The patent buyout price for human papilloma virus (HPV) vaccine and the ratio of R&D costs to the patent value

Adjuvant Human Papillomavirus Vaccination After Excisional Procedure for Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

OBJECTIVE

To examine the cost effectiveness of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination after excisional procedure compared with no vaccination.

METHODS

We constructed a decision-analytic model (TreeAge Pro 2021) to compare outcomes between patients who underwent an excisional procedure followed by nonavalent HPV vaccination to those who underwent an excisional procedure without vaccination. Our theoretical cohort contained 250,000 patients, the approximate number undergoing excisional procedures annually in the United States. Our outcomes were costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), recurrence events, number of surveillance Pap tests with co-testing, number of colposcopies, and second excisional procedures. Probabilities of recurrence were based on a recently published meta-analysis. All values were derived from the literature, and QALYs were discounted at a rate of 3%. Outcomes were applied for 4 years after the initial excisional procedure. Our cost-effectiveness threshold was $100,000 per QALY. Sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate the robustness of the model.

RESULTS

In our theoretical cohort of patients who underwent an excisional procedure, the HPV vaccination strategy was associated with 17,281 fewer recurrences of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) (8,360 fewer cases of CIN 1 and 8,921 fewer cases of CIN 2 or 3), 26,203 fewer Pap tests (1,025,368 vs 1,051,570), 17,281 fewer colposcopies (20,588 vs 37,869), and 8,921 fewer second excisional procedures (4,779 vs 13,701). The vaccination strategy was associated with a higher cost of $135 million. Vaccination was a cost-effective strategy, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $29,181 per QALY, compared with no vaccination. In our sensitivity analyses, the HPV vaccination strategy remained cost effective until the cost of the three-dose HPV vaccine series reached $1,899 or the baseline (nonvaccinated) probability of recurrence was less than 4.8%.

CONCLUSION

In our model, HPV vaccination for patients with a prior excisional procedure led to improved outcomes and was cost effective. Our study suggests that clinicians should consider offering the three-dose HPV vaccine series to patients who have undergone an excisional procedure to decrease the risk of CIN recurrence and its sequelae.

"I Just Went for the Screening, But I Did Not Go for the Results". Utilization of Cervical Cancer Screening and Vaccination among Females at Oyibi Community

Background:

Cervical cancer screening and vaccination practices is reported to have low coverage in most developing countries. It has been reported that most women are aware of cervical cancer screening and vaccination worldwide. Nevertheless, the rate at which women participate in cervical cancer screening and vaccination was found to be low both locally and internationally. Consequently, in sub-Saharan Africa, cervical cancer screening programs have poor coverage. The aim of this study was to explore the practices of cervical cancer screening and vaccination among females at Oyibi community.

Methods:

The researchers employed a qualitative exploratory design to recruit 35 participants put into five Focus Group Discussions (FGDs). Five FGDs were formed with seven (7) members in each group. The members were purposely recruited. The sample size was based on data saturation. Data was retrieved using a semi-structured interview guide. The researchers served as moderators in the group.

Results:

Two (2) main themes with Eight (8) subthemes were generated from the data analysis. The themes were; (cervical cancer screening and vaccination practices), and (perceived benefits of cervical cancer screening and vaccination). The subthemes that emerged were as follows: types of cervical screening and vaccination done by participants, experiences during cervical cancer screening, experiences during cervical cancer vaccination, decision to go for cervical cancer screening and vaccination, willingness to recommend cervical cancer screening and vaccination to other women, early detection of cervical cancer through early screening, benefits of cervical cancer vaccination, and willingness to receive cervical cancer vaccine. The study also revealed that most of the women who had done the screening and vaccination were young (19-29 years).

Conclusion:

The results from the study indicated that the participants’ utilization of cervical cancer screening and vaccination were poor although they were conscious of the benefits of cervical cancer screening and vaccination and were willing to recommend it to their relatives and their loved ones.