Cost-effectiveness and Health Benefits of Pediatric 23-valent Pneumococcal Polysaccharide Vaccine, 7-valent Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine and Forecasting 13-valent Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine in China

Background: Each year in China, approximately 700,000 children under 5 years old are diagnosed with pneumonia, and 30,000 die of the disease. Although 7-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV-7) and 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPV-23) are available in China, the costs are borne by the consumer, resulting in low coverage for PCV-7. We aimed to conduct a simulation study to assess the cost-effectiveness and health benefits of PCV-7, 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV-13) and PPV-23 to prevent childhood pneumonia and other vaccine-preventive diseases in China. Methods: An economic evaluation was performed using a Markov simulation model. Parameters including demographic, epidemiological data, costs and efficacy of vaccines were obtained from previous studies. A hypothetical cohort of 100,000 newborns (focusing on pneumococcal diseases <= 7 years old) was followed up until death or 100 years of age. The model incorporated the impact of vaccination on reduction of incidence of pneumococcal diseases and mortality of children <= 7 years. Outcomes are presented in terms of disease cases averted, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Results: Under baseline assumptions, PPV-23 is currently the only cost-effective option, whereas PCV-13 showed the greatest impact on pneumococcal disease burden, reducing invasive pneumococcal diseases by 31.3%, pneumonia by 15.3% and gaining 73.8 QALYs (10,000 individuals at discount rate of 3%). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of PCV-13 and PCV-7 are US$ 29,460/QALY and US$ 104,094/QALY, respectively, showing no cost-effectiveness based on the World Health Organization recommended willingness-to-pay threshold. On the other hand, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of PCVs were most sensitive to vaccination costs; if it reduces 4.7% and 32.2% for PCV-7 and PCV-13, respectively, the vaccination will be cost-effective. Conclusions: To scale up current vaccination strategies and achieve potential health benefits, the replacement of PCV-7 with PCV-13 should be considered. As well, PCV's costs need to be reduced by increasing public subsidies and providing financial support to poor families.