RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 A Net Benefit Approach for the Optimal Allocation of a COVID-19 Vaccine
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2020.11.30.20240986
DO 10.1101/2020.11.30.20240986
A1 Erin Kirwin
A1 Ellen Rafferty
A1 Kate Harback
A1 Jeff Round
A1 Christopher McCabe
YR 2020
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/12/02/2020.11.30.20240986.abstract
AB Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a severe, novel virus that has spread globally. The implementation of a combination of public health interventions is required to reduce viral spread and avoid overwhelming acute care systems. Once available, an effective vaccination will further mitigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, decision makers will initially need to prioritise access to limited vaccine stockpiles as these will be insufficient to vaccine the whole population.The aim of this study is to identify optimal vaccine allocation strategies defined by age and risk target groups, coverage, effectiveness, and cost of vaccine, within a dynamic context where other public health responses and population behaviour change. In this study we use an epidemiological model of COVID-19 that has been enhanced to produce expected costs and Quality Adjusted Life Year results as well as total cases, hospitalisations, deaths, and net monetary benefit. We use the model to simulate hypothetical scenarios where vaccine is allocated beginning on October 15, 2020 with vaccine assumptions ranging from moderately optimistic to ‘worst-case scenario’. Net monetary benefit is used as the objective for optimisation.In a scenario with a sterilizing vaccine that is 80% effective, a stockpile sufficient for 40% population coverage, and prioritisation of those over the age of 60 at high risk of poor outcomes, active cases are reduced by 29.2% and net monetary benefit increased by $297 million dollars, relative to an identical scenario with no vaccine. The relative impact of prioritisation strategies varies greatly depending on concurrent public health interventions, for example, polices such as school closures and senior contact reductions have similar impacts on incremental net monetary benefit when there is no prioritisation given to any age or risk group (147 vs. 120 million, respectively), but when older and high risk groups are given priority, the benefit of school closures is much larger than reducing contacts for seniors (iNB 122 vs. 79 million, respectively). Results demonstrated that rank ordering of different prioritisation options varied greatly by prioritisation criteria, with different vaccine effectiveness and coverage, and by concurrently implemented policies.The results of this paper have three key policy implications: (i) that optimal vaccine allocation will depend on the public health policies, and human behaviours in place at the time of allocation; (ii) the outcomes of vaccine allocation policies can be greatly supported with interventions targeting contact reduction in critical sub-populations; and (iii) the identification of the optimal strategy depends on which outcomes are prioritised.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThe Institute of Health Economics is funded in part by Alberta Health.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:No IRB required.All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).Yes I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesAll data sources for the model are listed directly in the manuscript.