Comparing bivalent and quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccines: economic evaluation based on transmission model
Identifieur interne : 000A90 ( Main/Exploration ); précédent : 000A89; suivant : 000A91Comparing bivalent and quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccines: economic evaluation based on transmission model
Auteurs : Mark Jit [Royaume-Uni] ; Ruth Chapman [Royaume-Uni] ; Owain Hughes ; Yoon Hong Choi [Royaume-Uni]Source :
- BMJ [ 0959-8138 ] ; 2011.
Abstract
Objectives To compare the effect and cost effectiveness of bivalent and quadrivalent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination, taking into account differences in licensure indications, protection against non-vaccine type disease, protection against disease related to HPV types 6 and 11, and reported long term immunogenicity. Design A model of HPV transmission and disease previously used to inform UK vaccination policy, updated with recent evidence and expanded to include scenarios where the two vaccines differ in duration of protection, cross protection, and end points prevented. Setting United Kingdom. Population Males and females aged 12–75 years. Main outcome measure Incremental cost effectiveness ratios for both vaccines and additional cost per dose for the quadrivalent vaccine to be equally cost effective as the bivalent vaccine. Results The bivalent vaccine needs to be cheaper than the quadrivalent vaccine to be equally cost effective, mainly because of its lack of protection against anogenital warts. The price difference per dose ranges from a median of £19 (interquartile range £12–£27) to £35 (£27–£44) across scenarios about vaccine duration, cross protection, and end points prevented (assuming one quality adjusted life year (QALY) is valued at £30 000 and both vaccines can prevent all types of HPV related cancers). Conclusions The quadrivalent vaccine may have an advantage over the bivalent vaccine in reducing healthcare costs and QALYs lost. The bivalent vaccine may have an advantage in preventing death due to cancer. However, considerable uncertainty remains about the differential benefit of the two vaccines.
Url:
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.d5775
Affiliations:
Links toward previous steps (curation, corpus...)
- to stream Istex, to step Corpus: 001148
- to stream Istex, to step Curation: 001124
- to stream Istex, to step Checkpoint: 000653
- to stream Main, to step Merge: 000A92
- to stream Main, to step Curation: 000A90
Le document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title>Comparing bivalent and quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccines: economic evaluation based on transmission model</title><author><name sortKey="Jit, Mark" sort="Jit, Mark" uniqKey="Jit M" first="Mark" last="Jit">Mark Jit</name></author><author><name sortKey="Chapman, Ruth" sort="Chapman, Ruth" uniqKey="Chapman R" first="Ruth" last="Chapman">Ruth Chapman</name></author><author><name sortKey="Hughes, Owain" sort="Hughes, Owain" uniqKey="Hughes O" first="Owain" last="Hughes">Owain Hughes</name></author><author><name sortKey="Choi, Yoon Hong" sort="Choi, Yoon Hong" uniqKey="Choi Y" first="Yoon Hong" last="Choi">Yoon Hong Choi</name></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno><idno type="RBID">ISTEX:EB9607575BEB6ADA6746F632400F41267DC51A8A</idno><date when="2011" year="2011">2011</date><idno type="doi">10.1136/bmj.d5775</idno><idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/EB9607575BEB6ADA6746F632400F41267DC51A8A/fulltext/pdf</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">001148</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Curation">001124</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Checkpoint">000653</idno><idno type="wicri:doubleKey">0959-8138:2011:Jit M:comparing:bivalent:and</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Main/Merge">000A92</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Main/Curation">000A90</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Main/Exploration">000A90</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a">Comparing bivalent and quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccines: economic evaluation based on transmission model</title><author><name sortKey="Jit, Mark" sort="Jit, Mark" uniqKey="Jit M" first="Mark" last="Jit">Mark Jit</name><affiliation wicri:level="1"><country xml:lang="fr">Royaume-Uni</country><wicri:regionArea>Health Protection Agency, London NW9 6BT</wicri:regionArea><wicri:noRegion>London NW9 6BT</wicri:noRegion></affiliation><affiliation wicri:level="1"><country wicri:rule="url">Royaume-Uni</country></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Chapman, Ruth" sort="Chapman, Ruth" uniqKey="Chapman R" first="Ruth" last="Chapman">Ruth Chapman</name><affiliation wicri:level="1"><country xml:lang="fr">Royaume-Uni</country><wicri:regionArea>Health Protection Agency, London NW9 6BT</wicri:regionArea><wicri:noRegion>London NW9 6BT</wicri:noRegion></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Hughes, Owain" sort="Hughes, Owain" uniqKey="Hughes O" first="Owain" last="Hughes">Owain Hughes</name><affiliation><wicri:noCountry code="subField">1EH</wicri:noCountry></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Choi, Yoon Hong" sort="Choi, Yoon Hong" uniqKey="Choi Y" first="Yoon Hong" last="Choi">Yoon Hong Choi</name><affiliation wicri:level="1"><country xml:lang="fr">Royaume-Uni</country><wicri:regionArea>Health Protection Agency, London NW9 6BT</wicri:regionArea><wicri:noRegion>London NW9 6BT</wicri:noRegion></affiliation></author></analytic><monogr></monogr><series><title level="j">BMJ</title><title level="j" type="abbrev">BMJ</title><idno type="ISSN">0959-8138</idno><idno type="eISSN">1468-5833</idno><imprint><publisher>British Medical Journal Publishing Group</publisher><date type="published" when="2011">2011</date><biblScope unit="volume">343</biblScope></imprint><idno type="ISSN">0959-8138</idno></series><idno type="istex">EB9607575BEB6ADA6746F632400F41267DC51A8A</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1136/bmj.d5775</idno><idno type="href">bmj-343-bmj-d5775.pdf</idno><idno type="ArticleID">jitm871020</idno><idno type="local">bmj;343/sep27_1/d5775</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc><seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">0959-8138</idno></seriesStmt></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass></textClass><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract">Objectives To compare the effect and cost effectiveness of bivalent and quadrivalent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination, taking into account differences in licensure indications, protection against non-vaccine type disease, protection against disease related to HPV types 6 and 11, and reported long term immunogenicity. Design A model of HPV transmission and disease previously used to inform UK vaccination policy, updated with recent evidence and expanded to include scenarios where the two vaccines differ in duration of protection, cross protection, and end points prevented. Setting United Kingdom. Population Males and females aged 12–75 years. Main outcome measure Incremental cost effectiveness ratios for both vaccines and additional cost per dose for the quadrivalent vaccine to be equally cost effective as the bivalent vaccine. Results The bivalent vaccine needs to be cheaper than the quadrivalent vaccine to be equally cost effective, mainly because of its lack of protection against anogenital warts. The price difference per dose ranges from a median of £19 (interquartile range £12–£27) to £35 (£27–£44) across scenarios about vaccine duration, cross protection, and end points prevented (assuming one quality adjusted life year (QALY) is valued at £30 000 and both vaccines can prevent all types of HPV related cancers). Conclusions The quadrivalent vaccine may have an advantage over the bivalent vaccine in reducing healthcare costs and QALYs lost. The bivalent vaccine may have an advantage in preventing death due to cancer. However, considerable uncertainty remains about the differential benefit of the two vaccines.</div></front></TEI><affiliations><list><country><li>Royaume-Uni</li></country></list><tree><noCountry><name sortKey="Hughes, Owain" sort="Hughes, Owain" uniqKey="Hughes O" first="Owain" last="Hughes">Owain Hughes</name></noCountry><country name="Royaume-Uni"><noRegion><name sortKey="Jit, Mark" sort="Jit, Mark" uniqKey="Jit M" first="Mark" last="Jit">Mark Jit</name></noRegion><name sortKey="Chapman, Ruth" sort="Chapman, Ruth" uniqKey="Chapman R" first="Ruth" last="Chapman">Ruth Chapman</name><name sortKey="Choi, Yoon Hong" sort="Choi, Yoon Hong" uniqKey="Choi Y" first="Yoon Hong" last="Choi">Yoon Hong Choi</name><name sortKey="Jit, Mark" sort="Jit, Mark" uniqKey="Jit M" first="Mark" last="Jit">Mark Jit</name></country></tree></affiliations></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Belgique/explor/OpenAccessBelV2/Data/Main/Exploration
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 000A90 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Main/Exploration/biblio.hfd -nk 000A90 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Belgique
|area= OpenAccessBelV2
|flux= Main
|étape= Exploration
|type= RBID
|clé= ISTEX:EB9607575BEB6ADA6746F632400F41267DC51A8A
|texte= Comparing bivalent and quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccines: economic evaluation based on transmission model
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.25. |  |