Factors associated with parental human papillomavirus vaccination intentions among adolescents from socioeconomically advantaged versus deprived households: a nationwide, cross-sectional survey.

Background: In the USA, HPV vaccine coverage is substantially lower among adolescents from high-income households compared to their low-income counterparts. We examined and compared the factors associated with parental HPV vaccination intentions between socioeconomically divergent groups. Methods: Data from unvaccinated and not fully HPV-vaccinated adolescents from the 2017-2021 National Immunization Survey (NIS)-Teen were analyzed. Socioeconomically advantaged vs. deprived groups were identified based on dichotomized income (material capital) and education (social capital). Parental intent to initiate and complete the HPV vaccine series was compared using bivariable analysis and the factors associated with lacking intent were identified. Findings: The 2017-2021 NIS-Teen included a total of 212,643 participants; the final analytical sample consisted of 105,958 adolescents (an estimated 10.3 million adolescents) who were unvaccinated or not fully vaccinated. In the advantaged group, 64.7% of parents of unvaccinated adolescents (equating to 2.4 million US adolescents) had no intention to initiate the HPV vaccine compared to 40.9% of parents in the deprived group (equating to 0.2 million adolescents) (P < 0.0001; S > 13.29). The most frequent reason for lacking intent in the advantaged group was 'safety concerns' (25.5%). In the deprived group, 'lack of knowledge', 'not recommended', and 'not needed' were common reasons (nearly 15% each). Lack of intent to complete the HPV vaccine series was higher in the advantaged group (43.9%; 1.1 million adolescents) compared to the deprived group (25.2%; 0.08 million adolescents) (P < 0.0001; S > 13.29). More than half in the advantaged group (58.4%) and over a third (37.1%) in the deprived group cited 'already up to date' as the main reason for not completing the HPV vaccine series. Interpretation: Lack of intent to initiate and complete the HPV vaccination series, particularly among socioeconomically advantaged parents is a significant barrier to achieving the national goal in the USA. Funding: The US National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities, the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, MUSC Hollings Cancer Center Seed funding, and the US National Cancer Institutes.

Cost Effectiveness of CDK4/6 Inhibitors in the First-Line Treatment of HR+/HER2- Metastatic Breast Cancer in Postmenopausal Women in the USA.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 (CDK4/6) inhibitors improve progression-free survival when combined with endocrine therapies in patients with hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative metastatic breast cancer. However, the comparative cost effectiveness of utilizing three US Food and Drug Administration-approved CDK4/6 inhibitors is unknown. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the cost effectiveness of individual CDK4/6 inhibitors (palbociclib, ribociclib, abemaciclib) with letrozole versus letrozole monotherapy in the first-line treatment of hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative metastatic breast cancer in the USA. METHODS: We constructed a Markov-based decision-analytic model to evaluate the cost effectiveness of CDK4/6 inhibitors plus endocrine therapies over a 40-year lifetime from a third-party payer perspective. The model incorporated health states (progression-free disease, progressive disease, and death), major adverse events (neutropenia), and cancer-specific and all-cause mortality. Using clinical efficacy and quality-of-life scores (utility) data from clinical trials, we estimated quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios using Medicare charges reported in US dollars per 2022 valuation and a discount rate of 3% applied to costs and outcomes. We performed deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses to evaluate parametric and decision uncertainty. RESULTS: Compared to letrozole, the model estimated an increase of 5.72, 5.87, and 6.39 in QALYs and costs of $799,178, $788,168, and $741,102 in combining palbociclib, ribociclib, and abemaciclib plus letrozole, respectively. Palbociclib or ribociclib plus letrozole were dominated by abemaciclib plus letrozole. Compared with letrozole, abemaciclib plus letrozole resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $457,538 per QALY with an incremental cost of $553,621 and an incremental QALY gain of 1.21. The results were sensitive to the cost of abemaciclib, disease progression utility, and patients' age. CONCLUSIONS: At a willingness to pay of $100,000/QALY gained, our model predicts that combining CDK4/6 inhibitors plus letrozole is not cost effective with a marginal increase in QALYs at a high cost. Lowering the cost of these drugs or identifying patients who can receive maximal benefit from CDK4/6 inhibitors would improve the value of this regimen in patients.