TRA1-4 INCREMENTAL BENEFITS AND COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF A CATCH-UP HPV VACCINATION PROGRAM IN NORWAY

Monday, October 21, 2013: 11:00 AM
Key Ballroom 5-6 (Hilton Baltimore)
Health Services, and Policy Research (HSP)
Candidate for the Lee B. Lusted Student Prize Competition

Emily Burger, MPhil1, Stephen Sy, BS2, Mari Nygard, MD, PhD3, Ivar Sønbø Kristiansen, MD, PhD, MPH1 and Jane J. Kim, PhD2, (1)University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway, (2)Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA, (3)Cancer Registry of Norway, Oslo, Norway
Purpose: School-based vaccination of 12-year-old girls against human papillomavirus (HPV) was introduced in Norway in 2009, free of charge. Since the vaccine is ideally targeted to young individuals prior to HPV exposure, catch-up vaccination for girls over age 12 was not publicly funded. Our objective was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of a one-year female catch-up program (starting in 2014) up to age 26.   

Method: We calibrated a previously published dynamic model of HPV transmission to fit observed HPV prevalence and cervical cancer incidence in Norway. Under various scenarios of catch-up vaccination in females, we projected reductions in HPV incidence over multiple birth cohorts, including both direct and indirect benefits, and applied these reductions to a microsimulation model of cervical cancer and incidence-based models for non-cervical HPV-related diseases. We adopted a societal perspective and assumed that vaccination of females age >19 years would incur higher delivery costs (i.e., through their family physician). Scenarios reflecting 50% coverage of women up to age 20, 22, 24 or 26 were compared to a baseline strategy assuming that these cohorts were not vaccinated. Sensitivity analyses were conducted on vaccine cost (market vs. tender price) and differential uptake among targeted women.

Result: The marginal benefit of the vaccine decreased as the upper bound of the catch-up age increased. For example, at 50% coverage, the cohort of girls aged 18-years-old in 2014 gained an absolute 21% in cumulative reduction in HPV-16 incidence, compared to no catch-up campaign, while for the cohort of girls aged 26-years-old, this gain was only 10%. Cost-effectiveness followed a similar trend. At the current market price of the vaccine, catch-up can only be extended to age 22 while still remaining below Norway’s willingness-to-pay threshold (≈$83,000/QALY), compared with vaccinating 12-year-old girls only. However, the tender price of the vaccination (not publicly available) is believed to be less than 50% of the market price, in which case a catch-up program to age 26 falls below the threshold. Results remained stable for a catch-up campaign achieving only 30% coverage.

Conclusion: At current market price, a one-year catch-up program up to age 22 is likely to be cost effective; however, at the assumed tender price, HPV vaccination may be extended to age 26 while remaining cost-effective.