Public health and economic impact of switching from a trivalent to a quadrivalent inactivated influenza vaccine in Mexico

Comparisons in the Health and Economic Assessments of Using Quadrivalent Versus Trivalent Influenza Vaccines: A Systematic Literature Review

OBJECTIVES

Seasonal influenza vaccines protect against 3 (trivalent influenza vaccine [IIV3]) or 4 (quadrivalent influenza vaccine [IIV4]) viruses. IIV4 costs more than IIV3, and there is a trade-off between incremental cost and protection. This is especially the case in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) with limited budgets; previous reviews have not identified studies of IIV4-IIV3 comparisons in LMICs. We summarized the literature that compared health and economic outcomes of IIV4 and IIV3, focused on LMICs.

METHODS

We systematically searched 5 databases for articles published before October 6, 2021, that modeled health or economic effects of IIV4 versus IIV3. We abstracted data and compared findings among countries and models.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight studies fit our selection criteria; 10 included LMICs. Most studies (N = 31) reported that IIV4 was cost-saving or cost-effective compared with IIV3; we observed no difference in health or economic outcomes between LMICs and other countries. Based on cost differences of influenza vaccines, only one study compared coverage of IIV3 with IIV4 and reported that the maximum IIV4 price that would still yield greater public health impact than IIV3 was 13% to 22% higher than IIV3.

CONCLUSIONS

When vaccination coverage with IIV4 and IIV3 is the same, IIV4 tends to be not only more effective but more cost-effective than IIV3, even with relatively high price differences between vaccine types. Alternatively, where funding is limited as in most LMICs, higher vaccine coverage can be achieved with IIV3 than IIV4, which could result in more favorable health and economic outcomes.

Switching from trivalent to quadrivalent inactivated influenza vaccines in Uruguay: a cost-effectiveness analysis

We evaluated the cost-utility of replacing trivalent influenza vaccine (TIV) with quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV) in the current target populations in Uruguay. An existing decision-analytic static cost-effectiveness model was adapted for Uruguay. The population was stratified into age groups. Costs and outcomes were estimated for an average influenza season, based on observed rates from 2013 to 2019 inclusive. Introducing QIV instead of TIV in Uruguay would avoid around 740 additional influenza cases, 500 GP consultations, 15 hospitalizations, and three deaths, and save around 300 workdays, for the same vaccination coverage during an average influenza season. Most of the influenza-related consultations and hospitalizations would be avoided among children ≤4 and adults ≥65 years of age. Using QIV rather than TIV would cost an additional ~US$729,000, but this would be partially offset by savings in consultations and hospitalization costs. The incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained with QIV would be in the order of US$18,000 for both the payor and societal perspectives, for all age groups, and around US$12,000 for adults ≥65 years of age. The main drivers influencing the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio were the vaccine efficacy against the B strains and the percentage of match each season with the B strain included in TIV. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that switching to QIV would provide a favorable cost-utility ratio for 50% of simulations at a willingness-to-pay per QALY of US$20,000. A switch to QIV is expected to be cost-effective for the current target populations in Uruguay, particularly for older adults.

Public health and budget impacts of switching from a trivalent to a quadrivalent inactivated influenza vaccine in Paraguay

This study aimed to investigate the public health and economic benefit of using a quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV) instead of a trivalent influenza vaccine (TIV) in past seasons in Paraguay. The budget impact of switching from TIV to QIV in the Immunization Program was also evaluated. The adapted model includes two modules. The first compared retrospectively Health and Economic outcomes resulting from the use of QIV instead of TIV. The second forecast the spending and savings that would be associated with the switch from TIV to QIV. Our findings estimate that the switch from TIV to QIV during the seasons 2012 to 2017 could have prevented around 2,600 influenza cases, 67 hospitalizations and 10 deaths. An alternative scenario using standardized estimates of the burden of influenza showed that 234 influenza-related hospitalizations and 29 deaths could have been prevented. The estimated annual budget impact of a full switch from TIV to QIV was around USD1,6 million both from the payer and societal perspectives. Those results are mainly driven by vaccine prices and coverage rate. In sum, this manuscript describes how the use of QIV instead of TIV could have prevented influenza cases and subsequent complications that led to hospitalizations and deaths. This could have generated savings for the health system and society, offsetting part of the additional investment needed to switch from TIV to QIV.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Switching from Trivalent to Quadrivalent Seasonal Influenza Vaccine in Argentina

The burden of seasonal influenza disease in Argentina is considerable. The cost-effectiveness of trivalent (TIV) versus quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV) in Argentina was assessed. An age-stratified, static, decision-tree model compared the costs and benefits of vaccination for an average influenza season. Main outcomes included: numbers of influenza cases; general practitioner (GP) visits; complicated ambulatory cases; hospitalizations; deaths averted; and costs per quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained. Epidemiological data from Argentina for 2014–2019 were used to determine the proportion of A and B strain cases, and the frequency of mismatch between vaccine and circulating B strains. To manage uncertainty, one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. Switching from TIV to QIV would prevent 19,128 influenza cases, 16,164 GP visits, 2440 complicated ambulatory cases, 524 hospitalizations, and 82 deaths. Incremental cost–effectiveness ratios (ICERs) per QALY were 13,590 and 11,678 USD from the payer’s and societal perspectives, respectively. The greatest health benefits and direct medical cost savings would occur in ≥ 65-year-olds. One-way sensitivity analyses demonstrated the principal drivers of ICER to be vaccine acquisition costs, environmental B strain predominance, and B strain mismatch. Introducing QIV in Argentina would be beneficial and cost-effective relative to TIV, particularly in older adults.

Public Health and Economic Benefits of Influenza Vaccination of the Population Aged 50 to 59 Years without Risk Factors for Influenza Complications in Mexico: A Cross-Sectional Epidemiological Study

The Mexican influenza vaccination program does not include a recommendation for people aged 50–59 years without risk factors for influenza complications, and there are limited data regarding the cost-effectiveness of vaccinating this population. To explore the clinical and economic effects of including this population in the vaccination schedule, we performed a cross-sectional epidemiological study using records (2009–2018) from Mexico’s Influenza Surveillance System (SISVEFLU), death records (2010–2015) from the National Mortality Epidemiological and Statistical System, and discharge and hospitalization records (2010–2015) from the Automated Hospital Discharge System databases. A 1-year decision-analytic model was used to assess cost-effectiveness through a decision-tree based on data from SISVEFLU. The primary outcome was influenza cases avoided; with associated influenza-related events as secondary outcomes. Including the population aged 50–59 years without risk factors in Mexico’s influenza immunization program would have resulted in 199,500 fewer cases; 67,008 fewer outpatient consultations; 33,024 fewer emergency room consultations; 33,091 fewer hospitalizations; 12 fewer deaths. These reductions equate to a substantial public health benefit as well as an economic benefit; yielding net savings of 49.8 million US dollars over a typical influenza season. Expansion of the current Mexican vaccination schedule to include these people would be a cost-saving and dominant strategy.