Cost-effectiveness analysis of the bivalent compared with the quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccines in Taiwan

Nadia Demarteau, Chao Hsiun Tang, Hui Chi Chen, Chien Jen Chen, Georges Van Kriekinge

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

16 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: To compare the epidemiological and economic impact of additional cross-protection against oncogenic human papillomavirus (HPV) types beyond 16/18 of the bivalent vaccine (BV) versus protection against nononcogenic HPV types 6/11 of the quadrivalent vaccine (QV) in Taiwan. Methods: A lifetime Markov model calibrated to the Taiwanese setting simulated the natural history of low-risk (engendering cervical intraepithelial neoplasia [CIN] 1 and genital warts) and high-risk HPV (engendering CIN1, CIN2/3, and cervical cancer [CC]) infections, screening, and vaccination (100% coverage) for a cohort of 12-year-old girls (N = 153,000). Transition probabilities, costs, and utilities were estimated from published data and expert opinion. Vaccine efficacy was obtained from each vaccine's respective clinical trials. Price-parity and lifelong protection was assumed for both vaccines. The number of CIN lesions, CC cases, CC deaths and genital wart (GW) cases, and quality-adjusted life-years were estimated. Costs and outcomes (discounted at 3% and 1.5%, respectively) were compared from a payer's perspective. Results: The model estimated that the BV led to an additional, undiscounted, 11,484 CIN1, 1,779 (+34.3% vs. QV) CIN2/3, 188 (+29.0% vs. QV) CC, and 69 (+29.0% vs. QV) CC deaths prevented compared with the QV, while the QV prevented 4,150 GW (+71%). This resulted in an additional 768 quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) and 11.6 million new Taiwan dollars costs saved for the BV versus the QV after discounting. Conclusion: Both vaccines have a different epidemiological impact with an increased number of CC-related lesions potentially prevented for the BV because of additional cross-protection. In the Taiwanese setting, HPV mass vaccination using the BV was estimated to dominate vaccination using the QV.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)622-631
Number of pages10
JournalValue in Health
Volume15
Issue number5
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jul 2012

Fingerprint

Papillomavirus Vaccines
Taiwan
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Vaccines
Uterine Cervical Neoplasms
Condylomata Acuminata
Cross Protection
Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia
Quality-Adjusted Life Years
Costs and Cost Analysis
Vaccination
Human papillomavirus 11
Human papillomavirus 6
Mass Vaccination
Human papillomavirus 16
Expert Testimony

Keywords

  • cost-effectiveness
  • human papilloma virus vaccines
  • QALYs
  • Taiwan

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health Policy
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Cite this

Cost-effectiveness analysis of the bivalent compared with the quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccines in Taiwan. / Demarteau, Nadia; Tang, Chao Hsiun; Chen, Hui Chi; Chen, Chien Jen; Van Kriekinge, Georges.

In: Value in Health, Vol. 15, No. 5, 07.2012, p. 622-631.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Demarteau, Nadia ; Tang, Chao Hsiun ; Chen, Hui Chi ; Chen, Chien Jen ; Van Kriekinge, Georges. / Cost-effectiveness analysis of the bivalent compared with the quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccines in Taiwan. In: Value in Health. 2012 ; Vol. 15, No. 5. pp. 622-631.
@article{be1ae691a3e240b99417d0030efd0731,
title = "Cost-effectiveness analysis of the bivalent compared with the quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccines in Taiwan",
abstract = "Objective: To compare the epidemiological and economic impact of additional cross-protection against oncogenic human papillomavirus (HPV) types beyond 16/18 of the bivalent vaccine (BV) versus protection against nononcogenic HPV types 6/11 of the quadrivalent vaccine (QV) in Taiwan. Methods: A lifetime Markov model calibrated to the Taiwanese setting simulated the natural history of low-risk (engendering cervical intraepithelial neoplasia [CIN] 1 and genital warts) and high-risk HPV (engendering CIN1, CIN2/3, and cervical cancer [CC]) infections, screening, and vaccination (100{\%} coverage) for a cohort of 12-year-old girls (N = 153,000). Transition probabilities, costs, and utilities were estimated from published data and expert opinion. Vaccine efficacy was obtained from each vaccine's respective clinical trials. Price-parity and lifelong protection was assumed for both vaccines. The number of CIN lesions, CC cases, CC deaths and genital wart (GW) cases, and quality-adjusted life-years were estimated. Costs and outcomes (discounted at 3{\%} and 1.5{\%}, respectively) were compared from a payer's perspective. Results: The model estimated that the BV led to an additional, undiscounted, 11,484 CIN1, 1,779 (+34.3{\%} vs. QV) CIN2/3, 188 (+29.0{\%} vs. QV) CC, and 69 (+29.0{\%} vs. QV) CC deaths prevented compared with the QV, while the QV prevented 4,150 GW (+71{\%}). This resulted in an additional 768 quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) and 11.6 million new Taiwan dollars costs saved for the BV versus the QV after discounting. Conclusion: Both vaccines have a different epidemiological impact with an increased number of CC-related lesions potentially prevented for the BV because of additional cross-protection. In the Taiwanese setting, HPV mass vaccination using the BV was estimated to dominate vaccination using the QV.",
keywords = "cost-effectiveness, human papilloma virus vaccines, QALYs, Taiwan",
author = "Nadia Demarteau and Tang, {Chao Hsiun} and Chen, {Hui Chi} and Chen, {Chien Jen} and {Van Kriekinge}, Georges",
year = "2012",
month = "7",
doi = "10.1016/j.jval.2012.02.012",
language = "English",
volume = "15",
pages = "622--631",
journal = "Value in Health",
issn = "1098-3015",
publisher = "Elsevier Limited",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Cost-effectiveness analysis of the bivalent compared with the quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccines in Taiwan

AU - Demarteau, Nadia

AU - Tang, Chao Hsiun

AU - Chen, Hui Chi

AU - Chen, Chien Jen

AU - Van Kriekinge, Georges

PY - 2012/7

Y1 - 2012/7

N2 - Objective: To compare the epidemiological and economic impact of additional cross-protection against oncogenic human papillomavirus (HPV) types beyond 16/18 of the bivalent vaccine (BV) versus protection against nononcogenic HPV types 6/11 of the quadrivalent vaccine (QV) in Taiwan. Methods: A lifetime Markov model calibrated to the Taiwanese setting simulated the natural history of low-risk (engendering cervical intraepithelial neoplasia [CIN] 1 and genital warts) and high-risk HPV (engendering CIN1, CIN2/3, and cervical cancer [CC]) infections, screening, and vaccination (100% coverage) for a cohort of 12-year-old girls (N = 153,000). Transition probabilities, costs, and utilities were estimated from published data and expert opinion. Vaccine efficacy was obtained from each vaccine's respective clinical trials. Price-parity and lifelong protection was assumed for both vaccines. The number of CIN lesions, CC cases, CC deaths and genital wart (GW) cases, and quality-adjusted life-years were estimated. Costs and outcomes (discounted at 3% and 1.5%, respectively) were compared from a payer's perspective. Results: The model estimated that the BV led to an additional, undiscounted, 11,484 CIN1, 1,779 (+34.3% vs. QV) CIN2/3, 188 (+29.0% vs. QV) CC, and 69 (+29.0% vs. QV) CC deaths prevented compared with the QV, while the QV prevented 4,150 GW (+71%). This resulted in an additional 768 quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) and 11.6 million new Taiwan dollars costs saved for the BV versus the QV after discounting. Conclusion: Both vaccines have a different epidemiological impact with an increased number of CC-related lesions potentially prevented for the BV because of additional cross-protection. In the Taiwanese setting, HPV mass vaccination using the BV was estimated to dominate vaccination using the QV.

AB - Objective: To compare the epidemiological and economic impact of additional cross-protection against oncogenic human papillomavirus (HPV) types beyond 16/18 of the bivalent vaccine (BV) versus protection against nononcogenic HPV types 6/11 of the quadrivalent vaccine (QV) in Taiwan. Methods: A lifetime Markov model calibrated to the Taiwanese setting simulated the natural history of low-risk (engendering cervical intraepithelial neoplasia [CIN] 1 and genital warts) and high-risk HPV (engendering CIN1, CIN2/3, and cervical cancer [CC]) infections, screening, and vaccination (100% coverage) for a cohort of 12-year-old girls (N = 153,000). Transition probabilities, costs, and utilities were estimated from published data and expert opinion. Vaccine efficacy was obtained from each vaccine's respective clinical trials. Price-parity and lifelong protection was assumed for both vaccines. The number of CIN lesions, CC cases, CC deaths and genital wart (GW) cases, and quality-adjusted life-years were estimated. Costs and outcomes (discounted at 3% and 1.5%, respectively) were compared from a payer's perspective. Results: The model estimated that the BV led to an additional, undiscounted, 11,484 CIN1, 1,779 (+34.3% vs. QV) CIN2/3, 188 (+29.0% vs. QV) CC, and 69 (+29.0% vs. QV) CC deaths prevented compared with the QV, while the QV prevented 4,150 GW (+71%). This resulted in an additional 768 quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) and 11.6 million new Taiwan dollars costs saved for the BV versus the QV after discounting. Conclusion: Both vaccines have a different epidemiological impact with an increased number of CC-related lesions potentially prevented for the BV because of additional cross-protection. In the Taiwanese setting, HPV mass vaccination using the BV was estimated to dominate vaccination using the QV.

KW - cost-effectiveness

KW - human papilloma virus vaccines

KW - QALYs

KW - Taiwan

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84864584323&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84864584323&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jval.2012.02.012

DO - 10.1016/j.jval.2012.02.012

M3 - Article

C2 - 22867770

AN - SCOPUS:84864584323

VL - 15

SP - 622

EP - 631

JO - Value in Health

JF - Value in Health

SN - 1098-3015

IS - 5

ER -