Key result
RV5 was the most cost-effective rotavirus vaccine option, yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 510 US$ per DALY averted compared to no vaccination.
Why the study?
Two rotavirus vaccines are licensed in Zhejiang province, China, but cost-effectiveness data were needed to inform immunization program prioritization.
Does rotavirus vaccination (RV1 or RV5) improve cost-effectiveness per DALY averted compared to no vaccination in Zhejiang province, China?
Does rotavirus vaccination (RV1 or RV5) improve cost-effectiveness per DALY averted compared to no vaccination in Zhejiang province, China?
Introducing the pentavalent rotavirus vaccine (RV5) into the immunization program in Zhejiang province, China is highly cost-effective compared to no vaccination.
RV5 modeling supports local cost-effectiveness in Zhejiang; leaves open prospective confirmation before program adoption.
Two RV vaccines have been licensed in Zhejiang province, China, including the pentavalent RotaTeq (RV5) and the monovalent RV vaccine (RV1). This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of RV1 and RV5 to inform the prioritization of provincial immunization program. A decision tree-Markov model was applied to assess the cost-effectiveness of RV1 or RV5 vaccination, compared to no RV vaccination in a 5-year period. The incremental health cost per disability-adjusted life year (DALY) is averted when each kind of RV vaccine included in the immunization program was estimated. It was also compared to the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of 1 time of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita of Zhejiang province in 2021 (16865.70US$). The uncertainties of these results were assessed through the one-way sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis. In the base-case scenario, RV5 was the least costly RV vaccine with a cost-effectiveness ratio of 510 US$ per DALY averted. The other RV1 vaccines provided equivalent benefits but at higher costs, with a cost-effectiveness ratio of 4600 US$ per DALY averted. Compared to no vaccination, the probabilities of being cost-effective were 72.3% for RV1 and 88.4% for RV5, at a WTP threshold of 1 time of the GDP per capita. An RV vaccination program using any of the two China-licensed RV vaccines compared to no vaccination would avert 30-70% of outpatient visits, hospitalizations, and deaths from RVGE. RV5 was currently estimated to be the most cost-effective.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lv et al. (2023) studied Rotavirus gastroenteritis (RVGE) (n=432,026). Rotavirus vaccine (RV5 or RV1) vs. No vaccination was evaluated on Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (US$ per DALY averted). RV5 was the most cost-effective rotavirus vaccine option, yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 510 US$ per DALY averted compared to no vaccination.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: