Suppr超能文献

巴西四价与三价流感疫苗的成本效益——不同静态模型类型结果的比较

Cost-utility of quadrivalent versus trivalent influenza vaccine in Brazil - comparison of outcomes from different static model types.

作者信息

Van Bellinghen Laure-Anne, Marijam Alen, Tannus Branco de Araujo Gabriela, Gomez Jorge, Van Vlaenderen Ilse

机构信息

CHESS in Health, Bonheiden, Belgium.

GSK, Wavre, Belgium.

出版信息

Braz J Infect Dis. 2018 Jan-Feb;22(1):1-10. doi: 10.1016/j.bjid.2017.11.004. Epub 2018 Jan 18.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Influenza burden in Brazil is considerable with 4.2-6.4 million cases in 2008 and influenza-like-illness responsible for 16.9% of hospitalizations. Cost-effectiveness of influenza vaccination may be assessed by different types of models, with limitations due to data availability, assumptions, and modelling approach.

OBJECTIVE

To understand the impact of model complexity, the cost-utility of quadrivalent versus trivalent influenza vaccines in Brazil was estimated using three distinct models: a 1-year decision tree population model with three age groups (FLOU); a more detailed 1-year population model with five age groups (FLORA); and a more complex lifetime multi-cohort Markov model with nine age groups (FLORENCE).

METHODS

Analysis 1 (impact of model structure) compared each model using the same data inputs (i.e., best available data for FLOU). Analysis 2 (impact of increasing granularity) compared each model populated with the best available data for that model.

RESULTS

Using the best data for each model, the discounted cost-utility ratio of quadrivalent versus trivalent influenza vaccine was R$20,428 with FLOU, R$22,768 with FLORA (versus R$20,428 in Analysis 1), and, R$19,257 with FLORENCE (versus R$22,490 in Analysis 1) using a lifetime horizon. Conceptual differences between FLORA and FLORENCE meant the same assumption regarding increased all-cause mortality in at-risk individuals had an opposite effect on the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio in Analysis 2 versus 1, and a proportionally higher number of vaccinated elderly in FLORENCE reduced this ratio in Analysis 2.

DISCUSSION

FLOU provided adequate cost-effectiveness estimates with data in broad age groups. FLORA increased insights (e.g., in healthy versus at-risk, paediatric, respiratory/non-respiratory complications). FLORENCE provided greater insights and precision (e.g., in elderly, costs and complications, lifetime cost-effectiveness).

CONCLUSION

All three models predicted a cost per quality-adjusted life year gained for quadrivalent versus trivalent influenza vaccine in the range of R$19,257 (FLORENCE) to R$22,768 (FLORA) with the best available data in Brazil (Appendix A).

摘要

背景

巴西的流感负担相当严重,2008年有420万至640万病例,流感样疾病导致16.9%的住院病例。流感疫苗接种的成本效益可以通过不同类型的模型进行评估,但由于数据可用性、假设和建模方法的限制,这些模型存在局限性。

目的

为了解模型复杂性的影响,使用三种不同的模型估计了巴西四价流感疫苗与三价流感疫苗的成本效益:一个具有三个年龄组的1年决策树人群模型(FLOU);一个更详细的具有五个年龄组的1年人群模型(FLORA);以及一个更复杂的具有九个年龄组的终生多队列马尔可夫模型(FLORENCE)。

方法

分析1(模型结构的影响)使用相同的数据输入(即FLOU的最佳可用数据)对每个模型进行比较。分析2(粒度增加的影响)使用每个模型的最佳可用数据对每个模型进行比较。

结果

使用每个模型的最佳数据,四价流感疫苗与三价流感疫苗的贴现成本效益比在FLOU模型中为20428雷亚尔,在FLORA模型中为22768雷亚尔(与分析1中的20428雷亚尔相比),在FLORENCE模型中为19257雷亚尔(与分析1中的22490雷亚尔相比),采用终生视角。FLORA和FLORENCE之间的概念差异意味着,关于高危个体全因死亡率增加的相同假设在分析2与分析1中对增量成本效益比产生了相反的影响,并且FLORENCE中接种疫苗的老年人比例相对较高,这在分析2中降低了该比例。

讨论

FLOU模型利用广泛年龄组的数据提供了足够的成本效益估计。FLORA模型增加了一些见解(例如,在健康人群与高危人群、儿科、呼吸/非呼吸并发症方面)。FLORENCE模型提供了更深入的见解和更高的精确度(例如,在老年人、成本和并发症、终生成本效益方面)。

结论

在巴西使用最佳可用数据时,所有三种模型预测四价流感疫苗与三价流感疫苗相比每获得一个质量调整生命年的成本在FLORENCE模型的19257雷亚尔至FLORA模型的22768雷亚尔之间(附录A)。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验