Despite the current pneumococcal vaccination program in England for older adults and adults with underlying conditions, disease burden remains high. We evaluated cost-effectiveness of 20-valent pne...

Accurate and up-to-date figures of the cost of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) hospitalization are needed to understand the associated economic burden for public health decision makers. Recent e...

Currently, the 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV13) is administered under a 1+1 (1 primary dose) pediatric schedule in the United Kingdom (UK). Higher-valency PCVs, 15-valent PCV (PCV15), or 20-valent PCV (PCV20) might be considered to expand serotype coverage. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of PCV20 or PCV15 using either a 2+1 (2 primary doses) or 1+1 schedule for pediatric immunization in the UK. Using a dynamic transmission model, we simulated future disease incidence and costs under PCV13 1+1, PCV20 2+1, PCV20 1+1, PCV15 2+1, and PCV15 1+1 schedules from the UK National Health Service perspective. We prospectively estimated disease cases, direct costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Scenario analyses were performed to estimate the impact of model assumptions and parameter uncertainty. Over a five-year period, PCV20 2+1 averted the most disease cases and gained the most additional QALYs. PCV20 2+1 and 1+1 were dominant (cost-saving and more QALYs gained) compared with PCV15 (2+1 or 1+1) and PCV13 1+1. PCV20 2+1 was cost-effective (GBP 8110/QALY) compared with PCV20 1+1. PCV20 was found cost-saving compared with PCV13 1+1, and PCV20 2+1 was cost-effective compared with PCV20 1+1. Policymakers should consider the reduction in disease cases with PCV20, which may offset vaccination costs.

Background: Monovalent meningococcal C conjugate vaccine (MCCV) was introduced into the routine immunization program in many countries in Europe and worldwide following the emergence of meningococcal serogroup C (MenC) in the late 1990s. This systematic literature review summarizes the immediate and long-term impact and effectiveness of the different MCCV vaccination schedules and strategies employed. Methods: We conducted a systematic literature search for peer-reviewed, scientific publications in the databases of MEDLINE (via PubMed), LILACS, and SCIELO. We included studies from countries where MCCV have been introduced in routine vaccination programs and studies providing the impact and effectiveness of MCCV published between 1st January 2001 and 31st October 2017. Results: Forty studies were included in the review; 30 studies reporting impact and 17 reporting effectiveness covering 9 countries (UK, Spain, Italy, Canada, Brazil, Australia, Belgium, Germany and the Netherlands). Following MCCV introduction, significant and immediate reduction of MenC incidence was consistently observed in vaccine eligible ages in all countries with high vaccine uptake. The reduction in non-vaccine eligible ages (especially population > 65 years) through herd protection was generally observed 3–4 years following introduction. Vaccine effectiveness (VE) was mostly assessed through screening methods and ranged from 38 to 100%. The VE was generally highest during the first year after vaccination and waned over time. The VE was better maintained in countries employing catch-up campaigns in older children and adolescents, compared to routine infant only schedules. Conclusions: MCCV were highly effective, showing a substantial and sustained decrease in MenC invasive meningococcal disease. The epidemiology of meningococcal disease is in constant transition, and some vaccination programs now include adolescents and higher valent vaccines due to the recent increase in cases caused by serogroups not covered by MCCV. Continuous monitoring of meningococcal disease is essential to understand disease evolution in the setting of different vaccination programs.

Hospitals in England experience extremely high levels of bed occupancy in the winter. In these circumstances, vaccine-preventable hospitalisations due to seasonal respiratory infections have a high cost because of the missed opportunity to treat other patients on the waiting list. This paper estimates the number of hospitalisations that current vaccines against influenza, pneumococcal disease (PD), COVID-19, and a hypothetical Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV) vaccine, could prevent in the winter among older adults in England. Their costs were quantified using a conventional reference costing method and a novel opportunity costing approach considering the net monetary benefit (NMB) obtained from alternative uses of the hospital beds freed-up by vaccines. The influenza, PD and RSV vaccines could collectively prevent 72,813 bed days and save over £45 million in hospitalisation costs. The COVID-19 vaccine could prevent over 2 million bed days and save £1.3 billion. However, the value of hospital beds freed up by vaccination is likely to be 1.1–2 times larger (£48–93 million for flu, PD and RSV; £1.4–2.8 billion for COVID-19) when quantified in opportunity cost terms. Considering opportunity costs is key to ensuring maximum value is obtained from preventative budgets, as reference costing may significantly underestimate the true value of vaccines.

Despite use of 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPV23) in England, disease burden among at-risk adults remains high. We evaluated the public health and budgetary impact of 20-valent p...