Avritscher Elenir B C, Cooksley Catherine D, Geraci Jane M, Bekele Benjamin N, Cantor Scott B, Rolston Kenneth V, Elting Linda S
Department of Biostatistics and Applied Mathematics, The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas 77030, USA.
Cancer. 2007 Jun 1;109(11):2357-64. doi: 10.1002/cncr.22670.
Despite recommendations to immunize all patients at an increased risk of influenza complications, the vaccine utilization among high-risk nonelderly adults remains low and its cost-effectiveness is unclear. In the current study, the authors analyzed the cost-effectiveness of influenza vaccination in working-age (ages 20-64 years) cancer patients.
The authors developed a decision-analytic model, from the societal perspective, using epidemiologic, vaccine effectiveness, resource utilization, cost, survival, and utility data from published sources, supplemented with data collected from the authors' own institutional accounting system. Two strategies were compared: influenza vaccination of working-age cancer patients and no vaccination. The base-case patient was assumed to be a 51-year-old cancer patient (the mean age for the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results [SEER] population of working-age patients within 5 years of cancer diagnosis).
The effectiveness of the influenza vaccine was 6.02 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) at a cost of $30.10. The effectiveness of the no vaccination strategy was 6.01 QALYs at a cost of $27.86. Compared with the no vaccination strategy, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of vaccinating working-age cancer patients would be $224.00 per QALY gained. Using the benchmark of $50,000 per QALY, the model was only sensitive to changes in cancer survival (threshold of 2.8 months).
The influenza vaccine is cost-effective for working-age cancer patients with a life expectancy of >or=3 months. All working-age cancer patients who are within 5 years of cancer diagnosis and have a life expectancy of at least 3 months should be vaccinated against influenza.
尽管有建议对所有流感并发症风险增加的患者进行免疫接种,但高危非老年成年人的疫苗利用率仍然较低,其成本效益尚不清楚。在当前研究中,作者分析了工作年龄(20 - 64岁)癌症患者接种流感疫苗的成本效益。
作者从社会角度开发了一个决策分析模型,使用已发表资料中的流行病学、疫苗效力、资源利用、成本、生存和效用数据,并补充了从作者自己机构的会计系统收集的数据。比较了两种策略:工作年龄癌症患者接种流感疫苗和不接种疫苗。基础病例假设为一名51岁的癌症患者(美国国家癌症研究所监测、流行病学和最终结果[SEER]项目中癌症诊断后5年内工作年龄患者的平均年龄)。
流感疫苗的效益为6.02个质量调整生命年(QALY),成本为30.10美元。不接种疫苗策略的效益为6.01个QALY,成本为27.86美元。与不接种疫苗策略相比,工作年龄癌症患者接种疫苗的增量成本效益比为每获得1个QALY 224.00美元。以每QALY 50,000美元为基准,该模型仅对癌症生存的变化敏感(阈值为2.8个月)。
对于预期寿命≥3个月的工作年龄癌症患者,流感疫苗具有成本效益。所有癌症诊断后5年内且预期寿命至少3个月的工作年龄癌症患者都应接种流感疫苗。