Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 715
Filter
Add more filters

Publication year range
1.
Cell ; 172(6): 1163-1167, 2018 03 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29522737

ABSTRACT

Evidence of the safety and protective benefits of human papillomavirus virus (HPV) vaccines as an anti-cancer measure is overwhelming. However, vaccine uptake varies widely across countries and falls short of levels needed to achieve population immunity. We highlight policy measures that would help ensure greater worldwide coverage and save lives.


Subject(s)
Alphapapillomavirus/immunology , Papillomavirus Infections/immunology , Papillomavirus Vaccines/immunology , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/immunology , Alphapapillomavirus/drug effects , Female , Global Health/trends , Humans , Papillomavirus Infections/prevention & control , Papillomavirus Infections/virology , Papillomavirus Vaccines/economics , Papillomavirus Vaccines/therapeutic use , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/prevention & control , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/virology , Vaccination/economics , Vaccination/methods , Vaccination/trends
2.
BMC Health Serv Res ; 24(1): 845, 2024 Jul 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39061059

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The vaccine coverage rate (VCR) for human papillomavirus (HPV) in France is one of the lowest in Europe, well below the target of 80% announced in the French Cancer Plan 2021-2030. The extension of vaccination competencies (prescription and administration) to new health care providers, such as community pharmacists (CPs), was a decisive step by the French Health Authority (HAS) in 2022 to simplify access to vaccination and improve the VCR. This research assessed the economic and organizational impacts (OIs) of the extension of vaccination competencies in France. METHODS: A model was developed in Excel® to compare the current HPV vaccination pathway focused on general practitioners (GPs) to a mix of pathways (new and current) that extends pharmacists' competencies (prescription and/or injection). The simulated population corresponded to girls and boys targeted by the French recommendations. The model was run from 2023 to 2030. HAS guidelines were used to identify OIs related to these new pathways. Model inputs were collected from national data sources and an acceptability study. The results focused on three OIs (HPV vaccination ability [defined as the number of adolescents who could be vaccinated in each pathway], the VCR projection, and flows of activity between health care professionals]). The economic impact was evaluated from the National Health Insurance (NHI) perspective in 2022. RESULTS: With a mix of vaccination pathways, including an increasing role of pharmacists, the target of an 80% VCR could be reached in 2030 (versus 2032 with the current pathway) with lower investment than the current situation, resulting in cost savings for the NHI of €212 million. Expanding vaccination competencies will provide pharmacists with additional revenue (an average of €755,000/month for all vaccinating pharmacies) and will free up medical time for GPs (average of 603,000 consultations/year for all GPs). CONCLUSIONS: Expanding vaccination competencies to pharmacists has a positive impact on the entire ecosystem. From a public health perspective, the national VCR target can be achieved and better access to care can be provided, freeing up medical time. From an economic perspective, this approach can provide savings for the NHI and additional revenue for pharmacists.


Subject(s)
Papillomavirus Infections , Papillomavirus Vaccines , Pharmacists , Humans , France , Papillomavirus Vaccines/economics , Papillomavirus Vaccines/administration & dosage , Female , Male , Papillomavirus Infections/prevention & control , Adolescent , Vaccination/economics , Community Pharmacy Services/organization & administration , Community Pharmacy Services/economics , Clinical Competence , Human Papillomavirus Viruses
4.
Int J Cancer ; 148(4): 932-940, 2021 02 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32706907

ABSTRACT

The human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines may provide some level of cross-protection against high-risk HPV genotypes not directly targeted by the vaccines. We evaluated the long-term health and economic impacts of routine HPV vaccination using either the nonavalent HPV vaccine or the bivalent HPV vaccine in the context of 48 Gavi-eligible countries. We used a multi-modeling approach to compare the bivalent with or without cross-protection and the nonavalent HPV vaccine. The optimal, that is, most cost-effective, vaccine was the vaccine with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio below the per-capita gross domestic product (GDP) for each country. By 2100 and assuming 70% HPV vaccination coverage, a bivalent vaccine without cross-protection, a bivalent vaccine with favorable cross-protection and the nonavalent vaccine were projected to avert 14.9, 17.2 and 18.5 million cumulative cases of cervical cancer across all 48 Gavi-eligible countries, respectively. The relative value of the bivalent vaccine compared to the nonavalent vaccine increased assuming a bivalent vaccine conferred high cross-protection. For example, assuming a cost-effectiveness threshold of per-capita GDP, the nonavalent vaccine was optimal in 83% (n = 40) of countries if the bivalent vaccine did not confer cross-protection; however, the proportion of countries decreased to 63% (n = 30) if the bivalent vaccine conferred high cross-protection. For lower cost-effectiveness thresholds, the bivalent vaccine was optimal in a greater proportion of countries, under both cross-protection assumptions. Although the nonavalent vaccine is projected to avert more cases of cervical cancer, the bivalent vaccine with favorable cross-protection can prevent a considerable number of cases and would be considered a high-value vaccine for many Gavi-eligible countries.


Subject(s)
Human papillomavirus 16/immunology , Human papillomavirus 18/immunology , Papillomavirus Infections/immunology , Papillomavirus Vaccines/immunology , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/immunology , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Developed Countries , Developing Countries , Female , Genotype , Geography , Global Health/economics , Human papillomavirus 16/genetics , Human papillomavirus 16/physiology , Human papillomavirus 18/genetics , Human papillomavirus 18/physiology , Humans , Papillomavirus Infections/prevention & control , Papillomavirus Infections/virology , Papillomavirus Vaccines/administration & dosage , Papillomavirus Vaccines/economics , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/prevention & control , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/virology , Vaccination/economics , Vaccination/methods
5.
PLoS Med ; 18(3): e1003534, 2021 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33705382

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: A nonavalent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine has been licensed for use in women and men up to age 45 years in the United States. The cost-effectiveness of HPV vaccination for women and men aged 30 to 45 years in the context of cervical cancer screening practice was evaluated to inform national guidelines. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We utilized 2 independent HPV microsimulation models to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of extending the upper age limit of HPV vaccination in women (from age 26 years) and men (from age 21 years) up to age 30, 35, 40, or 45 years. The models were empirically calibrated to reflect the burden of HPV and related cancers in the US population and used standardized inputs regarding historical and future vaccination uptake, vaccine efficacy, cervical cancer screening, and costs. Disease outcomes included cervical, anal, oropharyngeal, vulvar, vaginal, and penile cancers, as well as genital warts. Both models projected higher costs and greater health benefits as the upper age limit of HPV vaccination increased. Strategies of vaccinating females and males up to ages 30, 35, and 40 years were found to be less cost-effective than vaccinating up to age 45 years, which had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) greater than a commonly accepted upper threshold of $200,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. When including all HPV-related outcomes, the ICER for vaccinating up to age 45 years ranged from $315,700 to $440,600 per QALY gained. Assumptions regarding cervical screening compliance, vaccine costs, and the natural history of noncervical HPV-related cancers had major impacts on the cost-effectiveness of the vaccination strategies. Key limitations of the study were related to uncertainties in the data used to inform the models, including the timing of vaccine impact on noncervical cancers and vaccine efficacy at older ages. CONCLUSIONS: Our results from 2 independent models suggest that HPV vaccination for adult women and men aged 30 to 45 years is unlikely to represent good value for money in the US.


Subject(s)
Cost-Benefit Analysis , Papillomavirus Infections/prevention & control , Papillomavirus Vaccines/therapeutic use , Vaccination/economics , Adult , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Papillomavirus Vaccines/economics , United States
6.
Value Health ; 24(1): 61-66, 2021 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33431154

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Cost-effectiveness analysis can guide decision making about health interventions, but the appropriate cost-effectiveness threshold to use is unclear in most countries. The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends vaccinating girls 9 to 14 years against human papillomavirus (HPV), but over half the world's countries have not introduced it. This study aimed to investigate whether country-level decisions about HPV vaccine introduction are consistent with a particular cost-effectiveness threshold, and to estimate what that threshold may be. METHODS: The cost-effectiveness of vaccinating 12-year-old girls was estimated in 179 countries using the Papillomavirus Rapid Interface for Modelling and Economics (PRIME) model, together with vaccine price data from World Health Organization's Market Information for Access to Vaccines database. In each year from 2006 to 2018, countries were categorized based on (1) whether they had introduced HPV vaccination, and (2) whether the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for HPV vaccine introduction fell below a certain cost-effectiveness threshold. RESULTS: A cost-effectiveness threshold of 60% to 65% of GDP per capita has the best ability to discriminate countries that introduced vaccination, with a diagnostic odds ratio of about 7. For low-income countries the optimal threshold was lower, at 30% to 40% of GDP per capita. CONCLUSIONS: A cost-effectiveness threshold has some ability to discriminate between HPV vaccine introducer and non-introducer countries, although the average threshold is below the widely used threshold of 1 GDP per capita. These results help explain the current pattern of HPV vaccine use globally. They also inform the extent to which cost-effectiveness thresholds proposed in the literature reflect countries' actual investment decisions.


Subject(s)
Cost-Benefit Analysis/statistics & numerical data , Developing Countries/statistics & numerical data , Papillomavirus Infections/prevention & control , Papillomavirus Vaccines/administration & dosage , Papillomavirus Vaccines/economics , Developing Countries/economics , Global Health , Humans , Immunization Programs/economics , Immunization Programs/statistics & numerical data , Models, Economic , Papillomavirus Infections/economics , Papillomavirus Infections/epidemiology , Quality-Adjusted Life Years
7.
Ann Intern Med ; 172(1): 22-29, 2020 01 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31816629

ABSTRACT

Background: In the United States, the routine age for human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination is 11 to 12 years, with catch-up vaccination through age 26 years for women and 21 years for men. U.S. vaccination policy on use of the 9-valent HPV vaccine in adult women and men is being reviewed. Objective: To evaluate the added population-level effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of extending the current U.S. HPV vaccination program to women aged 27 to 45 years and men aged 22 to 45 years. Design: The analysis used HPV-ADVISE (Agent-based Dynamic model for VaccInation and Screening Evaluation), an individual-based transmission dynamic model of HPV infection and associated diseases, calibrated to age-specific U.S. data. Data Sources: Published data. Target Population: Women aged 27 to 45 years and men aged 22 to 45 years in the United States. Time Horizon: 100 years. Perspective: Health care sector. Intervention: 9-valent HPV vaccination. Outcome Measures: HPV-associated outcomes prevented and cost-effectiveness ratios. Results of Base-Case Analysis: The model predicts that the current U.S. HPV vaccination program will reduce the number of diagnoses of anogenital warts and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia of grade 2 or 3 and cases of cervical cancer and noncervical HPV-associated cancer by 82%, 80%, 59%, and 39%, respectively, over 100 years and is cost saving (vs. no vaccination). In contrast, extending vaccination to women and men aged 45 years is predicted to reduce these outcomes by an additional 0.4, 0.4, 0.2, and 0.2 percentage points, respectively. Vaccinating women and men up to age 30, 40, and 45 years is predicted to cost $830 000, $1 843 000, and $1 471 000, respectively, per quality-adjusted life-year gained (vs. current vaccination). Results of Sensitivity Analysis: Results were most sensitive to assumptions about natural immunity and progression rates after infection, historical vaccination coverage, and vaccine efficacy. Limitation: Uncertainty about the proportion of HPV-associated disease due to infections after age 26 years and about the level of herd effects from the current HPV vaccination program. Conclusion: The current HPV vaccination program is predicted to be cost saving. Extending vaccination to older ages is predicted to produce small additional health benefits and result in substantially higher incremental cost-effectiveness ratios than the current recommendation. Primary Funding Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.


Subject(s)
Papillomavirus Infections/prevention & control , Papillomavirus Vaccines/therapeutic use , Adult , Age Factors , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Female , Health Care Costs , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Papillomavirus Infections/economics , Papillomavirus Vaccines/economics , Treatment Outcome , United States/epidemiology , Young Adult
8.
Am J Obstet Gynecol ; 223(4): 562.e1-562.e8, 2020 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32179023

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To determine the costs and reimbursement associated with running a vaccine program in 5 obstetrics/gynecology practices in Colorado that had participated in a 3-year randomized, controlled trial focused on increasing vaccination in this setting. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a secondary analysis on costs from 5 clinics participating in a cluster-randomized controlled trial that assessed the effectiveness of a multimodal intervention to improve vaccination rates in outpatient obstetrics/gynecology clinics in central Colorado. The intervention included designation of an immunization champion within the practice, purchasing recommended vaccines for the practice, guidance on storage and management, implementing practices for routine identification of eligible patients for vaccination using the medical record, implementation of standing orders for vaccination, and vaccine administration to patients. Data on costs were gathered from office invoices, claims data, surveys and in-person observations during the course of the trial. These data incorporated supply and personnel costs for administering vaccines to individual patients that were derived from a combination of time-motion studies of staff and provider clinical activity, and practice reports, as well as costs related to maintaining the vaccination program at the practice level, which were derived from practice reports and invoices. Cost data for personnel time during visits in which vaccination was assessed and/or discussed, but no vaccine was given to the patient were also included in the main analysis. Data on practice revenue were derived from practice reimbursement records. All costs were described in 2014 dollars. The primary analysis was the proportion of costs for the program that were reimbursed, aggregated over all years of the study and combining all vaccines and practices, separated by obstetrics vs gynecology patients. RESULTS: Collectively the 5 clinics served >40,000 patient during the study period and served a population that was 16% Medicaid. Over the 3-year observation period, there were 6573 vaccination claims made collectively by the practices (4657 for obstetric patients, 1916 for gynecology patients). The most expensive component of the program was the material costs of the vaccines themselves, which ranged from a low of $9.67 for influenza vaccines, to a high of $141.40 for human papillomavirus vaccine. Staff costs for assessing and delivering vaccines during patient visits were minimal ($0.09-$1.24 per patient visit depending on the practice and whether an obstetrics or gynecology visit was being assessed) compared with staff costs for maintaining the program at a practice level (ie, assessing inventory, ordering and stocking vaccines; $0.89-$105.89 per vaccine dose given). When assessing all costs compared with all reimbursement, we found that vaccines for obstetrics patients were reimbursed at 159% of the costs over the study period, and for gynecology patients at 97% of the costs. Overall, the vaccination program was financially favorable across the practices, averaging 125% reimbursement of costs across the three study years. CONCLUSION: Providing routine vaccines to patients in the ambulatory obstetrics/gynecology setting is generally not financially prohibitive for practices, and may even be financially beneficial, though there is variability between practices that can affect the overall reimbursement margin.


Subject(s)
Ambulatory Care/economics , Delivery of Health Care/economics , Gynecology/economics , Health Care Costs , Immunization Programs/economics , Obstetrics/economics , Vaccines/therapeutic use , Colorado , Diphtheria-Tetanus-acellular Pertussis Vaccines/economics , Diphtheria-Tetanus-acellular Pertussis Vaccines/therapeutic use , Drug Storage , Eligibility Determination , Female , Humans , Influenza Vaccines/economics , Influenza Vaccines/therapeutic use , Medicaid , Papillomavirus Vaccines/economics , Papillomavirus Vaccines/therapeutic use , Personnel Staffing and Scheduling , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Reimbursement Mechanisms , Rural Population , Time Factors , United States , Urban Population , Vaccines/economics
9.
J Infect Chemother ; 26(3): 225-230, 2020 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31607433

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The human papilloma virus (HPV) vaccination coverage rate in Japan has dropped dramatically from more than 70% to less than 1% since 2013. With conflicting information and a lack of quantification of the benefits and risks of the HPV vaccine, parents have been hindered in making their decision. We quantified the benefits and risks of the HPV vaccine in terms of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), to help their informed decision. METHOD: A literature search was performed to determine the incidence and burden of each outcome in a decision tree model. The benefits and the risks of the HPV vaccination were determined in QALY change with a sensitivity analysis. RESULT: The benefits of the HPV vaccine in terms of QALYs gained were 703.72, 14.45, and 30.83/100,000 persons for cervical cancer, cervical intraepithelial neoplasm 3 (CIN 3), and genital warts, respectively. The QALY loss due to acute adverse reactions, chronic adverse reactions without assistance needs, and chronic adverse reactions with assistance needs were 0.07, 5.83, and 5.82/100,000 persons, respectively. The risk/benefit ratio in QALY change in the base case was 0.0156. In all scenarios, the benefit of the HPV vaccine was significantly greater than the risk. CONCLUSION: The benefits are much greater than the risks, even if it is assumed that all reported adverse events were due to the vaccination. The Japanese government and health care providers should immediately recommend the HPV vaccine to all adolescent girls irrespective of any causal links between the vaccine and reported adverse events.


Subject(s)
Mass Vaccination/organization & administration , Papillomavirus Infections/prevention & control , Papillomavirus Vaccines/administration & dosage , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/prevention & control , Vaccination Coverage/organization & administration , Adolescent , Adult , Anti-Vaccination Movement/trends , Child , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Decision Making , Female , Humans , Japan/epidemiology , Mass Vaccination/adverse effects , Mass Vaccination/economics , Mass Vaccination/statistics & numerical data , Middle Aged , Models, Theoretical , Papillomavirus Infections/economics , Papillomavirus Infections/epidemiology , Papillomavirus Infections/pathology , Papillomavirus Vaccines/adverse effects , Papillomavirus Vaccines/economics , Parents/psychology , Quality-Adjusted Life Years , Risk Assessment , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/epidemiology , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/pathology , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/virology , Vaccination Coverage/economics , Vaccination Coverage/statistics & numerical data , Vaccination Coverage/trends , Young Adult
10.
BMC Public Health ; 20(1): 671, 2020 May 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32398057

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: An infection with high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) is the obligatory aetiological factor for the development of cervical cancer. In Switzerland, the prevention strategy for cervical cancer is based on primary prevention via HPV vaccination and secondary prevention with an opportunistic screening programme for precancerous lesions. Vaccination is recommended to 11-26 years old male and female persons. The objective of the study was to assess the epidemiological impact on cervical cancer of switching from the currently implemented programme with the 4-valent vaccine to the 9-valent vaccine, in an 11-26 years old gender-neutral vaccination programme in Switzerland. METHODS: A previously validated dynamic transmission model of HPV infections was adapted and calibrated to the Swiss setting assuming an 80% coverage rate in HPV-vaccination and lifelong vaccine type-specific protection. A gender-neutral vaccination programme (males and females) for 11-26 years old with a 9-valent HPV vaccine was compared with the current 11-26 years old gender-neutral 4-valent vaccination programme. Sensitivity analyses were conducted in order to test the impact of lower vaccination coverage rates and a shorter duration of protection on the model outcomes. RESULTS: In Switzerland, a 9-valent gender-neutral vaccination programme would result in an additional prevention of 2979 cervical cancer cases, 13,862 CIN3 and 15,000 CIN2 cases, compared with the 4-valent gender-neutral vaccination programme over 100 years. These additional disease cases avoided would correspond to a 24, 36 and 48% cumulative incidence decrease in cervical cancer, CIN3 and CIN2 cases, respectively. It would also prevent additional 741 cervical cancer-related deaths over 100 years. A substantial additional reduction in cervical cancer and precancerous lesions burden is still observed when varying the vaccination coverage rate from 30 to 60% or reducing the duration of protection from lifelong to 20 years. CONCLUSIONS: The switch to the 9-valent vaccine in Switzerland to prevent cervical diseases showed an important contribution in terms of public health impact compared with the 4-valent vaccine in an 11-26 years old gender-neutral population, even with very conservative assumptions such as low coverage rates or low duration of protection and limiting analysis to only cervical disease.


Subject(s)
Immunization Programs/statistics & numerical data , Papillomavirus Infections/prevention & control , Papillomavirus Vaccines/economics , Papillomavirus Vaccines/therapeutic use , Uterine Cervical Dysplasia/prevention & control , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/prevention & control , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Adult , Child , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Female , Humans , Incidence , Mass Screening/statistics & numerical data , Switzerland/epidemiology , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/epidemiology , Young Adult , Uterine Cervical Dysplasia/epidemiology
11.
Sex Transm Infect ; 95(5): 386-390, 2019 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30723185

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the prevalence of, and describe risk factors for, genital warts (GWs) in the British population, following the introduction of the bivalent (human papillomavirus (HPV)-16/18) vaccination programme in girls, and prior to the switch to quadrivalent (HPV-6/11/16/18) vaccine (offering direct protection against GWs) and compare this with GW diagnoses in the prevaccination era. METHODS: Natsal-3, a probability sample survey in Britain, conducted in 2010-2012, interviewed 9902 men and women aged 16-44. Natsal-2, conducted in 1999-2001, surveyed 11 161 men and women aged 16-44. Both surveys collected data on sexual behaviour and sexually transmitted infection diagnoses using computer-assisted interview methods. RESULTS: In Natsal-3, 3.8% and 4.6% of sexually experienced men and women reported ever having a diagnosis of GWs, with 1.3% of men and 1.7% of woman reporting a GWs diagnosis in the past 5 years. GWs were strongly associated with increasing partner numbers and condomless sex. Diagnoses were more frequent in men who have sex with men (MSM) (11.6% ever, 3.3% past 5 years) and in women reporting sex with women (10.8% ever, 3.6% past 5 years). In the age group who were eligible for vaccination at the time of Natsal-3 (16-20 years), a similar proportion of same-aged women reported a history of GWs in Natsal-2 (1.9%, 1.1-3.4) and Natsal-3 (2.6%, 1.5-4.4). CONCLUSIONS: These data provide essential parameters for mathematical models that inform cost-effectiveness analyses of HPV vaccination programmes. There was no evidence of population protection against GWs conferred by the bivalent vaccine. Even with vaccination of adolescent boys, vaccination should be offered to MSM attending sexual health clinics.


Subject(s)
Condylomata Acuminata/prevention & control , Papillomaviridae/immunology , Papillomavirus Vaccines/administration & dosage , Adolescent , Adult , Condylomata Acuminata/economics , Condylomata Acuminata/epidemiology , Condylomata Acuminata/virology , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Female , Humans , Male , Papillomaviridae/genetics , Papillomavirus Vaccines/economics , Prevalence , Sexual Behavior , United Kingdom/epidemiology , Vaccination , Young Adult
12.
Sex Transm Infect ; 95(1): 28-35, 2019 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30674687

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Many economic evaluations of human papillomavirus vaccination should ideally consider multiple disease outcomes, including anogenital warts, respiratory papillomatosis and non-cervical cancers (eg, anal, oropharyngeal, penile, vulvar and vaginal cancers). However, published economic evaluations largely relied on estimates from single studies or informal rapid literature reviews. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of articles up to June 2016 to identify costs and utility estimates admissible for an economic evaluation from a single-payer healthcare provider's perspective. Meta-analyses were performed for studies that used same utility elicitation tools for similar diseases. Costs were adjusted to 2016/2017 US$. RESULTS: Sixty-one papers (35 costs; 24 utilities; 2 costs and utilities) were selected from 10 742 initial records. Cost per case ranges were US$124-US$883 (anogenital warts), US$6912-US$52 579 (head and neck cancers), US$12 936-US$51 571 (anal cancer), US$17 524-34 258 (vaginal cancer), US$14 686-US$28 502 (vulvar cancer) and US$9975-US$27 629 (penile cancer). The total cost for 14 adult patients with recurrent respiratory papillomatosis was US$137 601 (one paper).Utility per warts episode ranged from 0.651 to 1 (12 papers, various utility elicitation methods), with pooled mean EQ-5D and EQ-VAS of 0.86 (95% CI 0.85 to 0.87) and 0.74 (95% CI 0.74 to 0.75), respectively. Fifteen papers reported utilities in head and neck cancers with range 0.29 (95% CI 0.0 to 0.76) to 0.94 (95% CI 0.3 to 1.0). Mean utility reported ranged from 0.5 (95% CI 0.4 to 0.61) to 0.65 (95% CI 0.45 to 0.75) (anal cancer), 0.59 (95% CI 0.54 to 0.64) (vaginal cancer), 0.65 (95% CI 0.60 to 0.70) (vulvar cancer) and 0.79 (95% CI 0.74 to 0.84) (penile cancer). CONCLUSIONS: Differences in values reported from each paper reflect variations in cancer site, disease stages, study population, treatment modality/setting and utility elicitation methods used. As patient management changes over time, corresponding effects on both costs and utility need to be considered to ensure health economic assumptions are up-to-date and closely reflect the case mix of patients.


Subject(s)
Anus Neoplasms/economics , Condylomata Acuminata/economics , Head and Neck Neoplasms/economics , Papillomavirus Infections/economics , Papillomavirus Vaccines/economics , Penile Neoplasms/economics , Respiratory Tract Infections/economics , Vaginal Neoplasms/economics , Vulvar Neoplasms/economics , Anus Diseases/economics , Anus Diseases/prevention & control , Anus Neoplasms/prevention & control , Condylomata Acuminata/prevention & control , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Female , Genital Diseases, Female/economics , Genital Diseases, Female/prevention & control , Genital Diseases, Male/economics , Genital Diseases, Male/prevention & control , Head and Neck Neoplasms/prevention & control , Health Care Costs , Humans , Male , Papillomavirus Infections/prevention & control , Papillomavirus Vaccines/therapeutic use , Penile Neoplasms/prevention & control , Quality of Life , Respiratory Tract Infections/prevention & control , United States , Vaginal Neoplasms/prevention & control , Vulvar Neoplasms/prevention & control
13.
BMC Cancer ; 19(1): 426, 2019 May 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31064346

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Public health efforts to prevent human papillomavirus (HPV)-related cancers include HPV vaccination and cervical cancer screening. We quantified the annual healthcare cost of six HPV-related cancers in order to provide inputs in cost-effectiveness analyses and quantify the potential economic savings from prevention of HPV-related cancers in Norway. METHODS: Using individual patient-level data from three unlinked population-based registries, we estimated the mean healthcare costs 1) annually across all phases of disease, 2) during the first 3 years of care following diagnosis, and 3) for the last 12 months of life for patients diagnosed with an HPV-related cancer. We included episodes of care related to primary care physicians, specialist care (private specialists and hospital-based care and prescriptions), and prescription drugs redeemed at pharmacies outside hospitals between 2012 and 2014. We valued costs (2014 €1.00 = NOK 8.357) based on diagnosis-related groups (DRG), patient copayments, reimbursement fees and pharmacy retail prices. RESULTS: In 2014, the total healthcare cost of HPV-related cancers amounted to €39.8 million, of which specialist care accounted for more than 99% of the total cost. The annual maximum economic burden potentially averted due to HPV vaccination will be lower for vulvar, penile and vaginal cancer (i.e., €984,620, €762,964 and €374,857, respectively) than for cervical, anal and oropharyngeal cancers (i.e., €17.2 million, €6.7 million and €4.6 million, respectively). Over the first three years of treatment following cancer diagnosis, patients diagnosed with oropharyngeal cancer incurred the highest total cost per patient (i.e. €49,774), while penile cancer had the lowest total cost per patient (i.e. €18,350). In general, costs were highest the first year following diagnosis and then declined; however, costs increased rapidly again towards end of life for patients who did not survive. CONCLUSION: HPV-related cancers constitute a considerable economic burden to the Norwegian healthcare system. As the proportion of HPV-vaccinated individuals increase and secondary prevention approaches advance, this study highlights the potential economic burden avoided by preventing these cancers.


Subject(s)
Cost of Illness , Health Care Costs/statistics & numerical data , Neoplasms/economics , Papillomavirus Infections/economics , Papillomavirus Vaccines/economics , Adolescent , Adult , Child , Cost-Benefit Analysis/statistics & numerical data , Early Detection of Cancer/economics , Early Detection of Cancer/methods , Female , Humans , Male , Neoplasms/diagnosis , Neoplasms/therapy , Neoplasms/virology , Norway , Papillomaviridae/immunology , Papillomavirus Infections/diagnosis , Papillomavirus Infections/therapy , Papillomavirus Infections/virology , Papillomavirus Vaccines/administration & dosage , Vaccination/economics , Young Adult
14.
Gynecol Oncol ; 152(3): 472-479, 2019 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30876491

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In response to emergent evidence, many countries are transitioning from cytology-based to HPV screening. We evaluated the impact of an upcoming transition on health outcomes and resource utilisation in New Zealand. METHODS: An extensively validated model of HPV transmission, vaccination, natural history and cervical screening ('Policy1-Cervix') was utilised to simulate a transition from three-yearly cytology for women 20-69 years to five-yearly HPV screening with 16/18 genotyping for women 25-69 years, accounting for population growth and the impact of HPV immunisation. Cervical cancer rates, resources use (test volumes), costs, and test positivity rates from 2015 to 2035 were estimated. FINDINGS: By 2035, the transition to HPV screening will result in declines in cervical cancer incidence and mortality rates by 32% and 25%, respectively, compared to 2018. A potentially detectable 5% increase in cervical cancer incidence due to earlier detection is predicted for the year of transition. Annual numbers of women screened will fluctuate with the five-year screening interval. Cytology volumes will reduce by over 80% but colposcopy volumes will be similar to pre-transition rates, and program costs will be reduced by 16%. A 9% HPV test positivity rate is expected in the first round of HPV screening (2019-2023), with 2.7% of women referred for colposcopy. Transitioning from cytology to primary HPV cervical screening could avert 149 cancer cases and 45 deaths by 2035. CONCLUSION: Primary HPV screening and vaccination will reduce cervical cancer and resources use. A small transient apparent increase of invasive cancer rates due to earlier detection may be detectable at the population level, reflecting the introduction of a more sensitive screening test. These findings can be used to inform health services planning and public communications surrounding program implementation.


Subject(s)
Papillomavirus Infections/diagnosis , Papillomavirus Infections/prevention & control , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/diagnosis , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/prevention & control , Adult , Aged , Early Detection of Cancer/economics , Early Detection of Cancer/methods , Early Diagnosis , Female , Health Resources/economics , Health Resources/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Middle Aged , National Health Programs , New Zealand/epidemiology , Papillomavirus Infections/epidemiology , Papillomavirus Vaccines/administration & dosage , Papillomavirus Vaccines/economics , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/epidemiology , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/virology , Young Adult
15.
Value Health ; 22(11): 1227-1230, 2019 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31708058

ABSTRACT

In July 2018, the UK Minister of Public Health announced that human papillomavirus vaccination would be extended to 12-year-old boys. This decision was informed by updated evidence from the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) published earlier that month. Vaccination of boys had been found not to be cost-effective in a series of analyses conducted for the JCVI, including the most recent assessment prior to the minister's announcement. These analyses were conducted under the standard methods for cost-effectiveness analysis recommended by the JCVI, which are primarily based on guidelines from the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence. Although the JCVI concluded they were unable to advise extending vaccination on the basis of standard appraisal methods, their most recent round of assessment also considered analyses using nonstandard appraisal methods. In particular, the JCVI noted that vaccination of boys was likely to be cost-effective when a lower discount rate of 1.5% is applied to costs and health effects, as opposed to the 3.5% rate usually employed. The JCVI stated that they were supportive of applying such alternative methods, and on this basis, they would advise extending vaccination to boys. This commentary explains the JCVI's application of nonstandard appraisal methods and considers whether it was justified. We conclude that the JCVI was not justified in applying the lower discount rate. We voice concerns that a willingness to endorse a politically popular intervention may have driven the JCVI to depart from a fair and consistent application of healthcare rationing.


Subject(s)
Papillomavirus Infections/economics , Papillomavirus Infections/prevention & control , Papillomavirus Vaccines/administration & dosage , Papillomavirus Vaccines/economics , Vaccination/economics , Vaccination/standards , Child , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Health Care Rationing , Humans , Male , Models, Economic , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Quality-Adjusted Life Years , State Medicine , United Kingdom
16.
Int J Equity Health ; 18(1): 159, 2019 10 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31623613

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The human papillomavirus (HPV) is the most common sexually transmitted infection (STI) worldwide. Gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (GBM), and GBM living with HIV in particular, are disproportionately impacted by HPV-associated cancers. The HPV vaccine, given early enough in life, may markedly reduce the likelihood of such cancers. In Canada, most provincial insurance programs only cover HPV vaccination for GBM up to the age of 26. Our objective was to understand physicians' everyday experiences and challenges in recommending HPV vaccination to older GBM patients. METHODS: As part of the HPV Screening and Vaccine Evaluation (HPV-SAVE) Study, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 25 HIV-positive GBM patients who had received anal cancer screening and 15 service providers, including 13 physicians, who had arranged for anal cancer screening in the Canadian provinces of Ontario and British Columbia. In this analysis, we draw upon the 13 physician interviews, which were coded following Grounded Theory. RESULTS: Physicians strongly supported the HPV vaccine for all GBM and considered it to be important for the management of HIV-related care. However, the overall support for HPV vaccination among physicians did not translate into consistent recommendation practices. There were two overarching factors that limited the strength/frequency of physicians' vaccine recommendation practices. First, cost/insurance coverage for some older patients impacted if and how the HPV vaccine was discussed. Second, physicians had diverse perspectives on both the prevention and therapeutic benefits of vaccinating older GBM and the reality that national guidelines are incongruent with publicly funded vaccine programs for vaccinating patients over 26 years old. These two interrelated factors have co-produced an apparent economic-evidentiary conundrum for many physicians regarding how and for whom to offer HPV vaccination. CONCLUSION: Economic barriers coupled with evidentiary and guideline gaps have created clinical practice challenges for physicians and has resulted in different messages being communicated to some older GBM patients about how important HPV vaccination is for their health.


Subject(s)
Homosexuality, Male , Papillomavirus Vaccines/administration & dosage , Physicians/psychology , Practice Patterns, Physicians' , Sexual and Gender Minorities , Adult , Canada , Homosexuality, Male/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Insurance Coverage/statistics & numerical data , Male , Papillomavirus Vaccines/economics , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/economics , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/ethics , Qualitative Research , Sexual and Gender Minorities/statistics & numerical data , Socioeconomic Factors
17.
Health Econ ; 28(2): 299-310, 2019 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30511394

ABSTRACT

Economic theory predicts that vaccination policies at the local level can be negatively affected by the policies of neighboring regions because of free-riding motives, whereas positive dependency may exist due to policy diffusions among localities. By using the unique variations in the provision of vaccination subsidies in Japan, we assess how vaccination policies in a local government are affected by the decisions of neighboring governments. We find that the provision of vaccination subsidies is positively correlated with the decisions of neighboring localities. Moreover, a correlation is found with neighboring municipalities within the same prefecture but not with those in surrounding prefectures, indicating that the correlations are likely to arise because of mimicking behavior among localities within a prefecture. Our results show that vaccination policies tend to be formed following neighboring municipalities and do not necessarily aim to optimize community health, thus questioning the autonomy of local government authorities regarding vaccination policies.


Subject(s)
Health Policy , Local Government , Vaccination , Aged , Child , Child, Preschool , Financing, Government/statistics & numerical data , Health Policy/economics , Humans , Japan , Models, Econometric , Papillomavirus Vaccines/economics , Papillomavirus Vaccines/therapeutic use , Vaccination/economics , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data , Vaccines/economics , Vaccines/therapeutic use
18.
Biochemistry (Mosc) ; 84(7): 800-816, 2019 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31509730

ABSTRACT

Human papillomaviruses of high carcinogenic risk (HR HPVs) are major etiological agents of malignant diseases of the cervix, vulva, penis, anal canal, larynx, head, and neck. Prophylactic vaccination against HPV, which mainly covers girls and women under 25, does not prevent vertical and horizontal HPV transmission in infants and children and does not have a therapeutic effect. As a result, a significant proportion of the population is not protected from the HPV infection and development of HPV-associated neoplastic transformation and cancer, which indicates the need for development and introduction of therapeutic HPV vaccines. Unlike prophylactic vaccines aimed at the formation of virus-neutralizing antibodies, therapeutic vaccines elicit cellular immune response leading to the elimination of infected and malignant cells expressing viral proteins. The ideal targets for vaccine immunotherapy are highly conserved HR HPV oncoproteins E6 and E7 expressed in precancerous and tumor tissues. Here, we describe expression of these proteins during different stages of HPV infection, their antigenic and immunogenic properties, and T-cell epitopes, the response to which correlates with natural regression of HPV-induced neoplastic changes. The review describes patterns of E6 and E7 oncoproteins presentation to the immune system as components of candidate vaccines along with the results of the most promising preclinical trials and animal models used in these trials. Special attention is paid to vaccine candidates which have shown efficacy in clinical trials in patients with HPV-associated neoplastic changes.


Subject(s)
Papillomaviridae/immunology , Papillomavirus Infections/therapy , Papillomavirus Vaccines/therapeutic use , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/therapy , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/virology , Animals , Bacterial Vaccines/therapeutic use , Cancer Vaccines/therapeutic use , Disease Models, Animal , Female , Humans , Male , Mice , Molecular Targeted Therapy , Papillomavirus E7 Proteins/immunology , Papillomavirus E7 Proteins/metabolism , Papillomavirus Vaccines/economics , Recombinant Proteins/immunology , T-Lymphocytes, Cytotoxic/immunology , Vaccines, DNA/therapeutic use
19.
BMC Public Health ; 19(1): 1031, 2019 Aug 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31370810

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In Mozambique cervical cancer is a public health threat, due to its high incidence and limited access to early diagnosis of precancerous lesions. International organisations are supporting the introduction of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines in low- and middle-income countries. Some of these countries recently conducted demonstration programmes, which included evaluation of acceptability, coverage, and practicality of implementation and of integration in existing programmes. Information on costs of delivering the vaccine is needed to overcome the challenges of reaching vaccine potential recipients in rural and remote areas. METHODS: We estimated the financial and economic costs of delivering HPV vaccination to ten-year-old girls at schools for the first vaccination cycle of the demonstration programme in the Manhiça district (southern Mozambique), delivered throughout 2014. We also estimated costs of an alternative scenario with a reduced number of doses and personnel, which was analogous to the second vaccination cycle delivered throughout 2015. Cost estimates followed a micro-costing approach and included interviews with key informants at different administrative levels through the administration of standard questionnaires developed by the World Health Organisation. RESULTS: Considering only data from the first vaccination cycle (2014), which consisted in the administration of three doses, the average economic cost was US$17.59 per dose and US$52.29 per fully-immunised girl (FIG). Financial cost per dose (US$6.07) and per FIG (US$17.95) were substantially lower. The economic cost was US$15.53 per dose and US$31.14 per FIG when estimating an alternative cost scenario with reduced number of doses and personnel. CONCLUSIONS: The average economic cost per dose was lower than the ones recently reported for low- and middle-income countries. However, our estimation of the financial cost per FIG was higher than the ones observed elsewhere (ranging from US$2.49 in India to US$20.36 in Vietnam) due to the high percentage of out-of-school girls which, reduced vaccine coverage and, therefore, reduced the denominator. Due to budget constraints, if Mozambique is to implement nation-wide HPV vaccination targeted to ten-year-old girls at schools, a reduction in personnel costs should be operated either by restricting the outreach vaccinator team or the number of supervision visits.


Subject(s)
Costs and Cost Analysis/statistics & numerical data , Immunization Programs/economics , Papillomavirus Vaccines/economics , School Health Services/economics , Child , Female , Humans , Mozambique , Program Evaluation , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/prevention & control
20.
BMC Public Health ; 19(1): 1406, 2019 Oct 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31664976

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Cost is an important determinant of health program implementation. In this study, we conducted a comprehensive evaluation of the implementation strategy of Mozambique's school-based HPV vaccine demonstration project. We sought to estimate the total costs for the program, cost per fully immunized girl (FIG), and compute projections for the total cost of implementing a similar national level vaccination program. METHODS: We collected primary data through document review, participatory observation, and key informant interviews at all levels of the national health system and Ministry of Education. We used a combination of micro-costing methods-identification and measurement of resource quantities and valuation by application of unit costs, and gross costing-for consideration of resource bundles as they apply to the number of vaccinated girls. We extrapolated the cost per FIG to the HPV-vaccine-eligible population of Mozambique, to demonstrate the projected total annual cost for two scenarios of a similarly executed HPV vaccine program. RESULTS: The total cost of the Mozambique HPV vaccine demonstration project was $523,602. The mean cost per FIG was $72 (Credibility Intervals (CI): $62 - $83) in year one, $38 (CI: $37 - $40) in year two, and $54 CI: $49 - $61) for years one and two. The mean cost per FIG with the third HPV vaccine dose excluded from consideration was $60 (CI: $50 - $72) in year one, $38 (CI: $31 - $46) in year two, and $48 (CI: $42 - $55) for years one and two. The mean cost per FIG when only one HPV vaccine dose is considered was $30 (CI: $27 - $33)) in year one, $19 (CI: $15-$23) in year two, and $24 (CI: $22-$27) for both years. The projected annual cost of a two-and one-dose vaccine program targeting all 10-year-old girls in the country was $18.2 m (CI: $15.9 m - $20.7 m) and $9 m (CI: $8 m - $10 m) respectively. CONCLUSION: National adaptation and scale-up of Mozambique's school-based HPV vaccine strategy may result in substantial costs depending on dosing. For sustainability, stakeholders will need to negotiate vaccine price and achieve higher efficiency in startup activities and demand creation.


Subject(s)
Papillomavirus Infections/prevention & control , Papillomavirus Vaccines/administration & dosage , Papillomavirus Vaccines/economics , School Health Services/economics , School Health Services/organization & administration , Child , Costs and Cost Analysis , Female , Humans , Immunization Schedule , Mozambique/epidemiology , Papillomavirus Infections/epidemiology , Program Evaluation
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL