The Potential Cost Effectiveness of Different Dengue Vaccination Programmes in Malaysia: A Value-Based Pricing Assessment Using Dynamic Transmission Mathematical Modelling
- 471 Downloads
Dengue disease poses a great economic burden in Malaysia.
This study evaluated the cost effectiveness and impact of dengue vaccination in Malaysia from both provider and societal perspectives using a dynamic transmission mathematical model. The model incorporated sensitivity analyses, Malaysia-specific data, evidence from recent phase III studies and pooled efficacy and long-term safety data to refine the estimates from previous published studies. Unit costs were valued in $US, year 2013 values.
Six vaccination programmes employing a three-dose schedule were identified as the most likely programmes to be implemented. In all programmes, vaccination produced positive benefits expressed as reductions in dengue cases, dengue-related deaths, life-years lost, disability-adjusted life-years and dengue treatment costs. Instead of incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), we evaluated the cost effectiveness of the programmes by calculating the threshold prices for a highly cost-effective strategy [ICER <1 × gross domestic product (GDP) per capita] and a cost-effective strategy (ICER between 1 and 3 × GDP per capita). We found that vaccination may be cost effective up to a price of $US32.39 for programme 6 (highly cost effective up to $US14.15) and up to a price of $US100.59 for programme 1 (highly cost effective up to $US47.96) from the provider perspective. The cost-effectiveness analysis is sensitive to under-reporting, vaccine protection duration and model time horizon.
Routine vaccination for a population aged 13 years with a catch-up cohort aged 14–30 years in targeted hotspot areas appears to be the best-value strategy among those investigated. Dengue vaccination is a potentially good investment if the purchaser can negotiate a price at or below the cost-effective threshold price.
The authors thank the Director General of Health Malaysia for his permission to publish this article. We also acknowledge the technical input and constructive suggestions from the following experts: Dr. Chee Kheong Chong and Dr. Rose Nani Mudin from Disease Control Division, MOH Malaysia. We acknowledge Nicola Truss, inScience Communications, Springer Healthcare, who provided proofreading assistance. This assistance was funded by Sanofi Pasteur.
AAS and HYY designed the study. LC constructed the model. BSG, RJ and A-SHSS advised on the parameterization of the model construction. LS made substantial contribution in the acquisition of data. AAS and HYY assembled the data and did the statistical analysis. HYY wrote the first draft and all authors contributed to further drafts and approved the final manuscript.
Compliance with ethical standards
This study was supported by an agreement between Sanofi-Aventis Singapore and Universiti Sains Malaysia.
Conflict of interest
HYY and AAS have received research grants from Sanofi-Aventis Singapore Ptd. Lte. LC and LS are employees of Sanofi-Pasteur. BSG and RJ have no conflicts of interest. A-SHSS has received consultation honorarium from Sanofi-Aventis Singapore Ptd. Lte.
This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
- 2.World Health Organization. Dengue Situation Updates. http://www.wpro.who.int/emerging_diseases/DengueSituationUpdates/en/. Accessed 11 Oct 2016.
- 11.Shim E. Dengue dynamics and vaccine cost-effectiveness analysis in the Philippines. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2016;16:0194.Google Scholar
- 13.Amar-Singh HSS, Koh M-T, Tan KK, Chan LG, Zhou L, Bouckenooghe A, et al. Safety and immunogenicity of a tetravalent dengue vaccine in healthy children aged 2–11 years in Malaysia: a randomized, placebo-controlled, phase III study. Vaccine. 2013;31(49):5814–21. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2013.10.013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 15.Capeding MR, Tran NH, Hadinegoro SRS, Ismail HIHJM, Chotpitayasunondh T, Chua MN, et al. Clinical efficacy and safety of a novel tetravalent dengue vaccine in healthy children in Asia: a phase 3, randomised, observer-masked, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet. 2014;384(9951):1358–65. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)61060-6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 17.World Health Organization. Summary of the April 2016 meeting of the Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on immunization (SAGE). Geneva: WHO; 2016. p. 02016.Google Scholar
- 18.World Health Organization. Comparative modelling of dengue vaccine public health impact (CMDVI). Geneva: WHO; 2016.Google Scholar
- 20.UNICEF. State of the world’s children 2015 country statistical information. New York: UNICEF; 2013. http://www.unicef.org/infobycountry/malaysia_statistics.html. Accessed 30 July 2015.
- 21.World Health Organization. Managing vaccine wastage at country level: guidelines for programme managers. Geneva: WHO; 2003.Google Scholar
- 24.International Monetary Fund. World Economic Outlook Database. http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2014/02/weodata/index.aspx. Accessed 15 Dec 2014.
- 25.Malaysia Ministry of Health. Pharmacoeconomic guideline for Malaysia. Putrajaya: MoH; 2012.Google Scholar
- 26.Commission on Macroeconomics and Health. Macroeconomics and health: investing in health for economic development. Report of the Commission on Macroeconomics and Health. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2001.Google Scholar
- 27.Malaysia Ministry of Health. Age-specific annual dengue incidence in Selangor 2003–2013. Putrajaya: MoH; 2014.Google Scholar
- 30.World Health Organization. Global strategy for dengue prevention and control, 2012–2020 Report no. WHO/HTM/NTD/VEM/2012.5. Geneva: WHO; 2012.Google Scholar
- 37.Lim YW, Shafie AA, Chua GN, Hassali M. Determination of cost-effectiveness threshold for Malaysia. George Town: Universiti Sains Malaysia; 2015.Google Scholar
- 38.Department of Statistics Malaysia. Population distribution and basic demographic characteristic report 2010. Putrajaya: DoS; 2011.Google Scholar
- 40.World Health Organization. Choosing interventions that are cost effective (WHO-CHOICE). Geneva: WHO; 2011. http://www.who.int/choice/cost-effectiveness/inputs/health_service/en/.
- 41.Guidelines on the Implementation of the Minimum Wages Order 2012. In: Putrajaya, editor. Ministry of Human Resources. National Wages Consultative Council; 2012.Google Scholar
- 42.Ministry of Health Malaysia. Handbook of National Immunization Programme for Babies and Children (for Nurses). Putrajaya: Family Health Promotion Division; 2008.Google Scholar
- 44.Nealon JTA, Capeding MR, Tran NH, Hadinegoro SR, Chotpitayasunondh T, et al. Symptomatic dengue burden in 5 countries in Asia-Pacific: epidemiological evidence from a dengue vaccine trial. In: 5th Asian vaccine conference, Hanoi; 2015.Google Scholar