Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Projected health and economic effects of nonavalent versus bivalent human papillomavirus vaccination in preadolescence in the Netherlands
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Projected health and economic effects of nonavalent versus bivalent human papillomavirus vaccination in preadolescence in the Netherlands
Do you wish to request the book?
Projected health and economic effects of nonavalent versus bivalent human papillomavirus vaccination in preadolescence in the Netherlands
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Projected health and economic effects of nonavalent versus bivalent human papillomavirus vaccination in preadolescence in the Netherlands
2025
Overview
Background
Most European countries offer human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination through organised immunisation programmes, but the choice of vaccine varies. We compared the expected health and economic effects of the currently used bivalent vaccine, targeting HPV-16/18, and the nonavalent vaccine, targeting seven additional genotypes, for the Netherlands.
Methods
We estimated the incremental impact of nonavalent versus bivalent vaccination in a cohort of 100,000 girls and 100,000 boys offered vaccination at age 10, by projecting type-specific infection risk reductions onto expected number of cervical screening outcomes, HPV-related cancers, and treatments for anogenital warts and recurrent respiratory papillomatosis (RRP). In the base-case, we assumed two-dose vaccination with 60% uptake, lifelong partial cross-protection against HPV-31/33/45 for the bivalent vaccine and EUR 25 extra cost per dose for the nonavalent vaccine. Cost-effectiveness was assessed from a healthcare provider perspective by comparing the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per life-year gained (LYG) with the Dutch threshold of EUR 20,000/LYG.
Results
Compared with bivalent vaccination, nonavalent vaccination prevents an additional 1320 high-grade cervical lesions, 70 cancers, 34,000 anogenital warts episodes and 30 RRPs and generates EUR 4.1 million discounted savings from fewer treatments. The ICER is EUR 5489 (95% credible interval: 3765; 7019)/LYG in the base-case and exceeds the cost-effectiveness threshold only if the cross-protection for the bivalent vaccine extends permanently to non-31/33/45 genotypes or if the vaccine efficacy wanes past age 20 for both vaccines.
Conclusions
Sex-neutral vaccination with the nonavalent vaccine is likely to be cost-effective. Long-term monitoring of type-specific vaccine effectiveness is essential because of the impact of cross-protection and waning efficacy on cost-effectiveness.
Publisher
BioMed Central,BioMed Central Ltd,Springer Nature B.V,BMC
Subject
/ Cancer
/ Child
/ Complications and side effects
/ Condylomata Acuminata - economics
/ Condylomata Acuminata - prevention & control
/ Female
/ Human Papillomavirus Viruses
/ Humans
/ Male
/ Medicine
/ Papillomavirus Infections - economics
/ Papillomavirus Infections - epidemiology
/ Papillomavirus Infections - prevention & control
/ Papillomavirus Vaccines - administration & dosage
/ Papillomavirus Vaccines - economics
/ Sexually transmitted diseases
/ Uterine Cervical Neoplasms - economics
/ Uterine Cervical Neoplasms - prevention & control
/ Vaccines
/ Warts
