A Cost-Effectiveness Tool for Informing Policies on Zika Virus Control.

BACKGROUND: As Zika virus continues to spread, decisions regarding resource allocations to control the outbreak underscore the need for a tool to weigh policies according to their cost and the health burden they could avert. For example, to combat the current Zika outbreak the US President requested the allocation of $1.8 billion from Congress in February 2016. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Illustrated through an interactive tool, we evaluated how the number of Zika cases averted, the period during pregnancy in which Zika infection poses a risk of microcephaly, and probabilities of microcephaly and Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS) impact the cost at which an intervention is cost-effective. From Northeast Brazilian microcephaly incidence data, we estimated the probability of microcephaly in infants born to Zika-infected women (0.49% to 2.10%). We also estimated the probability of GBS arising from Zika infections in Brazil (0.02% to 0.06%) and Colombia (0.08%). We calculated that each microcephaly and GBS case incurs the loss of 29.95 DALYs and 1.25 DALYs per case, as well as direct medical costs for Latin America and the Caribbean of $91,102 and $28,818, respectively. We demonstrated the utility of our cost-effectiveness tool with examples evaluating funding commitments by Costa Rica and Brazil, the US presidential proposal, and the novel approach of genetically modified mosquitoes. Our analyses indicate that the commitments and the proposal are likely to be cost-effective, whereas the cost-effectiveness of genetically modified mosquitoes depends on the country of implementation. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Current estimates from our tool suggest that the health burden from microcephaly and GBS warrants substantial expenditures focused on Zika virus control. Our results justify the funding committed in Costa Rica and Brazil and many aspects of the budget outlined in the US president's proposal. As data continue to be collected, new parameter estimates can be customized in real-time within our user-friendly tool to provide updated estimates on cost-effectiveness of interventions and inform policy decisions in country-specific settings.

Dengue dynamics and vaccine cost-effectiveness in Brazil.

Recent Phase 2b dengue vaccine trials have demonstrated the safety of the vaccine and estimated the vaccine efficacy with further trials underway. In anticipation of vaccine roll-out, cost-effectiveness analysis of potential vaccination policies that quantify the dynamics of disease transmission are fundamental to the optimal allocation of available doses. We developed a dengue transmission and vaccination model and calculated, for a range of vaccination costs and willingness-to-pay thresholds, the level of vaccination coverage necessary to sustain herd-immunity, the price at which vaccination is cost-effective and is cost-saving, and the sensitivity of our results to parameter uncertainty. We compared two vaccine efficacy scenarios, one a more optimistic scenario and another based on the recent lower-than-expected efficacy from the latest clinical trials. We found that herd-immunity may be achieved by vaccinating 82% (95% CI 58-100%) of the population at a vaccine efficacy of 70%. At this efficacy, vaccination may be cost-effective for vaccination costs up to US$ 534 (95% CI $369-1008) per vaccinated individual and cost-saving up to $204 (95% CI $39-678). At the latest clinical trial estimates of an average of 30% vaccine efficacy, vaccination may be cost-effective and cost-saving at costs of up to $237 (95% CI $159-512) and $93 (95% CI $15-368), respectively. Our model provides an assessment of the cost-effectiveness of dengue vaccination in Brazil and incorporates the effect of herd immunity into dengue vaccination cost-effectiveness. Our results demonstrate that at the relatively low vaccine efficacy from the recent Phase 2b dengue vaccine trials, age-targeted vaccination may still be cost-effective provided the total vaccination cost is sufficiently low.

Dengue vector control strategies in an urban setting: an economic modelling assessment.

BACKGROUND: An estimated 2·5 billion people are at risk of dengue. Incidence of dengue is especially high in resource-constrained countries, where control relies mainly on insecticides targeted at larval or adult mosquitoes. We did epidemiological and economic assessments of different vector control strategies. METHODS: We developed a dynamic model of dengue transmission that assesses the evolution of insecticide resistance and immunity in the human population, thus allowing for long-term evolutionary and immunological effects of decreased dengue transmission. We measured the dengue health burden in terms of disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) lost. We did a cost-effectiveness analysis of 43 insecticide-based vector control strategies, including strategies targeted at adult and larval stages, at varying efficacies (high-efficacy [90% mortality], medium-efficacy [60% mortality], and low-efficacy [30% mortality]) and yearly application frequencies (one to six applications). To assess the effect of parameter uncertainty on the results, we did a probabilistic sensitivity analysis and a threshold analysis. FINDINGS: All interventions caused the emergence of insecticide resistance, which, with the loss of herd immunity, will increase the magnitude of future dengue epidemics. In our model, one or more applications of high-efficacy larval control reduced dengue burden for up to 2 years, whereas three or more applications of adult vector control reduced dengue burden for up to 4 years. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of the strategies for two high-efficacy adult vector control applications per year was US$615 per DALY saved and for six high-efficacy adult vector control applications per year was $1267 per DALY saved. Sensitivity analysis showed that if the cost of adult control was more than 8·2 times the cost of larval control then all strategies based on adult control became dominated. INTERPRETATION: Six high-efficacy adult vector control applications per year has a cost-effectiveness ratio that will probably meet WHO's standard for a cost-effective or very cost-effective intervention. Year-round larval control can be counterproductive, exacerbating epidemics in later years because of evolution of insecticide resistance and loss of herd immunity. We suggest the reassessment of vector control policies that are based on larval control only. FUNDING: The Fulbright Programme, CAPES (Brazilian federal agency for post-graduate education), the Miriam Burnett trust, and the Notsew Orm Sands Foundation.