| Literature DB >> 35831685 |
Kenneth J Smith1, Angela R Wateska2, Mary Patricia Nowalk2, Chyongchiou J Lin3, Lee H Harrison2, William Schaffner4, Richard K Zimmerman2.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: US pneumococcal vaccination recommendations for adults aged 65 years or older recently changed, with options for either 20-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV20) or the combination of 15-valent conjugate vaccine (PCV15) followed by 23-valent polysaccharide vaccine (PPSV23) 1 year later. Underserved minority adults are at higher risk for pneumococcal disease.Entities:
Keywords: Cost-effectiveness analysis; Minority groups; Pneumococcal vaccination
Year: 2022 PMID: 35831685 PMCID: PMC9334503 DOI: 10.1007/s40121-022-00669-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Infect Dis Ther ISSN: 2193-6382
Public health results for pneumococcal vaccination strategies in 65-year-olds by race
| IPD | NBP | Hospitalizations | Case-hospitalization rate | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cases | Deaths | Cases | Deaths | |||
| Black population ( | ||||||
| No vaccination | 2341 | 339 | 39,162 | 265 | 6713 | 16.2% |
| PCV20 | 2162 | 315 | 38,678 | 254 | 6351 | 15.6% |
| PCV15 and PPSV23 | 2148 | 314 | 38,715 | 256 | 6373 | 15.6% |
| Non-Black population ( | ||||||
| No vaccination | 17,401 | 2616 | 307,105 | 2146 | 46,999 | 14.5% |
| PCV20 | 15,716 | 2385 | 300,701 | 2042 | 43,756 | 13.8% |
| PCV15 and PPSV23 | 15,577 | 2377 | 300,913 | 2058 | 43,825 | 13.8% |
IPD invasive pneumococcal disease, NBP nonbacteremic pneumococcal pneumonia, PCV15 15-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine, PCV20 20-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine, PPSV23 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine, QALY quality-adjusted life year
Cost-effectiveness analysis results for pneumococcal vaccination strategies in 65-year-olds by race
| Cost | Incremental cost | Effectiveness (QALY) | Incremental effectiveness (QALY) | ICER (per QALY gained) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Black population | |||||
| No vaccination | $427 | – | 7.87998 | – | – |
| PCV20 | $551 | $124 | 7.88072 | 0.00073 | $169,540 |
| PCV15 and PPSV23 | $622 | $70 | 7.88085 | 0.00013 | $535,797 |
| Non-Black population | |||||
| No vaccination | $342 | – | 8.49604 | – | – |
| PCV20 | $493 | $151 | 8.49676 | 0.00072 | $210,529 |
| PCV15 and PPSV23 | $576 | $83 | 8.49688 | 0.00011 | $728,423 |
| Black population | |||||
| No vaccination | $342 | – | 8.49604 | – | – |
| PCV20 | $494 | $152 | 8.49674 | 0.00069 | $219,611 |
| PCV15 and PPSV23 | $578 | $84 | 8.49679 | 0.00005 | $1,667,248 |
| Non-Black population | |||||
| No vaccination | $427 | – | 7.87998 | – | – |
| PCV20 | $552 | $125 | 7.88069 | 0.00071 | $177,104 |
| PCV15 and PPSV23 | $624 | $72 | 7.88074 | 0.00005 | $1,406,539 |
ICER incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, PCV15 15-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine, PCV20 20-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine, PPSV23 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine, QALY quality-adjusted life years
Fig. 1Probabilistic sensitivity analysis of pneumococcal vaccine strategies in the 65-year-old Black cohort. Curves depict the likelihood of strategies being favored (y-axis) over a range of willingness-to-pay (or acceptability) thresholds (x-axis) when all parameters are varied simultaneously. PCV20 is favored at thresholds of $180,000 per QALY gained or greater, while no vaccination is favored at lower thresholds. PCV15 = 15-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine, PCV20 = 20-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine, PPSV23 = 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine, QALY = quality-adjusted life year
Scenario analyses: increased PCV20 uptake and decreased PCV20 effectiveness in 65-year-olds by race
| Incremental CE ratio (per QALY gained) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Base case | Increased PCV20 uptake* | Decreased PCV20 relative effectiveness† | |
| Black population | |||
| PCV20 | $169,540 | $169,538 | $212,211 |
| PCV15/PPSV23 | $535,797 | $5,738,000 | $233,300 |
| Non-Black population | |||
| PCV20 | $210,529 | $210,527 | $273,373 |
| PCV15/PPSV23 | $728,423 | $5,362,000 | $298,468 |
CE cost-effectiveness, PCV15 15-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine, PCV20 20-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine, PPSV23 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine, QALY quality-adjusted life year
*10% absolute uptake increase with the one-vaccine PCV20 strategy compared to the two-vaccine PCV15/PPSV23 strategy
†20% relative decrease in PCV20 effectiveness due to coverage degradation from multiple added serotypes
Fig. 2Sensitivity analysis: scenarios with decreased PCV20 effectiveness relative to PCV15 in the Black 65-year-old cohort. Panels depict changes in vaccine strategy cost-effectiveness when PCV20 effectiveness is decreased against all its component serotypes (top panel) or against pneumococcal serotype 3 (bottom panel). In the top panel, when PCV20 has a higher ICER than PCV15/PPSV23, PCV20 is also less effective than PCV15/PPSV23; thus, PCV20 is thus extended dominated in this circumstance. ICER = incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, PCV15 = 15-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine, PCV20 = 20-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine, PPSV23 = 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine, QALY = quality-adjusted life year
| US pneumococcal vaccination recommendations for adults aged 65 years and older recently changed, with options for either 20-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV20) or the combination of 15-valent conjugate vaccine (PCV15) followed by 23-valent polysaccharide vaccine (PPSV23). |
| The cost-effectiveness of these recommended options in US underserved minority populations is unclear. |
| In a decision analysis model, PCV20 use was substantially more economically favorable than PCV15/PPSV23 in both Black and non-Black cohorts, with results that were robust to variation in sensitivity analyses. |
| If the single-vaccine PCV20 increases vaccine uptake, which is potentially more likely in the underserved, then PCV20 use becomes even more highly favorable for this group. |
| PCV20 use in US underserved minority older adults could decrease pneumococcal disease burden and mitigate disease disparities in an economically reasonable fashion. |