Unlike most drugs, whose benefit is restricted to the individual who takes the drug, prophylactic vaccines have the potential for far-reaching effects that encompass health service utilisation, general health and wellbeing, cognitive development and, ultimately, economic productivity. The impact of immunisation is measured by evaluating effects directly on the vaccinated individual, indirectly on the unvaccinated community (herd protection), the epidemiology of the pathogen (such as changing circulating serotypes or prevention of epidemic cycles), and the additional benefits arising from improved health. Aside from protection of the individual, the broader success of immunisation is dependent on achieving a level of coverage sufficient to interrupt transmission of the pathogen. When evaluating the cost-effectiveness of vaccines, all of these potential benefits need to be accounted for. In many countries where immunisation programmes have been highly successful, the control of disease has meant that the benefits of immunisation have become less obvious. Once a well-known and much-feared disease appears to have disappeared, individuals, including healthcare professionals, no longer view ongoing prevention with the same sense of urgency. Reduced coverage is inevitably associated with resurgence in disease, with outbreaks potentially leading to significant morbidity and loss of life. Ensuring the continued success of immunisation programmes is the responsibility of all: individuals, healthcare professionals, government and industry.

The risk of Herpes Zoster (HZ) increases with age and various studies have also demonstrated an increasing HZ incidence globally. Simultaneously, the global trend of an aging population has placed a greater burden on the healthcare system. This study aims to estimate the potential burden of HZ over time accounting for the increasing trends of both HZ incidence and global aging. A recent systematic review on HZ incidence identified studies that evaluated the temporal effects of HZ incidence. Data from the identified studies were extracted to estimate the trend of HZ incidence in the ≥65-year-old age cohort. The incidence rates were estimated up to the year 2030 using two scenarios: a linear extrapolation and a last observation carried forward. Three countries were chosen to perform the analysis on: Australia, Japan and the United States. The incidence data from the three countries showed an average annual increase between 2.35 and 3.74% over the time period of the studies selected. The elderly population for the US, Japan and Australia are expected to increase by 55, 10 and 53% respectively by the year 2030 compared to the levels in 2015. Under the first scenario between 2001 and 2030, the number of annual incident cases of HZ in those aged ≥65 years is expected to increase by +343% (293,785 to 1,303,328), +176% (158,616 to 437,867) and +376% (18,105 to 86,268) in the US, Japan and Australia respectively while those for the second scenario are +150%, +83% and +223% respectively. In the US alone, the estimated annual cost of HZ-related cases in the ≥65 age cohort is approximately 4.74 Billion US$ in 2030. The increasing incidence of HZ coupled with the demographic trends (i.e., aging population and greater life expectancy) in many countries are likely to imply a rising economic burden of HZ on already constrained healthcare budgets.

More than 10 years after the authorisation of two rotavirus vaccines of demonstrated efficacy and with a strongly positive benefit-risk profile, uptake in Europe remains low. Only 13 countries in Europe provide a fully-funded rotavirus universal mass vaccination (UMV) programme, three provide a partially-funded programme, and one provides full funding for a reduced programme targeting at-risk infants. Around 40% of countries in Europe currently have no existing recommendations for rotavirus vaccine use in children from the national government. We provide an overview of the status of rotavirus vaccine recommendations across Europe and the factors impeding uptake. We consider the evidence for the benefits and risks of vaccination, and argue that cost-effectiveness and cost-saving benefits justify greater access to rotavirus vaccines for infants living in Europe. Lack of awareness of the direct and indirect burden caused by rotavirus disease, potential cost-saving from rotavirus vaccination including considerable benefits to children, families and society, and government/insurer cost constraints all contribute to complacency at different levels of health policy in individual countries. More than 10 years after their introduction, available data confirm the benefits and acceptable safety profile of infant rotavirus UMV programmes. Europe serves to gain considerably from rotavirus UMV in terms of reductions in healthcare resource utilization and related costs in both vaccinated subjects and their unvaccinated siblings through herd protection.

Background: This study aims to critically review available cost-effectiveness models for rotavirus vaccination, compare their designs using a standardized approach and compare similarities and differences in cost-effectiveness outcomes using a uniform set of input parameters. Methods: We identified various models used to estimate the cost-effectiveness of rotavirus vaccination. From these, results using a standardized dataset for four regions in the world could be obtained for three specific applications. Results: Despite differences in the approaches and individual constituting elements including costs, QALYs Quality Adjusted Life Years and deaths, cost-effectiveness results of the models were quite similar. Differences between the models on the individual components of cost-effectiveness could be related to some specific features of the respective models. Sensitivity analysis revealed that cost-effectiveness of rotavirus vaccination is highly sensitive to vaccine prices, rotavirus-associated mortality and discount rates, in particular that for QALYs. Conclusions: The comparative approach followed here is helpful in understanding the various models selected and will thus benefit (low-income) countries in designing their own cost-effectiveness analyses using new or adapted existing models. Potential users of the models in low and middle income countries need to consider results from existing studies and reviews. There will be a need for contextualization including the use of country specific data inputs. However, given that the underlying biological and epidemiological mechanisms do not change between countries, users are likely to be able to adapt existing model designs rather than developing completely new approaches. Also, the communication established between the individual researchers involved in the three models is helpful in the further development of these individual models. Therefore, we recommend that this kind of comparative study be extended to other areas of vaccination and even other infectious disease interventions.

Background: Rotavirus disease is associated with a substantial financial burden. Rotavirus gastroenteritis in children under 5 results in considerable medical resource utilization and burden for parents and society. Methods: For this study a modeling approach was employed to assess the financial burden of rotavirus disease in 4 European Union countries (Belgium, France, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom). Both direct medical costs to health authorities and indirect costs borne by society, parents, and employers were calculated. Results: The Purchasing-Power-Parity-adjusted direct cost expressed as a cost per exposure year, per child under 5, was highest in France (€12.26) and Belgium (€11.80) compared with the Netherlands (€8.13) and the United Kingdom (€7.67). The Purchasing-Power-Parity-adjusted indirect cost was estimated to be highest in the United Kingdom (€15.47) and the Netherlands (€15.33) compared with France (€11.31) and Belgium (€10.24). The sum of the direct medical and indirect costs of rotavirus disease management was estimated to be €23.11 ± €0.70/yr per child under 5 years for all 4 countries. Conclusions: In countries where more emphasis was placed on first-line intervention (United Kingdom, the Netherlands), direct costs were lower than in countries where access to second-line healthcare support was more open (Belgium, France). The data suggest that the greater burden of financial responsibility of managing rotavirus disease in children was borne by society (higher in the United Kingdom and the Netherlands than in France and Belgium). In Europe investment in rotavirus disease management is substantial, therefore the medical and economic benefits of a vaccination strategy should be considered to reduce the medical and financial burden associated with acute rotavirus gastroenteritis.