TY - JOUR
T1 - Public health impact and cost-effectiveness of the RTS,S/AS01 malaria vaccine
T2 - A systematic comparison of predictions from four mathematical models
AU - Penny, Melissa A.
AU - Verity, Robert
AU - Bever, Caitlin A.
AU - Sauboin, Christophe
AU - Galactionova, Katya
AU - Flasche, Stefan
AU - White, Michael T.
AU - Wenger, Edward A.
AU - Van De Velde, Nicolas
AU - Pemberton-Ross, Peter
AU - Griffin, Jamie T.
AU - Smith, Thomas A.
AU - Eckhoff, Philip A.
AU - Muhib, Farzana
AU - Jit, Mark
AU - Ghani, Azra C.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2016 Penny et al. Open Access article distributed under the terms of CC BY.
PY - 2016/1/23
Y1 - 2016/1/23
N2 - Summary Background The phase 3 trial of the RTS,S/AS01 malaria vaccine candidate showed modest efficacy of the vaccine against Plasmodium falciparum malaria, but was not powered to assess mortality endpoints. Impact projections and cost-effectiveness estimates for longer timeframes than the trial follow-up and across a range of settings are needed to inform policy recommendations. We aimed to assess the public health impact and cost-effectiveness of routine use of the RTS,S/AS01 vaccine in African settings. Methods We compared four malaria transmission models and their predictions to assess vaccine cost-effectiveness and impact. We used trial data for follow-up of 32 months or longer to parameterise vaccine protection in the group aged 5-17 months. Estimates of cases, deaths, and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) averted were calculated over a 15 year time horizon for a range of levels of Plasmodium falciparum parasite prevalence in 2-10 year olds (PfPR2-10; range 3-65%). We considered two vaccine schedules: three doses at ages 6, 7·5, and 9 months (three-dose schedule, 90% coverage) and including a fourth dose at age 27 months (four-dose schedule, 72% coverage). We estimated cost-effectiveness in the presence of existing malaria interventions for vaccine prices of US$2-10 per dose. Findings In regions with a PfPR2-10 of 10-65%, RTS,S/AS01 is predicted to avert a median of 93940 (range 20490-126540) clinical cases and 394 (127-708) deaths for the three-dose schedule, or 116480 (31450-160410) clinical cases and 484 (189-859) deaths for the four-dose schedule, per 100000 fully vaccinated children. A positive impact is also predicted at a PfPR2-10 of 5-10%, but there is little impact at a prevalence of lower than 3%. At $5 per dose and a PfPR2-10 of 10-65%, we estimated a median incremental cost-effectiveness ratio compared with current interventions of $30 (range 18-211) per clinical case averted and $80 (44-279) per DALY averted for the three-dose schedule, and of $25 (16-222) and $87 (48-244), respectively, for the four-dose schedule. Higher ICERs were estimated at low PfPR2-10 levels. Interpretation We predict a significant public health impact and high cost-effectiveness of the RTS,S/AS01 vaccine across a wide range of settings. Decisions about implementation will need to consider levels of malaria burden, the cost-effectiveness and coverage of other malaria interventions, health priorities, financing, and the capacity of the health system to deliver the vaccine. Funding PATH Malaria Vaccine Initiative; Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation; Global Good Fund; Medical Research Council; UK Department for International Development; GAVI, the Vaccine Alliance; WHO.
AB - Summary Background The phase 3 trial of the RTS,S/AS01 malaria vaccine candidate showed modest efficacy of the vaccine against Plasmodium falciparum malaria, but was not powered to assess mortality endpoints. Impact projections and cost-effectiveness estimates for longer timeframes than the trial follow-up and across a range of settings are needed to inform policy recommendations. We aimed to assess the public health impact and cost-effectiveness of routine use of the RTS,S/AS01 vaccine in African settings. Methods We compared four malaria transmission models and their predictions to assess vaccine cost-effectiveness and impact. We used trial data for follow-up of 32 months or longer to parameterise vaccine protection in the group aged 5-17 months. Estimates of cases, deaths, and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) averted were calculated over a 15 year time horizon for a range of levels of Plasmodium falciparum parasite prevalence in 2-10 year olds (PfPR2-10; range 3-65%). We considered two vaccine schedules: three doses at ages 6, 7·5, and 9 months (three-dose schedule, 90% coverage) and including a fourth dose at age 27 months (four-dose schedule, 72% coverage). We estimated cost-effectiveness in the presence of existing malaria interventions for vaccine prices of US$2-10 per dose. Findings In regions with a PfPR2-10 of 10-65%, RTS,S/AS01 is predicted to avert a median of 93940 (range 20490-126540) clinical cases and 394 (127-708) deaths for the three-dose schedule, or 116480 (31450-160410) clinical cases and 484 (189-859) deaths for the four-dose schedule, per 100000 fully vaccinated children. A positive impact is also predicted at a PfPR2-10 of 5-10%, but there is little impact at a prevalence of lower than 3%. At $5 per dose and a PfPR2-10 of 10-65%, we estimated a median incremental cost-effectiveness ratio compared with current interventions of $30 (range 18-211) per clinical case averted and $80 (44-279) per DALY averted for the three-dose schedule, and of $25 (16-222) and $87 (48-244), respectively, for the four-dose schedule. Higher ICERs were estimated at low PfPR2-10 levels. Interpretation We predict a significant public health impact and high cost-effectiveness of the RTS,S/AS01 vaccine across a wide range of settings. Decisions about implementation will need to consider levels of malaria burden, the cost-effectiveness and coverage of other malaria interventions, health priorities, financing, and the capacity of the health system to deliver the vaccine. Funding PATH Malaria Vaccine Initiative; Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation; Global Good Fund; Medical Research Council; UK Department for International Development; GAVI, the Vaccine Alliance; WHO.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84959529896&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84959529896&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00725-4
DO - 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00725-4
M3 - Article
C2 - 26549466
AN - SCOPUS:84959529896
SN - 0140-6736
VL - 387
SP - 367
EP - 375
JO - The Lancet
JF - The Lancet
IS - 10016
ER -