Nyi Nyi Soe1, Jason J Ong2,3,4, Xiaomeng Ma1, Christopher K Fairley2,3, Phyu Mon Latt5, Jun Jing1, Feng Cheng1, Lei Zhang1,2,3,6. 1. a Research Centre for Public Health, School of Medicine , Tsinghua University , Beijing , China. 2. b Melbourne Sexual Health Centre, Alfred Health , Melbourne , Australia. 3. c Central Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine , Monash University , Melbourne , Australia. 4. d London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine , London , UK. 5. e Section of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Population Health , The University of Auckland , Auckland , New Zealand. 6. f School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Medicine , Monash University , Melbourne , Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination for young women up to age 26 is highly cost-effective and has been implemented in 65 countries globally. We investigate the cost-effectiveness for HPV vaccination program in older women (age > 26 years), heterosexual men and men who have sex with men (MSM). METHOD: A targeted literature review was conducted on PubMed for publications between January 2000 and January 2017 according to the PRISMA guidelines. We included English-language articles that reported the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of HPV vaccination programs for women over age 26, heterosexual men, and MSM and identified the underlying factors for its cost-effectiveness. RESULTS: We included 36 relevant articles (six, 26 and four in older women, heterosexual men and MSM, respectively) from 17 countries (12 high-income (HICs) and five low- and middle-income (LMICs) countries). Most (4/6) studies in women over age 26 did not show cost-effectiveness ($65,000-192,000/QALY gained). Two showed cost-effectiveness, but only when the vaccine cost was largely subsidised and protection to non-naïve women was also considered. Sixteen of 26 studies in heterosexual men were cost-effective (ICER = $19,600-52,800/QALY gained in HICs; $49-5,860/QALY gained in LMICs). Nonavalent vaccines, a low vaccine price, fewer required doses, and a long vaccine protection period were key drivers for cost-effectiveness. In contrast, all four studies on MSM consistently reported cost-effectiveness (ICER = $15,000-$43,000/QALY gained), particularly in MSM age < 40 years and those who were HIV-positive. Countries' vaccination coverage did not significantly correlate with its per-capita Gross National Income. CONCLUSION: Targeted HPV vaccination for MSM should be next priority in HPV prevention after having established a solid girls vaccination programme. Vaccination for heterosexual men should be considered when 2-dose 4vHPV/9vHPV vaccines become available with a reduced price, whereas targeted vaccination for women over age 26 is unlikely to be cost-effective.
BACKGROUND:Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination for young women up to age 26 is highly cost-effective and has been implemented in 65 countries globally. We investigate the cost-effectiveness for HPV vaccination program in older women (age > 26 years), heterosexual men and men who have sex with men (MSM). METHOD: A targeted literature review was conducted on PubMed for publications between January 2000 and January 2017 according to the PRISMA guidelines. We included English-language articles that reported the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of HPV vaccination programs for women over age 26, heterosexual men, and MSM and identified the underlying factors for its cost-effectiveness. RESULTS: We included 36 relevant articles (six, 26 and four in older women, heterosexual men and MSM, respectively) from 17 countries (12 high-income (HICs) and five low- and middle-income (LMICs) countries). Most (4/6) studies in women over age 26 did not show cost-effectiveness ($65,000-192,000/QALY gained). Two showed cost-effectiveness, but only when the vaccine cost was largely subsidised and protection to non-naïve women was also considered. Sixteen of 26 studies in heterosexual men were cost-effective (ICER = $19,600-52,800/QALY gained in HICs; $49-5,860/QALY gained in LMICs). Nonavalent vaccines, a low vaccine price, fewer required doses, and a long vaccine protection period were key drivers for cost-effectiveness. In contrast, all four studies on MSM consistently reported cost-effectiveness (ICER = $15,000-$43,000/QALY gained), particularly in MSM age < 40 years and those who were HIV-positive. Countries' vaccination coverage did not significantly correlate with its per-capita Gross National Income. CONCLUSION: Targeted HPV vaccination for MSM should be next priority in HPV prevention after having established a solid girls vaccination programme. Vaccination for heterosexual men should be considered when 2-dose 4vHPV/9vHPV vaccines become available with a reduced price, whereas targeted vaccination for women over age 26 is unlikely to be cost-effective.
Entities:
Keywords:
Human papillomavirus; cost-effectiveness; men who have sex with men; vaccine
Authors: Tjalke A Westra; Mark H Rozenbaum; Raina M Rogoza; Hans W Nijman; Toos Daemen; Maarten J Postma; Jan C Wilschut Journal: J Infect Dis Date: 2011-08-01 Impact factor: 5.226
Authors: Sue J Goldie; Carol Levin; N Rocio Mosqueira-Lovón; Jesse Ortendahl; Jane Kim; Meredith O'Shea; Mireia Diaz Sanchez; Maria Ana Mendoza Araujo Journal: Rev Panam Salud Publica Date: 2012-12
Authors: Ashish A Deshmukh; Jagpreet Chhatwal; Elizabeth Y Chiao; Alan G Nyitray; Prajnan Das; Scott B Cantor Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2015-07-29 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Allen Lin; Koh J Ong; Peter Hobbelen; Eleanor King; David Mesher; W John Edmunds; Pam Sonnenberg; Richard Gilson; Irenjeet Bains; Yoon H Choi; Clare Tanton; Kate Soldan; Mark Jit Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2017-03-01 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Anne F Rositch; Eshan U Patel; Molly R Petersen; Thomas C Quinn; Patti E Gravitt; Aaron A R Tobian Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2021-05-04 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Cecilia Trucchi; Daniela Amicizia; Silvio Tafuri; Laura Sticchi; Paolo Durando; Claudio Costantino; Federica Varlese; Bruno Di Silverio; Anna Maria Bagnasco; Filippo Ansaldi; Giancarlo Icardi Journal: Vaccines (Basel) Date: 2020-02-07
Authors: Cintia Muñoz-Quiles; Javier Díez-Domingo; Luis Acedo; Víctor Sánchez-Alonso; Rafael J Villanueva Journal: Viruses Date: 2021-05-13 Impact factor: 5.048