Commercial Tobacco Endgame Goals: Early experiences from six countries.

INTRODUCTION: Tobacco use is a major threat to health globally. A number of countries have adopted 'endgame goals' to minimise smoking prevalence. The INSPIRED project aims to describe and compare the experiences of the first six countries to adopt an endgame goal. METHODS: Data were collected on the initial experiences of endgame goals in Canada, Finland, Ireland, New Zealand (Aotearoa), Scotland, and Sweden up to 2018. Information was collated on the nature of the endgame goals, associated interventions and strategies, potential enablers and barriers, and perceived advantages and disadvantages. RESULTS: The INSPIRED countries had relatively low smoking prevalences and moderate to strong smokefree policies. Their endgame goals aimed for smoking prevalences of 5% or less. Target dates ranged from 2025 to 2035. Except for New Zealand (Aotearoa), all countries had an action plan to support their goal by 2018. However, none of the plans incorporated specific endgame measures. Lack of progress in reducing inequities was a key concern, despite the consideration of equity in all of the country's goals and/or action plans. Experience with endgame goals was generally positive, however participants thought additional interventions would be required to equitably meet their endgame goal. CONCLUSIONS: There was variation in the nature and approach to endgame goals. This suggests that countries should consider adopting endgame goals and strategies to suit their social, cultural, and political contexts. The experiences of the INSPIRED countries suggest that further and more significant interventions will be required for the timely and equitable achievement of endgame goals. IMPLICATIONS: By 2018, six countries (Canada, Finland, Ireland, New Zealand (Aotearoa), Scotland, and Sweden) had introduced government-endorsed 'endgame goals', to rapidly reduce smoking prevalence to very low levels by a specified date. The nature and implementation of endgame goals was variable. Early experiences with the goals were generally positive, but progress in reducing smoking prevalence was insufficient, particularly for priority groups. This finding suggests more significant interventions ('endgame interventions') and measures to reduce inequities need to be implemented to achieve endgame goals. Variation in the nature and experience of endgame goals demonstrates the importance of designing endgame strategies that suit distinct social, cultural, and political contexts.

The Irish tobacco industry position on price increases on tobacco products.

OBJECTIVE: To examine what the tobacco industry in Ireland says to government on tobacco price, and what it does. METHODS: The annual government budgetary and tobacco trade, tax/price increases on cigarettes (2000-2010) and pre-budget submissions from the tobacco industry were analysed. RESULTS: Price increased from €4.77 in 2000 to €8.55 at the end of 2010, 64.0% of the increase was government imposed and 36.0% was imposed by the tobacco trade. The tobacco industry consistently urged government not to increase taxes as this would increase smuggling and contraband tobacco products. However, the tobacco industry increased price every year. CONCLUSION: There is significant disparity in what the tobacco industry says to government and how it behaves with respect to tobacco price. It is important that tobacco control advocates have access to such data and underscores the importance of strong guidelines for Article 5.3 of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control.

A cost-utility analysis of adding a bivalent or quadrivalent HPV vaccine to the Irish cervical screening programme.

BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer is a leading cause of death worldwide, and in Ireland it is the ninth most commonly diagnosed cancer in women. Almost 100% of these cancers are caused by human papillomavirus (HPV) infection. Two newly developed vaccines against HPV infection have become available. This study is a cost-utility analysis of the HPV vaccine in Ireland, and it compares the cost-effectiveness profiles of the two vaccines. METHODS: A cost-utility analysis of the HPV vaccine in Ireland was performed using a Markov model. A cohort of screened and vaccinated women was compared with an unvaccinated screened cohort, and both cohorts were followed over their lifetimes. The model looked at uptake of services related to HPV disease in both cohorts. Outcomes were measured in quality adjusted life years (QALYs). Extensive sensitivity analysis was done. RESULTS: For the base case analysis, the model showed that the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for quadrivalent HPV vaccination would be 25,349 euros/QALY and 30,460 euros/QALY for the bivalent vaccine. The ICER for the quadrivalent vaccine ranged from 2877 euros to 36,548 euros, and for the bivalent from 3399 euros to 45,237 euros. At current prices, the bivalent vaccine would need to be 22% cheaper than the quadrivalent vaccine in order to have equivalent cost effectiveness. CONCLUSION: HPV vaccination has the potential to be very cost effective in Ireland. The quadrivalent vaccine is more cost effective than the bivalent vaccine.