Public health impact of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine (BNT162b2) in the first year of rollout in the United States

Economic Evaluation of COVID-19 Immunization Strategies: A Systematic Review and Narrative Synthesis

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to systematically assess global economic evaluation studies on COVID-19 vaccination, offer valuable insights for future economic evaluations, and assist policymakers in making evidence-based decisions regarding the implementation of COVID-19 vaccination.

METHODS

Searches were performed from January 2020 to September 2023 across seven English databases (PubMed, Web of Science, MEDLINE, EBSCO, KCL-Korean Journal Dataset, SciELO Citation Index, and Derwent Innovations Index) and three Chinese databases (Wanfang Data, China Science and Technology Journal, and CNKI). Rigorous inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied. Data were extracted from eligible studies using a standardized data collection form, with the reporting quality of these studies assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards 2022 (CHEERS 2022).

RESULTS

Of the 40 studies included in the final review, the overall reporting quality was good, evidenced by a mean score of 22.6 (ranging from 10.5 to 28). Given the significant heterogeneity in fundamental aspects among the studies reviewed, a narrative synthesis was conducted. Most of these studies adopted a health system or societal perspective. They predominantly utilized a composite model, merging dynamic and static methods, within short to medium-term time horizons to simulate various vaccination strategies. The research strategies varied among studies, investigating different doses, dosages, brands, mechanisms, efficacies, vaccination coverage rates, deployment speeds, and priority target groups. Three pivotal parameters notably influenced the evaluation results: the vaccine's effectiveness, its cost, and the basic reproductive number (R0). Despite variations in model structures, baseline parameters, and assumptions utilized, all studies identified a general trend that COVID-19 vaccination is cost-effective compared to no vaccination or intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

The current review confirmed that COVID-19 vaccination is a cost-effective alternative in preventing and controlling COVID-19. In addition, it highlights the profound impact of variables such as dose size, target population, vaccine efficacy, speed of vaccination, and diversity of vaccine brands and mechanisms on cost effectiveness, and also proposes practical and effective strategies for improving COVID-19 vaccination campaigns from the perspective of economic evaluation.

Predictive models for health outcomes due to SARS-CoV-2, including the effect of vaccination: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The interaction between modelers and policymakers is becoming more common due to the increase in computing speed seen in recent decades. The recent pandemic caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus was no exception. Thus, this study aims to identify and assess epidemiological mathematical models of SARS-CoV-2 applied to real-world data, including immunization for coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19).

METHODOLOGY

PubMed, JSTOR, medRxiv, LILACS, EconLit, and other databases were searched for studies employing epidemiological mathematical models of SARS-CoV-2 applied to real-world data. We summarized the information qualitatively, and each article included was assessed for bias risk using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) and PROBAST checklist tool. The PROSPERO registration number is CRD42022344542.

FINDINGS

In total, 5646 articles were retrieved, of which 411 were included. Most of the information was published in 2021. The countries with the highest number of studies were the United States, Canada, China, and the United Kingdom; no studies were found in low-income countries. The SEIR model (susceptible, exposed, infectious, and recovered) was the most frequently used approach, followed by agent-based modeling. Moreover, the most commonly used software were R, Matlab, and Python, with the most recurring health outcomes being death and recovery. According to the JBI assessment, 61.4% of articles were considered to have a low risk of bias.

INTERPRETATION

The utilization of mathematical models increased following the onset of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Stakeholders have begun to incorporate these analytical tools more extensively into public policy, enabling the construction of various scenarios for public health. This contribution adds value to informed decision-making. Therefore, understanding their advancements, strengths, and limitations is essential.

Modelling the Potential Public Health Impact of Different COVID-19 Vaccination Strategies with an Adapted Vaccine in Singapore

BACKGROUND

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) causing COVID-19 has been a dynamically changing virus, requiring the development of adapted vaccines. This study estimated the potential public health impact alternative vaccination strategies for COVID-19 in Singapore.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

The outcomes of alternative vaccination strategies with a future adapted vaccine were estimated using a combined Markov decision tree model. The population was stratified by high- and standard-risk. Using age-specific inputs informed by local surveillance data and published sources, the model estimated health (case numbers, hospitalizations, and deaths) and economic (medical costs and productivity losses) outcomes in different age and risk subpopulations.

RESULTS

Booster vaccination in only the elderly and high-risk subpopulation was estimated to avert 278,614 cases 21,558 hospitalizations, 239 deaths, Singapore dollars (SGD) 277 million in direct medical costs, and SGD 684 million in indirect medical costs. These benefits increased as vaccination was expanded to other subpopulations. Increasing the booster vaccination coverage to 75% of the standard-risk population averted more deaths (3%), hospitalizations (29%), infections (145%), direct costs (90%), and indirect costs (192%) compared to the base case.

CONCLUSIONS

Broader vaccination strategies using an adapted booster vaccine could have substantial public health and economic impact in Singapore.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of COVID-19 booster vaccination with BNT162b2 in Japan

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate the public health and economic impact of the COVID-19 booster vaccination with BNT162b2 in Japan during an Omicron-dominant period from early 2022.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

A combined cohort Markov decision tree model estimated the cost-effectiveness of annual or biannual booster vaccination strategies compared to no booster vaccination for those aged 65 years and above, and those aged 60-64 years at high risk as the base case. The societal perspective was primarily considered. We also examined other target populations with different age and risk groups. Sensitivity and scenario analyses with alternative inputs were performed.

RESULTS

Annual and biannual vaccination strategies were dominant from the societal perspective in the base case. Incremental Cost Effectiveness Ratios (ICERs) from the payer perspective were JPY 1,752,499/Quality Adjusted Life Year (QALY) for annual vaccination and JPY 2,831,878/QALY for biannual vaccination, both less than the threshold value in Japan (JPY 5 million/QALY). The results were consistent even when examining other target age and risk groups. All sensitivity and scenario analyses indicated that ICERs were below JPY 5 million/QALY.

CONCLUSIONS

Booster vaccination with the COVID-19 vaccine BNT162b2 is a dominant strategy and beneficial to public health in Japan.

COVID-19 vaccines should be evaluated from the societal perspective

The COVID-19 pandemic demonstrates the importance of valuing vaccines from a broad societal perspective (SP), as opposed to a narrower health-payer perspective (HPP). COVID-19's catastrophic global impacts extend not only to its health-related effects, but also to the profound macroeconomic losses caused by lockdowns required for disease control, leading to the worst global economic crisis in a century. COVID-19 vaccination (CV) has been the central policy tool for resolving this economic crisis, and it has been hypothesized that this macroeconomic benefit alone justifies the cost of CV many times over. Yet HPP-based vaccine valuations are wholly insensitive to this enormous benefit, not allowing it to influence the allocation of given health budgets nor the determination of the magnitudes of such budgets, thereby risking inadequate societal spending on CV. HPP allocates given health budgets to maximize only health, giving no weight to macroeconomic outcomes, causing allocative inefficiency by not allowing welfare-improving trade-offs of health for wealth. HPP assumes health budgets are optimal, not scrutinizing whether their scale adequately reflects the macroeconomic benefits of health spending, thereby risking productive inefficiency by foregoing health spending increases such as on CV that could raise both population-level health and wealth. These allocative and productive inefficiencies in turn distort for-profit R&D incentives, risking dynamic inefficiency. And since the socio-economic and health burdens of COVID-19 are disproportionately borne by the worse off, HPP's failure to promote optimal levels of societal investment in CV may disproportionately burden the worse off as well, exacerbating inequality. Vaccine valuations from the societal perspective allow the allocation and determination of health budgets to reflect macroeconomic and distributional values, thereby promoting allocative, productive, and dynamic efficiency, as well as equity. These considerations of efficiency and equity support evaluating CV, and to ensure a level playing field, all vaccines, from a societal perspective.

Public health impact and economic value of booster vaccination with Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, bivalent (original and omicron BA.4/BA.5) in the United States

OBJECTIVE

To assess the public health impact and economic value of booster vaccination with the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine, Bivalent in the United States.

METHODS

A combined cohort Markov decision tree model estimated the cost-effectiveness and budget impact of booster vaccination compared to no booster vaccination in individuals aged ≥5 years. Analyses prospectively assessed three scenarios (base case, low, high) defined based upon the emergence (or not) of subvariants, using list prices. Age-stratified parameters were informed by literature. The cost-effectiveness analysis estimated cases, hospitalizations and deaths averted, Life Years (LYs) and Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) gained, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), the net monetary benefit (NMB), and the Return on Investment (ROI). The budget impact analyses used the perspective of a hypothetical 1-million-member plan. Sensitivity analyses explored parameter uncertainty. Conservatively, indirect effects and broad societal benefits were not considered.

RESULTS

The base case predicted that, compared to no booster vaccination, the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine, Bivalent could result in ∼3.7 million fewer symptomatic cases, 162 thousand fewer hospitalizations, 45 thousand fewer deaths, 373 thousand fewer discounted QALYs lost, and was cost-saving. Using a conservative value of $50,000 for 1 LY, every $1 invested yielded estimated $4.67 benefits. Unit costs, health outcomes and effectiveness had the greatest impact on results. At $50,000 per QALY gained, the booster generated a 34.2 billion NMB and probabilistic sensitivity analyses indicated a 92% chance of being cost-saving and 98% of being cost-effective. The bivalent was cost-saving or highly cost-effective in high and low scenarios. In a hypothetical 1-million-member health plan population, the vaccine was predicted to be a budget-efficient solution for payers.

CONCLUSIONS

Booster vaccination with the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine, Bivalent for the US population aged ≥5 years could generate notable public health impact and be cost-saving based on the findings of our base case analyses.

The Race to Develop the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine: From the Pharmaceutical Scientists' Perspective

At the outset of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, it was clear that a vaccine would be crucial for global health efforts. The Pfizer and BioNTech teams came together in a race against the virus, working to design, test, manufacture, and distribute a safe and efficacious vaccine in record time for people around the world. Here, we provide backstory commentary from the pharmaceutical scientist perspective on the challenges and solutions encountered in the development of the Pfizer-BioNTech mRNA COVID-19 vaccine (BNT162b2; b2; Comirnaty®; tozinameran). We discuss the foundational science that led to the decision to use an mRNA-based approach. We also describe key challenges in the identification of an optimal vaccine candidate and testing in clinical trials, the continuous efforts to improve the vaccine formulation in response to changing global health priorities and facilitate vaccine accessibility, and how vast quantities of vaccine doses were manufactured and safely delivered to every corner of the globe, all without compromising quality, science, and safety. The key to successfully delivering a safe and efficacious vaccine within nine months was a result of extraordinary, real-time, parallel effort and across-the-board collaboration between stakeholders on a global scale.

Modelling the potential public health impact of different vaccination strategies with an omicron-adapted bivalent vaccine in Thailand

BACKGROUND

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) causing COVID-19 has continuously evolved, requiring the development of adapted vaccines. This study estimated the impact of the introduction and increased coverage of an Omicron-adapted bivalent booster vaccine in Thailand.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

The outcomes of booster vaccination with an Omicron-adapted bivalent vaccine versus no booster vaccination were estimated using a combined cohort Markov decision tree model. The population was stratified into high- and standard-risk subpopulations. Using age-specific inputs informed by published sources, the model estimated health (case numbers, hospitalizations, and deaths) and economic (medical costs and productivity losses) outcomes in different age and risk subpopulations.

RESULTS

Booster vaccination in only the elderly and high-risk subpopulation was estimated to avert 97,596 cases 36,578 hospitalizations, 903 deaths, THB 3,119 million in direct medical costs, and THB 10,589 million in indirect medical costs. These benefits increased as vaccination was expanded to other subpopulations. Increasing the booster vaccination coverage to 75% of the standard-risk population averted more deaths (95%), hospitalizations (512%), infections (782%), direct costs (550%), and indirect costs (687%) compared to the base case.

CONCLUSIONS

Broader vaccination with an Omicron-adapted bivalent booster vaccine could have significant public health and economic benefits in Thailand.

Estimated global public health and economic impact of COVID-19 vaccines in the pre-omicron era using real-world empirical data

BACKGROUND

Limited data are available describing the global impact of COVID-19 vaccines. This study estimated the global public health and economic impact of COVID-19 vaccines before the emergence of the Omicron variant.

METHODS

A static model covering 215 countries/territories compared the direct effects of COVID-19 vaccination to no vaccination during 13 December 2020-30 September 2021. After adjusting for underreporting of cases and deaths, base case analyses estimated total cases and deaths averted, and direct outpatient and productivity costs saved through averted health outcomes. Sensitivity analyses applied alternative model assumptions.

RESULTS

COVID-19 vaccines prevented an estimated median (IQR) of 151.7 (133.7-226.1) million cases and 620.5 (411.1-698.1) thousand deaths globally through September 2021. In sensitivity analysis applying an alternative underreporting assumption, median deaths averted were 2.1 million. Estimated direct outpatient cost savings were $21.2 ($18.9-30.9) billion and indirect savings of avoided productivity loss were $135.1 ($121.1-206.4) billion, yielding a total cost savings of $155 billion globally through averted infections.

CONCLUSIONS

Using a conservative modeling approach that considered direct effects only, we estimated that COVID-19 vaccines have averted millions of infections and deaths, generating billions of cost savings worldwide, which underscore the continued importance of vaccination in public health response to COVID-19.

Modeling the potential public health impact of different vaccination strategies with an omicron-adapted bivalent vaccine in Malaysia

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) case numbers have increased following the emergence of the Omicron variant. This study estimated the impact of introducing and increasing the coverage of an Omicron-adapted bivalent booster vaccine in Malaysia.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

A combined cohort Markov decision tree model was used to compare booster vaccination with an Omicron-adapted bivalent COVID-19 vaccine versus no booster vaccination in Malaysia. The model utilized age-specific data from January 2021 to March 2022 derived from published sources. The outcomes of interest included case numbers, hospitalizations, deaths, medical costs, and productivity losses. The population was stratified into high-risk and standard-risk subpopulations, and the study evaluated the benefits of increased coverage in different age and risk groups.

RESULTS

Vaccinating only high-risk individuals and those aged ≥ 65 years was estimated to avert 274,313 cases, 33229 hospitalizations, 2,434 deaths, Malaysian ringgit (MYR) 576 million in direct medical costs, and MYR 579 million in indirect costs. Expanding vaccination coverage in the standard-risk population to 75% was estimated to avert more deaths (31%), hospitalizations (155%), infections (206%), direct costs (206%), and indirect costs (281%).

CONCLUSIONS

These findings support broader population Omicron-adapted bivalent booster vaccination in Malaysia with potential for significant health and economic gains.