Comparison of two dose and three dose human papillomavirus vaccine schedules: Cost effectiveness analysis based on transmission model

BMJ (Online)

Volumn 350, Issue , 2015, Pages

  Jit, Mark ^a,b   Brisson, Marc ^c,d,e   Laprise, Jean Franҫois ^c   Choi, Yoon Hong ^a  

^a PUBLIC HEALTH ENGLAND   (United Kingdom)

^b LONDON SCHOOL OF HYGIENE AND TROPICAL MEDICINE   (United Kingdom)

^c Université Laval   (Canada)

^d IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^e UNIVERSITÉ LAVAL   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

WART VIRUS VACCINE;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CHILD; COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS; CONDYLOMA ACUMINATUM; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; CROSS PROTECTION; DISEASE ASSOCIATION; DRUG COST; DRUG DOSE REGIMEN; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE UTILIZATION; HUMAN; INFECTION PREVENTION; LIFESPAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; UNITED KINGDOM; VACCINATION; VIRUS TRANSMISSION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPLICATION; DOSE RESPONSE; ECONOMICS; EPIDEMIOLOGY; IMMUNIZATION; MIDDLE AGED; PAPILLOMAVIRUS INFECTIONS; PROCEDURES; STATISTICAL MODEL; TRANSMISSION; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; CHILD; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, DRUG; FEMALE; GREAT BRITAIN; HUMANS; IMMUNIZATION SCHEDULE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MODELS, ECONOMIC; PAPILLOMAVIRUS INFECTIONS; PAPILLOMAVIRUS VACCINES; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEARS; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS; VACCINATION;

EID: 84921326276     PISSN: 09598146     EISSN: 17561833     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.g7584     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Brisson M, Van de Velde N, Boily MC. Economic evaluation of human papillomavirus vaccination in developed countries. Public Health Genomics 2009;12:343-51.
2. Fesenfeld M, Hutubessy R, Jit M. Cost-effectiveness of human papillomavirus vaccination in low and middle income countries: a systematic review. Vaccine 2013;31:3786-804.
3. Agosti JM, Goldie SJ. Introducing HPV vaccine in developing countries - key challenges and issues. N Engl J Med 2007;356:1908-10.
4. World Health Organization. Summary of the SAGE April 2014 meeting. 2014. www.who.int/immunization/sage/meetings/2014/april/report-summary-april-2014/en.
5. Kreimer AR, Rodriguez AC, Hildesheim A, Herrero R, Porras C, Schiffman M, et al. Proof-of-principle evaluation of the efficacy of fewer than three doses of a bivalent HPV16/18 vaccine. J Natl Cancer Inst 2011;103:1444-51.
6. Romanowski B, Schwarz TF, Ferguson LM, Ferguson M, Peters K, Dionne M, et al. Immune response to the HPV-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine administered as a 2-dose or 3-dose schedule up to 4 years after vaccination: results from a randomized study. Hum Vaccin Immunother 2014;10:1155-65.
7. Dobson SR, McNeil S, Dionne M, Dawar M, Ogilvie G, Krajden M, et al. Immunogenicity of 2 doses of HPV vaccine in younger adolescents vs 3 doses in young women: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2013;309:1793-802.
8. Naud PS, Roteli-Martins CM, De Carvalho NS, Teixeira JC, de Borba PC, Sanchez N, et al. Sustained efficacy, immunogenicity, and safety of the HPV-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine: final analysis of a long-term follow-up study up to 9.4 years post-vaccination. Hum Vaccin Immunother 2014;10:2147-62.
9. Steben, M. Update on Gardasil(R) (quadrivalent human papillomavirus [HPV] 6/11/16/18 vaccine) clinical trial efficacy results. Presented at EUROGIN 2010, Monte Carlo, Monaco, 17-20 February 2010.
10. Stanley MA, Sudenga SL, Giuliano AR. Alternative dosage schedules with HPV virus-like particle vaccines. Expert Rev Vaccines 2014;13:1027-38.
11. Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation. 11/12 February 2014: meeting minutes and agenda. www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment-data/file/294834/JCVI.zip.
12. Comité sur l'immunisation du Québec. La vaccination des pré-adolescents contre les virus du papillome humain (VPH) au Québec : deux ou trois doses? 2013. www.inspq.qc.ca/pdf/publications/1683-VaccinPreAdoVPHQc-2ou3Doses.pdf.
13. Jit M, Choi YH, Laprise JF, Boily MC, Drolet M, Brisson M. Two-dose strategies for human papillomavirus vaccination: how well do they need to protect? Vaccine 2014;32:3237-42.
14. Jit M, Choi YH, Edmunds WJ. Economic evaluation of human papillomavirus vaccination in the United Kingdom. BMJ 2008;337:a769.
15. Jit M, Chapman R, Hughes O, Choi YH. Comparing bivalent and quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccines: economic evaluation based on transmission model. BMJ 2011;343:d5775.
16. Luesley D, Leeson S. Colposcopy and programme management: guidelines for the NHS Cervical Screening Programme. Second ed. NHS Cancer Screening Programmes, 2010 (available at www.cancerscreening.nhs.uk/cervical/publications/nhscsp20.pdf). (NHSCSP Publication No 20.)
17. Choi YH, Jit M, Gay N, Cox A, Garnett GP, Edmunds WJ. Transmission dynamic modelling of the impact of human papillomavirus vaccination in the United Kingdom. Vaccine 2010;28:4091-102.
18. Malagon T, Drolet M, Boily MC, Franco EL, Jit M, Brisson J, et al. Cross-protective efficacy of two human papillomavirus vaccines: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Infect Dis 2012;12:781-9.
19. British Medical Association, Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain. British national formulary. BMA, RPS, 2013. (No 65.)
20. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Guide to the methods of technology appraisal. NICE, 2013.
21. Van de Velde N, Boily MC, Drolet M, Franco EL, Mayrand MH, Kliewer EV, et al. Population-level impact of the bivalent, quadrivalent, and nonavalent human papillomavirus vaccines: a model-based analysis. J Natl Cancer Inst 2012;104:17121-23.
22. Brisson M, Laprise JF, Drolet M, Van De Velde N, Franco EL, Kliewer EV, et al. Comparative cost-effectiveness of the quadrivalent and bivalent human papillomavirus vaccines: a transmission dynamic modeling study. Vaccine 2013;31:3863-71.
23. Rossi PG, Vicentini M. New cervical cancer screening guidelines on both sides of the Atlantic. EMJ Oncol 2013;1:80-9.
24. Wise J. Pilot study will assess whether HPV test should replace smears to screen for cervical cancer. BMJ 2012;344:e3744.