TY - JOUR
T1 - Economic evaluation of meningococcal vaccines
T2 - considerations for the future
AU - Christensen, Hannah
AU - Al-Janabi, Hareth
AU - Levy, Pierre
AU - Postma, Maarten J.
AU - Bloom, David E.
AU - Landa, Paolo
AU - Damm, Oliver
AU - Salisbury, David M.
AU - Diez-Domingo, Javier
AU - Towse, Adrian K.
AU - Lorgelly, Paula K.
AU - Shah, Koonal K.
AU - Hernandez-Villafuerte, Karla
AU - Smith, Vinny
AU - Glennie, Linda
AU - Wright, Claire
AU - York, Laura
AU - Farkouh, Raymond
PY - 2020
Y1 - 2020
N2 - In 2018, a panel of health economics and meningococcal disease experts convened to review methodologies, frameworks, and decision-making processes for economic evaluations of vaccines, with a focus on evaluation of vaccines targeting invasive meningococcal disease (IMD). The panel discussed vaccine evaluation methods across countries; IMD prevention benefits that are well quantified using current methods, not well quantified, or missing in current cost-effectiveness methodologies; and development of recommendations for future evaluation methods. Consensus was reached on a number of points and further consideration was deemed necessary for some topics. Experts agreed that the unpredictability of IMD complicates an accurate evaluation of meningococcal vaccine benefits and that vaccine cost-effectiveness evaluations should encompass indirect benefits, both for meningococcal vaccines and vaccines in general. In addition, the panel agreed that transparency in the vaccine decision-making process is beneficial and should be implemented when possible. Further discussion is required to ascertain: how enhancing consistency of frameworks for evaluating outcomes of vaccine introduction can be improved; reviews of existing tools used to capture quality of life; how indirect costs are considered within models; and whether and how the weighting of quality-adjusted life-years (QALY), application of QALY adjustment factors, or use of altered cost-effectiveness thresholds should be used in the economic evaluation of vaccines.
AB - In 2018, a panel of health economics and meningococcal disease experts convened to review methodologies, frameworks, and decision-making processes for economic evaluations of vaccines, with a focus on evaluation of vaccines targeting invasive meningococcal disease (IMD). The panel discussed vaccine evaluation methods across countries; IMD prevention benefits that are well quantified using current methods, not well quantified, or missing in current cost-effectiveness methodologies; and development of recommendations for future evaluation methods. Consensus was reached on a number of points and further consideration was deemed necessary for some topics. Experts agreed that the unpredictability of IMD complicates an accurate evaluation of meningococcal vaccine benefits and that vaccine cost-effectiveness evaluations should encompass indirect benefits, both for meningococcal vaccines and vaccines in general. In addition, the panel agreed that transparency in the vaccine decision-making process is beneficial and should be implemented when possible. Further discussion is required to ascertain: how enhancing consistency of frameworks for evaluating outcomes of vaccine introduction can be improved; reviews of existing tools used to capture quality of life; how indirect costs are considered within models; and whether and how the weighting of quality-adjusted life-years (QALY), application of QALY adjustment factors, or use of altered cost-effectiveness thresholds should be used in the economic evaluation of vaccines.
KW - Cost-effectiveness
KW - Meningitis
KW - Meningococcal
KW - QALY
KW - Vaccine
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85075341423&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s10198-019-01129-z
DO - 10.1007/s10198-019-01129-z
M3 - Article
C2 - 31754924
AN - SCOPUS:85075341423
VL - 21
SP - 297
EP - 309
JO - The European Journal of Health Economics
JF - The European Journal of Health Economics
SN - 1618-7598
ER -