Suppr超能文献

免疫接种,而非疫苗接种:用于预防婴儿 RSV 的单克隆抗体和美国儿童疫苗计划。

Immunization, not vaccination: monoclonal antibodies for infant RSV prevention and the US vaccines for children program.

机构信息

Data for Decisions, LLC, Waltham, MA, USA.

出版信息

J Med Econ. 2023 Jan-Dec;26(1):991-997. doi: 10.1080/13696998.2023.2242169.

Abstract

In the US, RSV imposes significant burdens on infants, households, and the health system. Yet the only licensed immunization is accessible to only certain risk groups comprising 2% of the infant population, leaving the remaining 98% unprotected. An effective immunization for all infants is a significant public health priority. One possible solution is the FDA-approved monoclonal antibody nirsevimab, which recent evidence suggests is safe and effective in preventing RSV in all infants, and which is currently being considered for inclusion in the pediatric immunization schedule and the federal Vaccines for Children (VFC) program. But the question arises whether immunization products like nirsevimab ought to be eligible for the VFC, which nominally and traditionally centers on vaccines providing immunity. Addressing this is urgent because VFC inclusion will be decided on imminently. I argue there are strong policy grounds, i.e., reasons grounded in the ultimate health system goals of maximizing population health or social welfare subject to resource constraints, not to exclude passive immunization from VFC eligibility. Active and passive immunizations both provide adaptive immunity and can therefore produce qualitatively similar effects on risks of infection, disease, and transmission; on disease severity and duration; and on health, welfare, and health resource use. The distinction between active and passive immunization does not intrinsically matter since what matters for the attainment of health system goals is the extent of immunity conferred, not whether immunity is active or passive. Nor can passivity be considered a useful proxy for conferring a lesser extent of immunity, since no such proxy is needed (existing valuation methods can cope with variations in product attributes), and it is a poor proxy (passive immunizations can be better for individuals with impaired immune systems and can have comparable effectiveness durations and economic value as vaccines).

摘要

在美国,RSV 给婴儿、家庭和医疗系统带来了巨大负担。然而,唯一获得许可的疫苗仅适用于某些风险群体,这些群体占婴儿人口的 2%,其余 98%的婴儿则没有得到保护。为所有婴儿接种有效的疫苗是一项重大的公共卫生优先事项。一种可能的解决方案是获得美国食品和药物管理局批准的单克隆抗体 nirsevimab,最近的证据表明,该抗体在预防所有婴儿 RSV 方面是安全有效的,目前正考虑将其纳入儿童免疫接种计划和联邦疫苗接种计划(VFC)。但是,问题是像 nirsevimab 这样的免疫产品是否应该有资格获得 VFC,VFC 名义上和传统上是以提供免疫的疫苗为中心。解决这个问题迫在眉睫,因为 VFC 的纳入将很快做出决定。我认为有强有力的政策依据,即在最大限度地提高人口健康或社会福利的最终医疗系统目标的基础上,根据资源限制来决定,不将被动免疫排除在 VFC 的资格之外。主动和被动免疫都提供适应性免疫,因此可以对感染、疾病和传播的风险、疾病的严重程度和持续时间以及健康、福利和卫生资源的使用产生类似的影响;主动和被动免疫之间的区别并不重要,因为对实现医疗系统目标而言重要的是所赋予的免疫程度,而不是免疫是主动的还是被动的。也不能将被动性视为赋予较小程度免疫的有用替代物,因为不需要这样的替代物(现有的估值方法可以处理产品属性的变化),而且它是一个较差的替代物(对于免疫系统受损的个体,被动免疫可能更好,并且可以具有与疫苗相当的有效性持续时间和经济价值)。

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