Datta, S;
Pink, J;
Medley, GF;
Petrou, S;
Staniszewska, S;
Underwood, M;
Sonnenberg, P;
(2019)
Assessing the cost-effectiveness of HPV vaccination strategies for adolescent girls and boys in the UK.
BMC Infectious Diseases
, 19
(1)
, Article 552. 10.1186/s12879-019-4108-y.
Preview |
Text
s12879-019-4108-y.pdf - Published Version Download (864kB) | Preview |
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Human papillomavirus (HPV) is the most widespread sexually transmitted infection worldwide. It causes several health consequences, in particular accounting for the majority of cervical cancer cases in women. In the United Kingdom, a vaccination campaign targeting 12-year-old girls started in 2008; this campaign has been successful, with high uptake and reduced HPV prevalence observed in vaccinated cohorts. Recently, attention has focused on vaccinating both sexes, due to HPV-related diseases in males (particularly for high-risk men who have sex with men) and an equity argument over equalising levels of protection. METHODS: We constructed an epidemiological model for HPV transmission in the UK, accounting for nine of the most common HPV strains. We complemented this with an economic model to determine the likely health outcomes (healthcare costs and quality-adjusted life years) for individuals from the epidemiological model. We then tested vaccination with the three HPV vaccines currently available, vaccinating either girls alone or both sexes. For each strategy we calculated the threshold price per vaccine dose, i.e. the maximum amount paid for the added health benefits of vaccination to be worth the cost of each vaccine dose. We calculated results at 3.5% discounting, and also 1.5%, to consider the long-term health effects of HPV infection. RESULTS: At 3.5% discounting, continuing to vaccinate girls remains highly cost-effective compared to halting vaccination, with threshold dose prices of £56-£108. Vaccination of girls and boys is less cost-effective (£25-£53). Compared to vaccinating girls only, adding boys to the programme is not cost-effective, with negative threshold prices (-£6 to -£3) due to the costs of administration. All threshold prices increase when using 1.5% discounting, and adding boys becomes cost-effective (£36-£47). These results are contingent on the UK's high vaccine uptake; for lower uptake rates, adding boys (at the same uptake rate) becomes more cost effective. CONCLUSIONS: Vaccinating girls is extremely cost-effective compared with no vaccination, vaccinating both sexes is less so. Adding boys to an already successful girls-only programme has a low cost-effectiveness, as males have high protection through herd immunity. If future health effects are weighted more heavily, threshold prices increase and vaccination becomes cost-effective.
| Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Title: | Assessing the cost-effectiveness of HPV vaccination strategies for adolescent girls and boys in the UK |
| Location: | England |
| Open access status: | An open access version is available from UCL Discovery |
| DOI: | 10.1186/s12879-019-4108-y |
| Publisher version: | https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-019-4108-y |
| Language: | English |
| Additional information: | This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
| Keywords: | Epidemiology, HPV, Human papillomavirus, MCMC, Modelling, Sexually transmitted infection, Vaccination, cost-effectiveness |
| UCL classification: | UCL UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Population Health Sciences > Institute for Global Health UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Population Health Sciences > Institute for Global Health > Infection and Population Health |
| URI: | https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10077276 |
Archive Staff Only
 |
View Item |
