Lee Bruce Y, Bartsch Sarah M, Mvundura Mercy, Jarrahian Courtney, Zapf Kristina M, Marinan Kathleen, Wateska Angela R, Snyder Bill, Swaminathan Savitha, Jacoby Erica, Norman James J, Prausnitz Mark R, Zehrung Darin
Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 855 N Wolfe Street, Suite 600, Baltimore, MD 21205, United States.
Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 855 N Wolfe Street, Suite 600, Baltimore, MD 21205, United States.
Vaccine. 2015 Sep 8;33(37):4727-36. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2015.02.076. Epub 2015 Mar 13.
New vaccine technologies may improve the acceptability, delivery (potentially enabling self-administration), and product efficacy of influenza vaccines. One such technology is the microneedle patch (MNP), a skin delivery technology currently in development. Although MNPs hold promise in preclinical studies, their potential economic and epidemiologic impacts have not yet been evaluated.
We utilized a susceptible-exposed-infectious-recovered (SEIR) transmission model linked to an economic influenza outcomes model to assess the economic value of introducing the MNP into the current influenza vaccine market in the United States from the third-party payer and societal perspectives. We also explored the impact of different vaccination settings, self-administration, the MNP price, vaccine efficacy, compliance, and MNP market share. Outcomes included costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), cases, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs; cost/QALY).
With healthcare provider administration, MNP introduction would be cost-effective (ICERs ≤$23,347/QALY) at all MNP price points ($9.50-$30) and market shares (10-60%) assessed, except when compliance and efficacy were assumed to be the same as existing vaccines and the MNP occupied a 10% market share. If MNP self-administration were available (assuming the same efficacy as current technologies), MNP compliance or its efficacy would need to increase by ≥3% in order to be cost-effective (ICERs ≤$1401/QALY), assuming a 2% reduction in administration success with unsupervised self-administration. Under these conditions, MNP introduction would be cost-effective for all price points and market shares assessed.
When healthcare providers administered the MNP, its introduction would be cost-effective or dominant (i.e., less costly and more effective) in the majority of scenarios assessed. If self-administration were available, MNP introduction would be cost-effective if it increased compliance enough to overcome any decrease in self-administration success or if the MNP presentation afforded an increase in efficacy over current delivery methods for influenza vaccines.
新型疫苗技术可能会提高流感疫苗的可接受性、接种方式(可能实现自我接种)及产品效力。微针贴片(MNP)就是这样一种目前正在研发的皮肤给药技术。尽管微针贴片在临床前研究中前景良好,但其潜在的经济和流行病学影响尚未得到评估。
我们使用了一个与流感经济结果模型相关联的易感-暴露-感染-康复(SEIR)传播模型,从第三方支付者和社会角度评估将微针贴片引入美国当前流感疫苗市场的经济价值。我们还探讨了不同接种环境、自我接种、微针贴片价格、疫苗效力、依从性以及微针贴片市场份额的影响。结果包括成本、质量调整生命年(QALY)、病例数和增量成本效益比(ICER;成本/QALY)。
在医疗服务提供者接种的情况下,除了假设依从性和效力与现有疫苗相同且微针贴片占据10%的市场份额外,在评估的所有微针贴片价格点(9.50美元至30美元)和市场份额(10%至60%)下,引入微针贴片都具有成本效益(ICER≤23347美元/QALY)。如果可以进行微针贴片自我接种(假设效力与当前技术相同),假设无监督自我接种时接种成功率降低2%,那么微针贴片的依从性或效力需要提高≥3%才能具有成本效益(ICER≤1401美元/QALY)。在这些条件下,引入微针贴片在评估的所有价格点和市场份额下都将具有成本效益。
当由医疗服务提供者接种微针贴片时,在大多数评估的情况下,引入微针贴片将具有成本效益或占主导地位(即成本更低且效果更好)。如果可以进行自我接种,那么如果微针贴片的引入能够提高依从性以克服自我接种成功率的任何下降,或者如果微针贴片的剂型比当前流感疫苗的给药方式效力更高,那么引入微针贴片将具有成本效益。