing HPV-related cancer burden annually by around 60 cases among men and women respectively in steady-state. The cost per gained QALY was estimated to 40,000 euro. Applying the procurement price of 2017, sex-neutral vaccination was dominant. CONCLUSION: Introducing a sex-neutral HPV-vaccination program would be good value for money also in Sweden where there this 80% coverage in the current HPV-vaccination program for preadolescent girls. The cost-effectiveness of a sex-neutral program is highly dependent on the price of the vaccine, the lower the price the more favourable it is to also vaccinate boys.
INTRODUCTION: The aim was to assess cost-effectiveness of expanding the Swedish HPV-vaccination program to include preadolescent boys, by comparing health-effects and costs of HPV-related disease, with a sex-neutral vaccination program versus only vaccinating girls. METHODS: We used a dynamic compartmental model to simulate the burden of HPV16/18-related disease in Sweden, accounting for indirect effects of vaccination through herd-immunity. The model accounted for sexual behaviour, such as age preferences and men who have sex with men. The main outcome was number of individuals with HPV-related cancers (cervical, genital, anal and oropharyngeal cancer) and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN). Costs included in the analysis were those incurred when treating HPV-related cancer and CIN, production losses during sick-leave, and acquisition and administration of vaccine. Health effects were measured as quality-adjusted life years (QALY). The time horizon was set to 100 years, and both effects and costs were discounted by 3% annually. Health effects and costs were accumulated over the time horizon and used to create an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. RESULTS: A sex-neutral vaccination program would reduce HPV-related cancer and CIN, both due to direct effects among vaccinated as well as through herd-immunity, further decreasing HPV-related cancer burden annually by around 60 cases among men and women respectively in steady-state. The cost per gained QALY was estimated to 40,000 euro. Applying the procurement price of 2017, sex-neutral vaccination was dominant. CONCLUSION: Introducing a sex-neutral HPV-vaccination program would be good value for money also in Sweden where there this 80% coverage in the current HPV-vaccination program for preadolescent girls. The cost-effectiveness of a sex-neutral program is highly dependent on the price of the vaccine, the lower the price the more favourable it is to also vaccinate boys.
Authors: David D Kim; Madison C Silver; Natalia Kunst; Joshua T Cohen; Daniel A Ollendorf; Peter J Neumann Journal: Pharmacoeconomics Date: 2020-10 Impact factor: 4.981