RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Global impact and cost-effectiveness of one-dose versus two-dose human papillomavirus vaccination schedules: a comparative modelling analysis
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2021.02.08.21251186
DO 10.1101/2021.02.08.21251186
A1 Prem, Kiesha
A1 Choi, Yoon Hong
A1 Bénard, Élodie
A1 Burger, Emily A
A1 Hadley, Liza
A1 Laprise, Jean-François
A1 Regan, Mary Caroline
A1 Drolet, Mélanie
A1 Sy, Stephen
A1 Abbas, Kaja
A1 Portnoy, Allison
A1 Kim, Jane J
A1 Brisson, Marc
A1 Jit, Mark
YR 2022
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/08/16/2021.02.08.21251186.abstract
AB Background To eliminate cervical cancer as a public health problem, the World Health Organization currently recommends routine vaccination of adolescent girls with two doses of the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine before sexual initiation. However, many countries have yet to implement HPV vaccination because of financial or logistical barriers to delivering two doses outside the infant immunisation programme.Methods Using three independent HPV transmission models, we estimated the long-term health benefits and cost-effectiveness of one-dose versus two-dose HPV vaccination, in 188 countries, assuming that one dose of the vaccine gives either a shorter duration of full protection (20 or 30 years) or lifelong protection but lower vaccine efficacy (e.g., 80%) compared to two doses. We simulated routine vaccination with the 9-valent HPV vaccine in 10-year-old girls at 80% coverage for the years 2021–2120, with a one-year catch-up campaign of 11–14-year-old girls at 80% coverage in the first year of the programme.Results Over the years 2021–2120, one-dose vaccination at 80% coverage was projected to avert 112.9 million (range of medians: 75.8–176.2) and 148.0 million (111.6–187.6) cervical cancer cases assuming one dose of the vaccine confers 20 and 30 years of protection, respectively. Should one dose of the vaccine provide lifelong protection at 80% vaccine efficacy, 155.2 million (143.7–170.3) cervical cancer cases could be prevented. Around 65 to 889 additional girls would need to be vaccinated with the second dose to prevent one cervical cancer case, depending on the epidemiological profiles of the country. Across all income groups, the threshold cost for the second dose was low: from 0.85 (0.07–3.82) USD in low-income countries to 18.08 (−3.62–85.64) USD in high-income countries, assuming one-dose confers 30-year protection.Conclusions Results were consistent across the three independent models and suggest that one-dose vaccination has similar health benefits to a two-dose programme while simplifying vaccine delivery, reducing costs, and alleviating vaccine supply constraints. The second dose may be cost-effective if there is a shorter duration of protection from one dose, cheaper vaccine and vaccination delivery strategies, and high burden of cervical cancer.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementFinancial support for this project was provided by PATH on behalf of the Single-Dose HPV Vaccine Evaluation Consortium which includes Harvard University (Harvard), London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (LSHTM), PATH, US National Cancer Institute (NCI), University of British Columbia, Canada (UBC), CHU de Quebec-Universite Laval, Quebec (CHU), University of Witwatersrand Reproductive Health and HIV Institute (Wits RHI), US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and the World Health Organization (WHO). We thank members of the Single-Dose HPV Vaccine Evaluation Consortium for comments and helpful discussion on this work. The work was also part-funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (OPP1157270) and the Fonds de recherche du Quebec - Sante (FRQS) Research Scholars award (to MB), and a Foundation scheme grant from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR; grant number FDN-143283). This research was also enabled in part by support provided by Compute Canada (www.computecanada.ca). The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of any of their funders. 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:As no identifying information was provided, institutional review was not required for reanalysis.I 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 analysis codes are available at https://github.com/kieshaprem/hpv-1-dose.DALYDisability-adjusted life yearGDPGross domestic productHPVHuman papillomavirusLMICsLow- and middle-income countriesPHEPublic Health EnglandPRIMEPapillomavirus Rapid Interface for Modelling and EconomicsRRRisk ratiosUIUncertainty intervalsUKUnited KingdomUSUnited StatesUSDUnited States Dollar VE Vaccine efficacyWHOWorld Health Organization