Search

Background: Despite the 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPSV23) vaccination programme implementation, pneumococcal disease (PD) remains an important cause of morbidity and mortality among the elderly in Japan, particularly since childhood pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV) vaccination programme continues to alter the serotype PD distribution among the elderly. Recently, in the United States, PCV15/PCV20 were recommended for adults aged ≥ 65 years and those aged 19-64 years with certain underlying conditions. In Japan, PCV15 is under the approval application process and PCV20 undergoing clinical trials, which has warranted the need in evaluating their value for money., Methods: We conducted cost-effectiveness analyses with Markov model and calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of PCV15/PCV20 vaccination programme compared to status quo from payers' perspective. Transition probabilities and utility weights in estimating quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), and disease treatment costs were either estimated or obtained from literature. To reflect the situation of COVID-19 pandemic, epidemiological data from 2020 and beyond were used., Results: Compared to the current vaccination programme, PCV20 vaccination programme gained more QALYs with less cost, while PCV15 vaccination programme cost ¥35,020 (US$318, US$1 = ¥110) to gain an additional QALY. Replacing PPSV23 vaccination programme with PCV20 vaccination programme is cost-saving. One-way sensitivity analyses revealed that lower VE limits of PCVs against non-bacteremic pneumonia (NBP) have large impact to change the result from PCV20 vaccination programme dominated PPSV23 vaccination programme to PPSV23 vaccination programme dominated PCV20 vaccination programme., Conclusion: In the COVID-19 era, replacing current PPSV23 with a single-dose PCV15- or PCV20 immunisation programme for 65-year-old adults in Japan is highly cost-effective, while the PCV 20 vaccination programme was observed to be more favourable., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The most common preventative measure against mumps is vaccination with mumps vaccine. Over 122 countries have implemented mumps vaccine routine immunization programs, mostly via Measles-Mumps-Rubella (MMR) vaccine. In Japan, the unexpectedly high incidence of aseptic meningitis caused by mumps vaccine led to the discontinuation of the MMR national vaccination program in 1993, inadvertently resulting in the re-emergence of mumps. Plans of introducing monovalent mumps vaccine into routine vaccination schedule have become one of the emerging topics in health policy that has warranted the need in evaluating its value for money., Methods: We conducted cost-effectiveness analyses with Markov model and calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of two different vaccination programs (a single-dose program at one-year-old, a two-dose program with second dose uptakes at five) compared to status quo from both payers' and societal perspectives. Transition probabilities and utility weights in estimating quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), and disease treatment costs were either estimated or obtained from literature. Costs per vaccination were assumed at ¥6140 (US$58;1US$ = ¥106)., Results: Both programs reduce disease treatment costs compared to status quo, while the reduction cannot offset vaccination cost. ICER of either program is found to be under ¥5,000,000 (US$47,170)/QALY willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold from either perspective. Results of probabilistic sensitivity analyses expressed by net monetary benefit indicated that at the WTP threshold, the acceptability is at 92.6% for two-dose vaccination program, 0% for single-dose vaccination program, and 7.4% for current no vaccination program. Two-dose program was optimal among the alternatives. One-way sensitivity analyses revealed that proportion of mumps-related hearing loss among mumps cases and vaccine effectiveness (VE) were key variables in changing the ICERs., Conclusion: Routine vaccination program of single- and two-dose programs were cost-effective from both payers' and societal perspectives. Between the two, the two-dose vaccination program was observed to be more favorable., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Pregnant women and infants are known as high risk groups for influenza. WHO recommend pregnant women be vaccinated with inactivated influenza vaccine. In Japan, some municipalities started to give subsidy to encourage pregnant women to receive a shot on their own accord, which has made the introduction of seasonal antepartum maternal vaccination program (AMVP) into the routine vaccination list a current topic in health policy and has raised the need to evaluate the value for money of such possibility., Methods: We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis to evaluate the efficiency of conducting AMVP in Japan. A decision tree model was adopted taking into consideration the duration of single-year vaccine effectiveness for infants and for mothers. The program targeted pregnant women aged 20-49 years old at or over 12 weeks gestation during October 1 through March 30. Estimated probabilities of treatments received due to influenza for pregnant/postpartum women or their infants varied by calendar time, vaccination status, and/or gestational age. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) compared with current no-AMVP from societal perspective was calculated. Transition probabilities, utility weights to estimate quality-adjusted life year (QALY), and disease treatment costs were either calculated or extracted from literature. Costs per vaccination was assumed at ¥3,529/US$32.1., Results: AMVP reduces disease treatment costs, while the reduction cannot offset the vaccination cost. Incremental QALYs were at 0.00009, among them 84.2% were from infants. ICER was ¥7,779,356/US$70,721 per QALY gained. One-way sensitivity analyses revealed that vaccine effectiveness for infant and costs per shot were the two main key variables affecting the ICER., Conclusion: We found that vaccinating pregnant women with influenza vaccine to prevent unvaccinated infants and pregnant/postpartum women from influenza-associated disease in Japan can be cost-effective from societal perspective, under the WHO-suggested "cost-effective" criteria (1-3 times of GDP)., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The approval of the extended use of 1-dose varicella vaccine (VVL) in adults aged 50 and older against herpes zoster (HZ) in 2016 and the 2-dose recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV) in 2018 raised the need to evaluate the value for money between these two vaccines., Methods: We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis with Markov modelling to evaluate the efficiency of the immunisation programmes from payer's perspective. Eight strategies with different ages to receive VVL or RZV were set, namely: 65-84 year old (y.o.), 70-84 y.o., 75-84 y.o., and 80-84 y.o. VVL- or RZV-strategy. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) compared with curative care scenario were calculated. The health statuses following the target cohort were as follows: acute HZ followed by recovery, post-herpetic neuralgia followed by recovery, post HZ/PHN, recurrence of HZ, and general death., Results: At the vaccination cost ¥8000 (US$73) for 1-dose ZVL and ¥30,000 (US$273) for 2-dose RZV, ICERs ranged from ¥2,633,587/US$23,942 (age 80-84 y.o.) to ¥3,434,267 or US$31,221 (age 65-84 y.o.)/QALY gained for VVL-strategies; from ¥5,262,227 or US$47,838 (age 80-84 y.o.) to ¥6,278,557 or US$57,078/QALY gained (age 65-84 y.o.) for RZV-strategies. Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves derived from probabilistic sensitivity analyses showed that if the cost-effective threshold was at ¥3,000,000 or US$27,273/QALY, the acceptability was 90.7% and 8.8% for 65-84 VVL-strategy and 65-84 RZV-strategy, respectively; if at ¥5,000,000 or US$45,455/QALY, 56.2% and 43.8%, and if at ¥10,000,000 or US$90,909/QALY 11.9% and 88.1%, respectively., Conclusion: Vaccinating individuals aged 65-84 y.o., 70-84 y.o., 75-84 y.o., 80-84 y.o. with VVL or RZV to prevent HZ-associated disease in Japan can be cost-effective from payer's perspective, with vaccination costs at ¥8,000 per shot for VVL, ¥30,000 for 2-dose RZV. While the results suggesting that only 65-84 VVL-strategy and 65-84 RZV strategy should be considered when introducing HZ immunisation programme. The optimal strategy varies depending on the willingness-to-pay threshold., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Both re-emergence of pertussis outbreak among adolescents/adults and recent approval of the extended use of DTaP vaccine for boosting adolescents/adults against pertussis in Japan, have raised the possibility of using aP-containing vaccine in pregnant women to protect neonates and unvaccinated infants. There is a need, therefore, to evaluate the value for money of such possibility., Methods: We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of conducting antepartum maternal vaccination (AMV) strategy in Japan. Considering the duration of vaccine effectiveness for infant (single year) and for mother (multiple years), the decision tree model and Markov model was adapted for infant and mother, respectively. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) compared with current no AMV strategy from societal perspective were calculated. The transition probabilities, utility weights to estimate quality-adjusted life year (QALY), and disease treatment costs were either calculated or extracted from literature. Costs per vaccination was assumed at ¥6000/US$54.5. Markov model for mothers with one-year cycle runs up to year four after vaccination, based on the waning of vaccine effectiveness. Infant who survived from pertussis was assumed to live until to his/her life expectancy., Results: AMV strategy reduces disease treatment costs, while the reduction cannot offset the vaccination cost. Incremental QALYs were at 0.0002802, among them 79.5% were from infants, and others from mothers. ICER was ¥9,149,317/US$83,176 per QALY gained. One-way sensitivity analyses identified that the incidence rate and costs per shot were the two main key variables to impact the ICER., Conclusion: We found that vaccinating pregnant women with aP-containing vaccine to prevent neonatal and unvaccinated infants from pertussis-associated disease in Japan can be cost-effective from societal perspective, under the WHO-suggested "cost-effective" criteria (1 to 3 times of GDP). Pertussis is expected be designated as a notifiable disease in 2018, re-analysis should be conducted when straightforward incidence data is available., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)