Sarah M Bartsch1, Owen J Stokes-Cawley1, Pierre Buekens2, Lindsey Asti1, Maria Elena Bottazzi3, Ulrich Strych3, Patrick T Wedlock1, Elizabeth A Mitgang1, Sheba Meymandi4, Jorge Abelardo Falcon-Lezama5, Peter J Hotez3, Bruce Y Lee6. 1. Public Health Informatics, Computational, and Operations Research (PHICOR), City University of New York, 55 W 125th Street, New York City, NY 10027, USA. 2. Department of Epidemiology, Tulane University School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, New Orleans, LA, USA. 3. National School of Tropical Medicine and Departments of Pediatrics and Molecular Virology & Microbiology, Baylor College of Medicine, One Baylor Plaza, BCM113 Houston, TX 77030, USA. 4. Center of Excellence for Chagas Disease at Olive View-UCLA Medical Center, 14445 Olive View Drive, Sylmar, CA 91342, USA. 5. Carlos Slim Foundation, Lago Zurich 245, Piso 20. Ampliación Granada, Del. Miguel Hidalgo, C.P. 11529 Ciudad de México, Mexico. 6. Public Health Informatics, Computational, and Operations Research (PHICOR), City University of New York, 55 W 125th Street, New York City, NY 10027, USA. Electronic address: bruceleemdmba@gmail.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Currently, there are no solutions to prevent congenital transmission of Chagas disease during pregnancy, which affects 1-40% of pregnant women in Latin America and is associated with a 5% transmission risk. With therapeutic vaccines under development, now is the right time to determine the economic value of such a vaccine to prevent congenital transmission. METHODS: We developed a computational decision model that represented the clinical outcomes and diagnostic testing strategies for an infant born to a Chagas-positive woman in Mexico and evaluated the impact of vaccination. RESULTS: Compared to no vaccination, a 25% efficacious vaccine averted 125 [95% uncertainty interval (UI): 122-128] congenital cases, 1.9 (95% UI: 1.6-2.2) infant deaths, and 78 (95% UI: 66-91) DALYs per 10,000 infected pregnant women; a 50% efficacious vaccine averted 251 (95% UI: 248-254) cases, 3.8 (95% UI: 3.6-4.2) deaths, and 160 (95% UI: 148-171) DALYs; and a 75% efficacious vaccine averted 376 (95% UI: 374-378) cases, 5.8 (95% UI: 5.5-6.1) deaths, and 238 (95% UI: 227-249) DALYs. A 25% efficacious vaccine was cost-effective (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio <3× Mexico's gross domestic product per capita, <$29,698/DALY averted) when the vaccine cost ≤$240 and ≤$310 and cost-saving when ≤$10 and ≤$80 from the third-party payer and societal perspectives, respectively. A 50% efficacious vaccine was cost-effective when costing ≤$490 and ≤$615 and cost-saving when ≤$25 and ≤$160, from the third-party payer and societal perspectives, respectively. A 75% efficacious vaccine was cost-effective when ≤$720 and ≤$930 and cost-saving when ≤$40 and ≤$250 from the third-party payer and societal perspectives, respectively. Additionally, 13-42 fewer infants progressed to chronic disease, saving $0.41-$1.21 million to society. CONCLUSION: We delineated the thresholds at which therapeutic vaccination of Chagas-positive pregnant women would be cost-effective and cost-saving, providing economic guidance for decision-makers to consider when developing and bringing such a vaccine to market.
BACKGROUND: Currently, there are no solutions to prevent congenital transmission of Chagas disease during pregnancy, which affects 1-40% of pregnant women in Latin America and is associated with a 5% transmission risk. With therapeutic vaccines under development, now is the right time to determine the economic value of such a vaccine to prevent congenital transmission. METHODS: We developed a computational decision model that represented the clinical outcomes and diagnostic testing strategies for an infant born to a Chagas-positive woman in Mexico and evaluated the impact of vaccination. RESULTS: Compared to no vaccination, a 25% efficacious vaccine averted 125 [95% uncertainty interval (UI): 122-128] congenital cases, 1.9 (95% UI: 1.6-2.2) infant deaths, and 78 (95% UI: 66-91) DALYs per 10,000 infected pregnant women; a 50% efficacious vaccine averted 251 (95% UI: 248-254) cases, 3.8 (95% UI: 3.6-4.2) deaths, and 160 (95% UI: 148-171) DALYs; and a 75% efficacious vaccine averted 376 (95% UI: 374-378) cases, 5.8 (95% UI: 5.5-6.1) deaths, and 238 (95% UI: 227-249) DALYs. A 25% efficacious vaccine was cost-effective (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio <3× Mexico's gross domestic product per capita, <$29,698/DALY averted) when the vaccine cost ≤$240 and ≤$310 and cost-saving when ≤$10 and ≤$80 from the third-party payer and societal perspectives, respectively. A 50% efficacious vaccine was cost-effective when costing ≤$490 and ≤$615 and cost-saving when ≤$25 and ≤$160, from the third-party payer and societal perspectives, respectively. A 75% efficacious vaccine was cost-effective when ≤$720 and ≤$930 and cost-saving when ≤$40 and ≤$250 from the third-party payer and societal perspectives, respectively. Additionally, 13-42 fewer infants progressed to chronic disease, saving $0.41-$1.21 million to society. CONCLUSION: We delineated the thresholds at which therapeutic vaccination of Chagas-positive pregnant women would be cost-effective and cost-saving, providing economic guidance for decision-makers to consider when developing and bringing such a vaccine to market.
Authors: Javier Diez-Domingo; Thomas Weinke; Juan Garcia de Lomas; Claudius U Meyer; Isabelle Bertrand; Cécile Eymin; Stéphane Thomas; Christine Sadorge Journal: Vaccine Date: 2014-12-30 Impact factor: 3.641
Authors: Zulma M Cucunubá; Astrid C Flórez; Angela Cárdenas; Paula Pavía; Marleny Montilla; Rodrigo Aldana; Katherine Villamizar; Lyda C Ríos; Rubén S Nicholls; Concepción J Puerta Journal: Am J Trop Med Hyg Date: 2012-10-01 Impact factor: 2.345
Authors: N A Salas; M Cot; D Schneider; B Mendoza; J A Santalla; J Postigo; J P Chippaux; L Brutus Journal: Trop Med Int Health Date: 2007-12 Impact factor: 2.622
Authors: G Russomando; M M de Tomassone; I de Guillen; N Acosta; N Vera; M Almiron; N Candia; M F Calcena; A Figueredo Journal: Am J Trop Med Hyg Date: 1998-09 Impact factor: 2.345
Authors: Victoria R Rendell; Robert H Gilman; Edward Valencia; Gerson Galdos-Cardenas; Manuela Verastegui; Leny Sanchez; Janet Acosta; Gerardo Sanchez; Lisbeth Ferrufino; Carlos LaFuente; Maria del Carmen Abastoflor; Rony Colanzi; Caryn Bern Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-03-25 Impact factor: 3.240