%0 Journal Article %A Keya Joshi %A Eva Rumpler %A Lee Kennedy-Shaffer %A Rafia Bosan %A Marc Lipsitch %T Comparative performance of between-population vaccine allocation strategies with applications for emerging pandemics %D 2022 %R 10.1101/2021.06.18.21259137 %J medRxiv %P 2021.06.18.21259137 %X Vaccine allocation decisions during emerging pandemics have proven to be challenging due to competing ethical, practical, and political considerations. Complicating decision making, policy makers need to consider vaccine allocation strategies that balance needs both within and between populations. Due to limited vaccine stockpiles, vaccine doses should be allocated in locations where their impact will be maximized. Using a susceptible-exposed-infectious-recovered (SEIR) model we examine optimal vaccine allocation decisions across two populations considering the impact of population size, underlying immunity, continuous vaccine roll-out, heterogeneous population risk structure, and differences in disease transmissibility. We find that in the context of an emerging pathogen where many epidemiologic characteristics might not be known, equal vaccine allocation between populations performs optimally in most scenarios. In the specific case considering heterogeneous population risk structure, first targeting individuals at higher risk of transmission or death due to infection leads to equal resource allocation across populations.Competing Interest StatementEva Rumpler, Lee Kennedy-Shaffer, and Rafia Bosan have no conflicts of interest to disclose. Keya Joshi reports a paid summer internship with Janssen Pharmaceuticals for work unrelated to COVID-19. Marc Lipsitch reports grants from CDC, grants from NIH, grants from UK NIHR, grants from Pfizer, personal fees from Merck, personal fees from Janssen, personal fees from Sanofi Pasteur, personal fees from Bristol Myers Squibb, personal fees from Peter Diamandis/Abundance Platinum, outside the submitted work; and Unpaid advice to One Day Sooner, Pfizer, Janssen, Astra-Zeneca, COVAX (United Biomedical).Funding StatementER, LKS and ML were supported by the Morris-Singer Fund. KJ was supported by NIH Training Grant 2T32AI007535. This work was supported in part by Award Number U01CA261277 from the US National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health. The content of this article is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the Morris-Singer Fund or the National Institutes of 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:NAI confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.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).YesI 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 relevant data and code will be available on GitHub. %U https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/07/13/2021.06.18.21259137.full.pdf