IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/pharme/v27y2009i3p231-245.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation of a Quadrivalent Human Papillomavirus Vaccine in Belgium

Author

Listed:
  • Lieven Annemans
  • Vanessa Rémy
  • James Oyee
  • Nathalie Largeron

Abstract

Background: The introduction of a quadrivalent human papillomavirus (HPV; types 6, 11, 16, 18) vaccine is expected to significantly reduce the burden of cervical cancer, cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN), genital warts and other HPV-related diseases. Objective: To determine the cost effectiveness of providing a quadrivalent (6,11,16,18) HPV vaccine programme in adolescent females aged 12 years in addition to the existing cervical cancer screening programme in Belgium. Methods: A Markov state-transition model was developed for the Belgian context in order to evaluate the long-term impact of vaccinating a cohort of girls aged 12 years alongside the existing screening programme. Women were followed until the age of 85 years. A vaccine that would prevent 100% of diseases associated with HPV-6, -11, -16 and -18, with lifetime duration of efficacy, 80% coverage, in conjunction with current screening, was compared with screening alone. For this analysis, 35% of cases of CIN-1, 55% of CIN-2/3, 75% of cervical cancer and 90% of genital warts were considered to be attributable to HPV-6, -11, -16 or -18. The model estimated lifetime risks and total lifetime healthcare costs, survival and QALYs for cervical cancer, CIN and genital warts. Outcomes validation was applied. Model outcomes also included incremental costs per life-year gained and incremental costs per QALY gained. The analysis was conducted from the perspective of the Belgian healthcare payer, and costs were in year 2006 values. Results: The model estimated a reduction in the lifetime risk of cervical cancer from 0.94% to 0.34%, therefore preventing 362 cases of cervical cancer and 131 related deaths in a cohort of 60 000 girls aged 12 years in Belgium. The base-case scenario suggests quadrivalent HPV vaccination in addition to current cervical screening in Belgium to be cost effective at €10 546 per QALY. This is within the accepted range of cost-effective interventions in Europe. This cost effectiveness is maintained for different parameter assumptions in the sensitivity analysis, with the exception of very high discount rates for costs and medical benefits, but, even in the worst case, ratios were still less than €50 000 per QALY. Even when a separate scenario modelled the requirement for a booster vaccination to sustain a lifetime duration of protection, the results remained cost effective at €17 388 per QALY. Conclusions: Vaccination with a quadrivalent HPVvaccine appears to be a costeffective public health intervention in conjunction with the existing screening programme in Belgium. The additional costs of introducing vaccination to the established screening programme would be offset by the potential savings from not having to treat the diseases caused by HPV-6, -11, -16 or -18. Copyright Adis Data Information BV 2009

Suggested Citation

  • Lieven Annemans & Vanessa Rémy & James Oyee & Nathalie Largeron, 2009. "Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation of a Quadrivalent Human Papillomavirus Vaccine in Belgium," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 27(3), pages 231-245, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:pharme:v:27:y:2009:i:3:p:231-245
    DOI: 10.2165/00019053-200927030-00006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.2165/00019053-200927030-00006
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2165/00019053-200927030-00006?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sun-Young Kim & Sue Goldie, 2008. "Cost-Effectiveness Analyses of Vaccination Programmes," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 191-215, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Oren Shavit & Raanan Raz & Michal Stein & Gabriel Chodick & Eduardo Schejter & Yehuda Ben-David & Raanan Cohen & Daphna Arbel & Varda Shalev, 2012. "Evaluating the epidemiology and morbidity burden associated with human papillomavirus in Israel," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 87-97, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Andrija S Grustam & Nasuh Buyukkaramikli & Ron Koymans & Hubertus J M Vrijhoef & Johan L Severens, 2019. "Value of information analysis in telehealth for chronic heart failure management," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(6), pages 1-23, June.
    2. Anthony Newall & Mark Jit & Philippe Beutels, 2012. "Economic Evaluations of Childhood Influenza Vaccination," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 30(8), pages 647-660, August.
    3. Greg Plosker, 2011. "Rotavirus Vaccine RIX4414 (Rotarix™)," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 29(11), pages 989-1009, November.
    4. Zsifkovits, Martin & Zsifkovits, Johannes & Pickl, Stefan W., 2016. "Simulating healthcare quality innovation based on a novel medical treatment: The case of Hepatitis-C in Europe," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 113(PB), pages 454-459.
    5. Ulrike Kuchenbecker & Daniela Chase & Anika Reichert & Julia Schiffner-Rohe & Mark Atwood, 2018. "Estimating the cost-effectiveness of a sequential pneumococcal vaccination program for adults in Germany," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(5), pages 1-23, May.
    6. Joke Bilcke & Philippe Beutels, 2009. "Reviewing the Cost Effectiveness of Rotavirus Vaccination," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 27(4), pages 281-297, April.
    7. Olivier Ethgen & Baudouin Standaert, 2012. "Population–versus Cohort–Based Modelling Approaches," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 171-181, March.
    8. van Ackere, Ann & Schulz, Peter J., 2020. "Explaining vaccination decisions: A system dynamics model of the interaction between epidemiological and behavioural factors," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    9. Anna K. Lugnér & Sido D. Mylius & Jacco Wallinga, 2010. "Dynamic versus static models in cost‐effectiveness analyses of anti‐viral drug therapy to mitigate an influenza pandemic," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(5), pages 518-531, May.
    10. Kjell Arne Johansson & Solomon Tessema Memirie & Clint Pecenka & Dean T Jamison & Stéphane Verguet, 2015. "Health Gains and Financial Protection from Pneumococcal Vaccination and Pneumonia Treatment in Ethiopia: Results from an Extended Cost-Effectiveness Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(12), pages 1-16, December.
    11. Sun-Young Kim & Sue J. Goldie & Joshua A. Salomon, 2010. "Exploring Model Uncertainty in Economic Evaluation of Health Interventions: The Example of Rotavirus Vaccination in Vietnam," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 30(5), pages 1-28, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:pharme:v:27:y:2009:i:3:p:231-245. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.