WEDNESDAY, Sept. 28 (HealthDay News) -- Due to different efficacy and protection offered by the bivalent and quadrivalent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines, the bivalent vaccine would need to be cheaper than the quadrivalent in order to be equally cost-effective, according to a study published online Sept. 27 in BMJ.
Mark Jit, from the Health Protection Agency in London, and colleagues compared the effects and cost-effectiveness of the bivalent and quadrivalent HPV vaccines in males and females aged 12 to 75 years. A previously used model of HPV transmission and disease was updated with recent evidence, and expanded to include differences in licensure indications, cross-protection against non-vaccine type, protection against disease related to HPV types 6 and 11, long-term immunogenicity, and end points prevented. The two vaccines' incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were computed, along with extra cost per dose of the quadrivalent vaccine to make it as cost-effective as the bivalent vaccine.
The investigators reported that, since the bivalent vaccine lacked protection against anogenital warts, in order to be equally cost-effective it would need to be cheaper than the quadrivalent vaccine. Assuming that one quality-adjusted life year is valued at £30,000, and both vaccines prevent all types of HPV-related cancers, the average price difference per dose would range from £19 to £35 in different situations of vaccine durations, cross-protection, and end points prevented.
"Even when possible longer duration of protection and better cross-protection against non-vaccine HPV types of the bivalent vaccine are taken into consideration, the quadrivalent vaccine is still more cost-effective if the two are equally priced," the authors write.
One of the study authors disclosed a financial tie to Sanofi Pasteur for work on quadrivalent L1 vaccine.
Abstract
Full Text
Editorial (subscription or payment may be required)
