![Sample our Medicine, Dentistry, Nursing & Allied Health journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5944/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Medicine-Dentistry-Nursing-Allied-Health.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
Background
Pneumococcal diseases have a clinical and economic impact on the population. Until this year, a 10-valent pneumococcal vaccine (PCV10) used to be applied in Colombia, which does not contain serotypes 19A, 3, and 6A, the most prevalent in the country. Therefore, we aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of the shift to the 13-valent pneumococcal vaccine (PCV13).
Research design and methods
A decision model was used for newborns in Colombia between 2022–2025 and adults over 65 years. The time horizon was life expectancy. Outcomes are Invasive Pneumococcal Diseases (IPD), Community-Acquired Pneumonia (CAP), Acute Otitis Media (AOM), their sequelae, Life Gained Years (LYGs), and herd effect in older adults.
Results
PCV10 covers 4.27% of serotypes in the country, while PCV13 covers 64.4%. PCV13 would avoid in children 796 cases of IPD, 19,365 of CAP, 1,399 deaths, and generate 44,204 additional LYGs, as well as 9,101 cases of AOM, 13 cases of neuromotor disability and 428 cochlear implants versus PCV10. In older adults, PCV13 would avoid 993 cases of IPD and 17,245 of CAP, versus PCV10. PCV13 saves $51.4 million. The decision model shows robustness in the sensitivity analysis.
Conclusion
PCV13 is a cost-saving strategy versus PCV10 to avoid pneumococcal diseases.
Declaration of interest
Jaime E. Ordóñez receives payment for consultancies and lectures by AbbVie (Argentina, Colombia, and Costa Rica), AstraZeneca (Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, Chile, Ecuador, Guatemala, Panama, Peru, the Dominican Republic, and USA), Bayer, Biogen Idec, Bristol Myers-Squibb, Colciencias, Colombian Society of Rheumatology, Corum, Glaukos, Grupo Biotoscana, ISPOR-Colombia, Merck, Metrosalud, Ministry of Health and Social Protection of Colombia, Ministry of National Education of Colombia, Novartis, Novo Nordisk (Colombia, Panama, Paraguay, Uruguay, and Russia), Pfizer (Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Panama, the Dominican Republic, and USA), Roche (Costa Rica, Panama, Guatemala), Secretariat of Health of Medellín, Secretariat of Social Welfare of Medellín, Stendhal, CES University, University of Antioquia, University of Medellín, University of the Valley of Guatemala. The authors have no other relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or material discussed in the manuscript apart from those disclosed.
Reviewer disclosures
Peer reviewers on this manuscript have received an honorarium for their review work. A reviewer on this manuscript has disclosed Advisory Board membership for PCV, GSK, Pfizer and MSD. Peer reviewers on this manuscript have no relevant financial or other relationships to disclose.
Author contributions
J Ordóñez and A Ordóñez have substantially contributed to the conception and design of the review paper and interpretation of the relevant literature, and we have been involved in writing the review paper or revising it for intellectual content.
J Ordóñez structured the economic model, searched for epidemiological data, the costs and effectiveness of the vaccines, analyzed the information, and wrote the paper. Angelica Ordóñez programmed the model and collaborated with the writing and revising the article.
J Ordóñez and A Ordóñez have agreed to submit this paper to Expert Review of Vaccines.
J Ordóñez and A Ordóñez have reviewed and agreed on all versions of the paper before submission, during revision, the final version accepted for publication, and any significant changes introduced at the proofing stage.
J Ordóñez and A Ordóñez agree to take responsibility and be accountable for the contents of the paper and to share the responsibility to resolve any questions raised about the accuracy or integrity of the published work.