Dolk Christiaan, Eichner Martin, Welte Robert, Anastassopoulou Anastassia, Van Bellinghen Laure-Anne, Poulsen Nautrup Barbara, Van Vlaenderen Ilse, Schmidt-Ott Ruprecht, Schwehm Markus, Postma Maarten
PharmacoEpidemiology and PharmacoEconomics, University of Groningen, Antonius Deusinglaan 1, 9713 GZ, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Epimos GmbH, Uhlandstrasse 3, 72144, Dusslingen, Germany.
Pharmacoeconomics. 2016 Dec;34(12):1299-1308. doi: 10.1007/s40273-016-0443-7.
Seasonal influenza infection is primarily caused by circulation of two influenza A strain subtypes and strains from two B lineages that vary each year. Trivalent influenza vaccine (TIV) contains only one of the two B-lineage strains, resulting in mismatches between vaccine strains and the predominant circulating B lineage. Quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV) includes both B-lineage strains. The objective was to estimate the cost-utility of introducing QIV to replace TIV in Germany.
An individual-based dynamic transmission model (4Flu) using German data was used to provide realistic estimates of the impact of TIV and QIV on age-specific influenza infections. Cases were linked to health and economic outcomes to calculate the cost-utility of QIV versus TIV, from both a societal and payer perspective. Costs and effects were discounted at 3.0 and 1.5 % respectively, with 2014 as the base year. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted.
Using QIV instead of TIV resulted in additional quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and cost savings from the societal perspective (i.e. it represents the dominant strategy) and an incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) of €14,461 per QALY from a healthcare payer perspective. In all univariate analyses, QIV remained cost-effective (ICUR <€50,000). In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, QIV was cost-effective in >98 and >99 % of the simulations from the societal and payer perspective, respectively.
This analysis suggests that QIV in Germany would provide additional health gains while being cost-saving to society or costing €14,461 per QALY gained from the healthcare payer perspective, compared with TIV.
季节性流感感染主要由两种甲型流感病毒亚型毒株以及两种乙型流感病毒谱系毒株的传播引起,这些毒株每年都会有所不同。三价流感疫苗(TIV)仅包含两种乙型流感病毒谱系毒株中的一种,导致疫苗毒株与主要流行的乙型流感病毒谱系之间不匹配。四价流感疫苗(QIV)包含了两种乙型流感病毒谱系毒株。目的是评估在德国引入QIV以替代TIV的成本效益。
使用基于个体的动态传播模型(4Flu)和德国数据,对TIV和QIV对特定年龄组流感感染的影响进行现实估计。将病例与健康和经济结果相关联,从社会和支付方角度计算QIV相对于TIV的成本效益。成本和效果分别按3.0%和1.5%进行贴现,以2014年为基准年。进行了单因素和概率敏感性分析。
从社会角度来看,使用QIV而非TIV可带来额外的质量调整生命年(QALY)并节省成本(即它代表了主导策略),从医疗保健支付方角度来看,每获得一个QALY的增量成本效益比(ICUR)为14,461欧元。在所有单因素分析中,QIV仍然具有成本效益(ICUR<50,000欧元)。在概率敏感性分析中,从社会和支付方角度来看,QIV在超过98%和超过99%的模拟中具有成本效益。
该分析表明,与TIV相比,德国的QIV在为社会节省成本或从医疗保健支付方角度来看每获得一个QALY花费14,461欧元的同时,还能带来额外的健康收益。