02:48pm Monday 18 December 2017

New meningitis vaccine only cost-effective at low price

Bexsero is the first vaccine to broadly protect against meningitis B disease, but research now suggests the Government would need to negotiate a considerable reduction in the £75 list price in order to provide the same value for money as other programmes in the NHS.

In March 2014, the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI), the independent expert group that advises UK governments on vaccination, recommended that Bexsero be offered to babies at two, four and 12 months of age as long as the Department of Health can obtain the vaccine at a cost-effective price.

Researchers at the Universities of Bristol, Cambridge and the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine conducted a modelling study to estimate the potential impact of a vaccine on cases of meningitis and septicaemia and the cost-effectiveness of a range of immunisation programmes.

The model took into account a range of factors, including how many cases could be averted, the cost of care, litigation costs, the quality of life for those left with disabilities, and the impact on families. The costs and benefits of vaccination over people’s lifetimes were compared to the costs and losses of not introducing it.

The research also estimated what price the vaccine should be in the UK as part of the decision making process, with details published for the first time in the BMJ today [10 October].

Dr Hannah Christensen, who led the research at the University of Bristol, said: “Our study suggests vaccinating babies, who are most at risk of meningococcal disease, would have the greatest immediate effect on reducing cases.  After taking into account comments raised by stakeholders following the interim JCVI decision, our research shows that offering the vaccine to infants could be cost-effective, but given the current evidence the vaccine price would need to be quite low to achieve this.”

Several vaccine strategies were considered, targeting infants where incidence is high and adolescents where transmission is thought to be the greatest.

Researchers also considered a range of different scenarios of how well the vaccine might work protecting against infection and disease, as well as the impact of the disease in the population.

The model estimates 1,447 cases of all meningococcal disease and 59 deaths occur annually in the absence of vaccination against group B meningococcal disease.

Cases would be cut by 26 per cent in the first five years if the recommended vaccination programme at two four and 12 months is followed.  This could be cost-effective with the vaccine priced at £7 per dose, given several favourable assumptions and the use of a quality of life adjustment factor.

Maximum reduction will be achieved by combining infant vaccination with an adolescent vaccination at 13-years-old. This would see annual cases reduced by 49 per cent in 10 years and 60 per cent in 20 years, but is dependent upon the vaccine protecting against carriage as well as disease, which is uncertain.

Assuming the vaccine works as well as possible, covering 91 per cent of meningitis B strains and preventing 60 per cent of carriage to save more lives, the maximum price of the vaccine for it to remain cost-effective would be £22 a dose to be given at two, four and 12 months.

Campaigners have been calling for the vaccine to be introduced in the UK since it was licensed in Europe in January 2013, but cost has always been a key issue.

Paper

‘Re-evaluating the cost-effectiveness of universal ‘MenB’ (Bexsero) vaccination in England: a modelling study’ [open access] by Hannah Christensen, Caroline L Trotter, Matthew Hickman and W John Edmunds in BMJ.

 

Further information

Further information

This work was supported by the National Institute for Health Research [RDA/03/07/014 and PDF-2012-05-245 to HC, PDA/02/06/088 to CT]. This work is produced by the authors under the terms of these research training fellowships issued by the NIHR. The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, The National Institute for Health Research or the Department of Health. MH is a member of the NIHR School of Public Health Research; HC and MH are members of the NIHR Health Protection Research Unit Evaluation of Interventions.  The sponsors of the study had no role in study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation, or writing of the report.

About the NIHR

The National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) is funded by the Department of Health to improve the health and wealth of the nation through research. Since its establishment in April 2006, the NIHR has transformed research in the NHS. It has increased the volume of applied health research for the benefit of patients and the public, driven faster translation of basic science discoveries into tangible benefits for patients and the economy, and developed and supported the people who conduct and contribute to applied health research. The NIHR plays a key role in the Government’s strategy for economic growth, attracting investment by the life-sciences industries through its world-class infrastructure for health research. Together, the NIHR people, programmes, centres of excellence and systems represent the most integrated health research system in the world. For further information, visit the NIHR website (www.nihr.ac.uk).

This article presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR). The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health.


Share on:
or:

Health news