• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
First Do No Harm? Modeling Risks and Benefits of Challenge Trials for Hepatitis C Vaccine Development.首先不造成伤害?为丙型肝炎疫苗开发建模风险和获益挑战试验。
Clin Infect Dis. 2023 Aug 14;77(Suppl 3):S231-S237. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciad379.
2
Assessing the cost-utility of preferentially administering Heplisav-B vaccine to certain populations.评估优先为特定人群接种 Heplisav-B 疫苗的成本效用。
Vaccine. 2020 Dec 3;38(51):8206-8215. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2020.10.067. Epub 2020 Nov 5.
3
Cefiderocol for treating severe aerobic Gram-negative bacterial infections: technology evaluation to inform a novel subscription-style payment model.头孢地尔罗治疗严重需氧革兰氏阴性细菌感染:技术评估以提供一种新的订阅式支付模式。
Health Technol Assess. 2024 Jun;28(28):1-238. doi: 10.3310/YGWR4511.
4
A rapid and systematic review of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of paclitaxel, docetaxel, gemcitabine and vinorelbine in non-small-cell lung cancer.对紫杉醇、多西他赛、吉西他滨和长春瑞滨在非小细胞肺癌中的临床疗效和成本效益进行的快速系统评价。
Health Technol Assess. 2001;5(32):1-195. doi: 10.3310/hta5320.
5
Public health impact and cost-effectiveness of gonorrhoea vaccination: an integrated transmission-dynamic health-economic modelling analysis.淋病疫苗接种的公共卫生影响和成本效益:综合传播动力学健康经济建模分析。
Lancet Infect Dis. 2022 Jul;22(7):1030-1041. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(21)00744-1. Epub 2022 Apr 12.
6
Denosumab, raloxifene, romosozumab and teriparatide to prevent osteoporotic fragility fractures: a systematic review and economic evaluation.地舒单抗、雷洛昔芬、罗莫佐单抗和特立帕肽预防骨质疏松性脆性骨折:系统评价和经济评估。
Health Technol Assess. 2020 Jun;24(29):1-314. doi: 10.3310/hta24290.
7
Cost-effectiveness of syringe service programs, medications for opioid use disorder, and combination programs in hepatitis C harm reduction among opioid injection drug users: a public payer perspective using a decision tree.从公共支付方角度来看,使用决策树分析在减少阿片类药物注射吸毒者丙型肝炎危害方面,注射针具服务项目、阿片类药物使用障碍治疗药物和联合方案的成本效益。
J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2021 Feb;27(2):137-146. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2021.27.2.137.
8
Impact and cost-effectiveness of hepatitis B virus prophylaxis in pregnancy: a dynamic simulation modelling study.乙型肝炎病毒预防在妊娠中的影响和成本效益:一项动态模拟建模研究。
Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2023 Jul;8(7):635-645. doi: 10.1016/S2468-1253(23)00074-2. Epub 2023 May 5.
9
Cost-effectiveness of treatment for chronic hepatitis C infection in an evolving patient population.不断变化的患者群体中慢性丙型肝炎感染治疗的成本效益
JAMA. 2003 Jul 9;290(2):228-37. doi: 10.1001/jama.290.2.228.
10
Public health impact and cost-effectiveness of switching from bivalent to nonavalent vaccine for human papillomavirus in Norway: incorporating the full health impact of all HPV-related diseases.挪威人乳头瘤病毒疫苗从二价转换为九价的公共卫生影响及成本效益:纳入所有HPV相关疾病的全面健康影响
J Med Econ. 2023 Jan-Dec;26(1):1085-1098. doi: 10.1080/13696998.2023.2250194.

本文引用的文献

1
Efficacy of Approved Versus Unapproved Vaccines for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Infection in Randomized Blinded Clinical Trials.随机双盲临床试验中已批准与未批准的严重急性呼吸综合征冠状病毒2感染疫苗的疗效
Open Forum Infect Dis. 2022 Aug 22;9(9):ofac408. doi: 10.1093/ofid/ofac408. eCollection 2022 Sep.
2
Waning of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness: individual and public health risk.新冠病毒疫苗效力的减弱:个人与公共健康风险
Lancet. 2022 Mar 5;399(10328):887-889. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(22)00282-3. Epub 2022 Feb 23.
3
Global Trends and Regional Differences in Hepatitis C Virus Infection Prevalence and Implications for Prevention - Worldwide, 1990-2017.1990 - 2017年全球丙型肝炎病毒感染流行趋势、地区差异及其预防意义
China CDC Wkly. 2020 Jul 24;2(30):564-569. doi: 10.46234/ccdcw2020.151.
4
Controlled Human Infection Model - Fast Track to HCV Vaccine?人体感染控制模型——丙肝疫苗的快速通道?
N Engl J Med. 2021 Sep 23;385(13):1235-1240. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsb2109093.
5
Hepatitis C Virus Vaccine Research: Time to Put Up or Shut Up.丙型肝炎病毒疫苗研究:是时候拿出成果或闭嘴了。
Viruses. 2021 Aug 12;13(8):1596. doi: 10.3390/v13081596.
6
Are SARS-CoV-2 Human Challenge Trials Ethical?新型冠状病毒2型人体挑战试验是否符合伦理道德?
JAMA Intern Med. 2021 Aug 1;181(8):1031-1032. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2021.2614.
7
Randomized Trial of a Vaccine Regimen to Prevent Chronic HCV Infection.疫苗方案预防慢性 HCV 感染的随机试验。
N Engl J Med. 2021 Feb 11;384(6):541-549. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2023345.
8
Challenge Trials: What Are the Ethical Problems?挑战试验:存在哪些伦理问题?
J Med Philos. 2021 Jan 25;46(1):137-145. doi: 10.1093/jmp/jhaa028.
9
Opinion: For now, it's unethical to use human challenge studies for SARS-CoV-2 vaccine development.观点:目前,将人体挑战试验用于新冠病毒疫苗研发是不道德的。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2020 Nov 17;117(46):28538-28542. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2021189117. Epub 2020 Oct 29.
10
Judging the social value of controlled human infection studies.评价人为控制感染研究的社会价值。
Bioethics. 2020 Oct;34(8):749-763. doi: 10.1111/bioe.12794. Epub 2020 Aug 25.

首先不造成伤害?为丙型肝炎疫苗开发建模风险和获益挑战试验。

First Do No Harm? Modeling Risks and Benefits of Challenge Trials for Hepatitis C Vaccine Development.

机构信息

Department of Health Services, Policy, and Practice, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, Rhode Island, USA.

Department of Biostatistics, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, Rhode Island, USA.

出版信息

Clin Infect Dis. 2023 Aug 14;77(Suppl 3):S231-S237. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciad379.

DOI:10.1093/cid/ciad379
PMID:37579207
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10425130/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

In 2019, about 58 million individuals were chronically infected with hepatitis C virus. Some experts have proposed challenge trials for hepatitis C virus vaccine development.

METHODS

We modeled incremental infections averted through a challenge approach, under varying assumptions regarding trial duration, number of candidates, and vaccine uptake. We computed the benefit-risk ratio of incremental benefits to risks for challenge versus traditional approaches. We also benchmarked against monetary costs of achieving incremental benefits through treatment.

RESULTS

Our base case assumes 3 vaccine candidates, each with an 11% chance of success, corresponding to a 30% probability of successfully developing a vaccine. Given this probability, and assuming a 5-year difference in duration between challenge and traditional trials, a challenge approach would avert an expected 185 000 incremental infections with 20% steady-state uptake compared to a traditional approach and 832 000 with 90% uptake (quality-adjusted life-year benefit-risk ratio, 72 000 & 323 000). It would cost at least $92 million and $416 million, respectively, to obtain equivalent benefits through treatment. BRRs vary considerably across scenarios, depending on input assumptions.

CONCLUSIONS

Benefits of a challenge approach increase with more vaccine candidates, faster challenge trials, and greater uptake.

摘要

背景

2019 年,约有 5800 万人慢性感染丙型肝炎病毒。一些专家提出了丙型肝炎病毒疫苗开发的挑战试验。

方法

我们根据试验持续时间、候选人数和疫苗接种率的不同假设,对通过挑战方法避免的增量感染进行建模。我们计算了挑战方法相对于传统方法的增量收益与风险的获益风险比。我们还将其与通过治疗实现增量收益的货币成本进行了基准比较。

结果

我们的基本情况假设有 3 种候选疫苗,每种疫苗成功的概率为 11%,这对应着成功开发疫苗的概率为 30%。考虑到这种概率,并且假设挑战试验和传统试验的持续时间相差 5 年,与传统方法相比,挑战方法预计将避免 185000 例增量感染,在 20%的稳态接种率下,与传统方法相比,挑战方法将避免 832000 例增量感染(质量调整生命年的获益风险比为 72000 和 323000)。通过治疗获得同等收益至少需要花费 9200 万美元和 4.16 亿美元。BRR 在很大程度上取决于输入假设的不同而有所不同。

结论

挑战方法的收益随着候选疫苗数量的增加、挑战试验的加快和接种率的提高而增加。