The Journal of Health Technology Assessment (보건의료기술평가)

Korean Association of Health Technology Assessment (한국보건의료기술평가학회)
권호 표지

A Systematic Review on Economic Evaluation of Rotavirus Vaccination

로타바이러스 백신 경제성평가 연구에 대한 체계적 문헌고찰

  • Lee, Minjun (College of Pharmacy, Yonsei Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Yonsei University) ;
  • Lee, Hankil (College of Pharmacy, Yonsei Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Yonsei University) ;
  • Cho, Hyeonseok (College of Pharmacy, Yonsei Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Yonsei University) ;
  • Kang, Hye-Young (College of Pharmacy, Yonsei Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Yonsei University)
  • 이민준 (연세대학교 약학대학, 연세대학교 약학대학 종합약학연구소) ;
  • 이한길 (연세대학교 약학대학, 연세대학교 약학대학 종합약학연구소) ;
  • 조현석 (연세대학교 약학대학, 연세대학교 약학대학 종합약학연구소) ;
  • 강혜영 (연세대학교 약학대학, 연세대학교 약학대학 종합약학연구소)
  • Received : 2018.12.04
  • Accepted : 2018.12.28
  • Published : 2018.12.31

⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objectives: Rotavirus is one of the main causes of severe diarrhea in children under five. Two types of rotavirus vaccines [$Rotarix^{(R)}$ (RV1) and $Rotateq^{(R)}$ (RV5)] have been introduced and its administration was optional in South Korea. A systematic review (SR) on economic evaluation (EE) of RV was conducted to examine whether the introduction of rotavirus vaccine to national vaccine program (NIP) is cost-effective. Methods: Previous SR studies of EE for RV were searched in August 2017 through databases such as MEDLINE and EMBASE. Additional search was performed to include literatures published after or unincluded in the previous SR studies. Among the 11 SR studies identified, 2 studies were reviewed via inclusion/exclusion criteria. A previous SR study including 104 original articles was selected by A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews. Among the 36 original articles identified through additional search, 10 were selected, resulting in 114 studies included in our analysis. Results: RV1-only, RV5-only, and evaluating-both studies account for about 44%, 22%, and 33%, respectively. Among RV1-only, RV5-only, or evaluating-both studies, 90%, 64%, or 68% of the studies concluded RV as being cost-effective, respectively. RV5-only studies were usually executed in high-income countries (68%), whereas RV1-only studies were executed mostly in lower (32%) and upper (26%) middle-income countries. When classifying studies by their funding sources, RV1-only studies (82%; 28 of 34 studies specifying funding sources) were chiefly supported by non-profit organization, and 100% of these studies were concluded as being cost-effective. RV5-only studies were mostly supported by profit organization (68%; 13 of 19 studies specifying sources), and 92% of these studies concluded as being cost-effective. Conclusion: By reviewing global EE studies for RV, we have learned that about 70% of these studies was shown to be cost-effective and RV1 appeared to be more cost-effective than RV5.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

Supported by : 질병관리본부

References

  1. Gray J, Vesikari T, Van Damme P, Giaquinto C, Mrukowicz J, Guarino A, et al. Rotavirus. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 2008;46 Suppl 2:24-31. https://doi.org/10.1097/MPG.0b013e31816f78ee
  2. 질병관리본부. 예방접종 대상 감염병의 역학과 관리: 예방접종 실시 기준 및 방법. 청주: 질병관리본부;2017. pp.502-503.
  3. Jeong H, Lee D, Kwak H. Rotavirus infection. Public Health Weekly Report 2016;9:610-615.
  4. Sohn TY, Lee CJ, Kim YJ, Kang MJ, Kim SH, Lee SY, et al. Clinical and epidemiological study of 1,165 hospitalized cases of rotaviral gastroenteritis before and after the introduction of rotavirus vaccine, 2006-2013. Korean J Pediatr Infect Dis 2014;21:174-180. https://doi.org/10.14776/kjpid.2014.21.3.174
  5. Lee KS, Lee YR, Park SY, Oh IH. The economic burden of rotavirus infection in South Korea from 2009 to 2012. PLoS One 2018;13:e0194120. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0194120
  6. who.int [Homepage on the Internet]. Geneva: World Health Organization [cited 2015 Dec 30]. Available from: http://www.who.int/immunization/position_papers/PP_rotavirus_january_2013_summary.pdf?ua=1.
  7. rotacouncil.org [Homepage on the Internet]. Global: ROTA Council [cited 2018 Dec 4]. Available from: http://rotacouncil.org/vaccine-evidence/available-rotavirus-vaccine-products.
  8. Soares-Weiser K, Maclehose H, Bergman H, Ben-Aharon I, Nagpal S, Goldberg E, et al. Vaccines for preventing rotavirus diarrhoea: vaccines in use. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012;11:CD008521.
  9. Patel MM, Steele D, Gentsch JR, Wecker J, Glass RI, Parashar UD. Real-world impact of rotavirus vaccination. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2011;30(1 Suppl):S1-S5. https://doi.org/10.1097/INF.0b013e3181fefa1f
  10. Anonymous. Rotavirus vaccines. WHO position paper - January 2013. Wkly Epidemiol Rec 2013;88:49-64.
  11. assembly.go.kr [Hompage on the Internet]. Seoul: The National Assembly of the Republic of Korea; c2018 [cited 2018 Dec 4]. Available from: http://likms.assembly.go.kr/bill/billDetail.do?billId=PRC_M1K7T0L7O1V1M0K9P5X2Q4Z0B9Z5U8&ageFrom=20&ageTo=20.
  12. National Evidence-Based healthcare Collaborating Agency (NECA). NECA's guidance for undertaking systematic reviews and meta-analyses for intervention. Seoul: NECA;2011.
  13. White C, Ip S, McPheeters M, Carey T, Chou R, Lohr K, et al. Using existing systematic reviews to replace de novo processes in conducting comparative effectiveness reviews. Rockville: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality;2009.
  14. Kotirum S, Vutipongsatorn N, Kongpakwattana K, Hutubessy R, Chaiyakunapruk N. Global economic evaluations of rotavirus vaccines: a systematic review. Vaccine 2017;35:3364-3386. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2017.04.051
  15. Drummond MF, Sculpher MJ, Torrance GW, O'Brien B, Stoddart GL. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. 3rd ed. New York: Oxford University Press;2005.
  16. who.int [Homepage on the Internet]. Geneva: World Health Organization [cited 2016 Jan 8]. Available from: http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/69981/1/WHO_ IVB_08.14_eng.pdf.
  17. Husereau D, Drummond M, Petrou S, Carswell C, Moher D, Greenberg D, et al. Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement. BMC Med 2013;11:80. https://doi.org/10.1186/1741-7015-11-80
  18. Pérez Velasco R, Praditsitthikorn N, Wichmann K, Mohara A, Kotirum S, Tantivess S, et al. Systematic review of economic evaluations of preparedness strategies and interventions against influenza pandemics. PLoS One 2012;7:e30333. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0030333
  19. worldbank.org [Homepage on the Internet]. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank [updated 2017 Jan 7; cited 2017 Dec 30]. Available from: https://blogs.worldbank.org/opendata/new-country-classifications-income-level-2017-2018.
  20. Rheingans R, Amaya M, Anderson JD, Chakraborty P, Atem J. Systematic review of the economic value of diarrheal vaccines. Hum Vaccin Immunother 2014;10:1582-1594. https://doi.org/10.4161/hv.29352
  21. Aidelsburger P, Grabein K, Bohm K, Dietl M, Wasem J, Koch J, et al. Cost-effectiveness of childhood rotavirus vaccination in Germany. Vaccine 2014;32:1964-1974. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2014.01.061
  22. Cui S, Tobe RG, Mo X, Liu X, Xu L, Li S. Cost-effectiveness analysis of rotavirus vaccination in China: projected possibility of scale-up from the current domestic option. BMC Infect Dis 2016;16:677. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-016-2013-1
  23. Bar-Zeev N, Tate JE, Pecenka C, Chikafa J, Mvula H, Wachepa R, et al. Cost-effectiveness of monovalent rotavirus vaccination of infants in Malawi: a postintroduction analysis using individual patient-level costing data. Clin Infect Dis 2016;62 Suppl 2:S220-S228. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/civ1025
  24. Yamin D, Atkins KE, Remy V, Galvani AP. Cost-effectiveness of rotavirus vaccination in France-accounting for indirect protection. Value Health 2016;19:811-819. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2016.05.011
  25. Koksal T, Akelma AZ, Koksal AO, Kutukoglu I, Ozdemir O, Yuksel CN, et al. Cost-effectiveness of rotavirus vaccination in Turkey. J Microbiol Immunol Infect 2017;50:693-699. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmii.2016.03.005
  26. Mousavi Jarrahi Y, Zahraei SM, Sadigh N, Esmaeelpoor Langeroudy K, Khodadost M, Ranjbaran M, et al. The cost effectiveness of rotavirus vaccination in Iran. Hum Vaccin Immunother 2016;12:794-800. https://doi.org/10.1080/21645515.2015.1087626
  27. Reyes JF, Wood JG, Beutels P, Macartney K, McIntyre P, Menzies R, et al. Beyond expectations: post-implementation data shows rotavirus vaccination is likely cost-saving in Australia. Vaccine 2017;35:345-352. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2016.11.056
  28. Al-Aidaroos AYA, Standaert B, Meszaros K, Shibl AM. Economic assessment of rotavirus vaccination in Saudi Arabia. J Infect Public Health 2017;10:564-571. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jiph.2016.11.006
  29. Hoshi SL, Kondo M, Okubo I. Economic evaluation of routine infant rotavirus immunisation program in Japan. Hum Vaccin Immunother 2017;13:1115-1125. https://doi.org/10.1080/21645515.2016.1245252
  30. Pecenka C, Parashar U, Tate JE, Khan JAM, Groman D, Chacko S, et al. Impact and cost-effectiveness of rotavirus vaccination in Bangladesh. Vaccine 2017;35:3982-3987. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2017.05.087
  31. Coyle D, Coyle K, Bettinger JA, Halperin SA, Vaudry W, Scheifele DW, et al. Cost effectiveness of infant vaccination for rotavirus in Canada. Can J Infect Dis Med Microbiol 2012;23:71-77. https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/327054
  32. who.int [Homepage on the Internet]. Geneva: World Health Organization [cited 2017 Dec 30]. Available from: http://www.who.int/immunization/programmes_systems/procurement/v3p/platform/module2/Factsheet_vacc_pricing_Gavi_transitioning_2017.pdf.