4.7 Article

Cost-effectiveness analysis of BNT162b2 COVID-19 booster vaccination in the United States

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Volume 119, Issue -, Pages 87-94

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijid.2022.03.029

Keywords

COVID-19; Booster; Cost-effective analysis; Markov model; BNT162b2

Funding

  1. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation [INV-006104]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81950410639, 12171387, 11801435]
  3. Outstanding Young Scholars Funding [3111500001]
  4. Xi'an Jiaotong University Basic Research and Profession Grant [xtr022019003, xzy032020032]
  5. Xi'an Jiaotong University Young Talent Support Grant [YX6J004]
  6. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2018M631134, 2020T130095ZX]
  7. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [xjh012019055]
  8. Natural Science Basic Research Program of Shaanxi Province [2019JQ-187]
  9. Young Talent Support Program of Shaanxi University Association for Science and Technology [20210307]
  10. Special emergency public health safety project of Shaanxi Provincial Education Department [20JG007]
  11. Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation [INV-006104] Funding Source: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The cost-effectiveness of a booster strategy for COVID-19 vaccination in older adults in the United States was evaluated. The results show that offering a booster dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine to older adults can result in cost savings in direct medical costs and improve quality-adjusted life-years. The cost-effectiveness of the booster strategy is sensitive to the population incidence of COVID-19 and vaccine efficacies.
Objectives: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a booster strategy in the United States. Methods: We developed a decision-analytic Markov model of COVID-19 to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a booster strategy of the Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2 (administered 6 months after the second dose) among older adults from a healthcare system perspective. Results: Compared with 2 doses of BNT162b2 without a booster, the booster strategy in a 100,0 00 cohort of older adults would incur an additional cost of $3.4 million in vaccination cost but save $6.7 million in direct medical cost and gain 3.7 quality-adjusted life-years in 180 days. This corresponds to a benefit-cost ratio of 1.95 and a net monetary benefit of $3.4 million. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicates that a booster strategy has a high chance (67%) of being cost-effective. Notably, the cost-effectiveness of the booster strategy is highly sensitive to the population incidence of COVID-19, with a cost-effectiveness threshold of 8.1/100,0 00 person-day. If vaccine efficacies reduce by 10%, 30%, and 50%, this threshold will increase to 9.7/100,00 0, 13.9/100,0 00, and 21.9/100,0 00 person-day, respectively. Conclusion: Offering the BNT162b2 booster to older adults aged >= 65 years in the United States is likely to be cost-effective. Less efficacious vaccines and boosters may still be cost-effective in settings of high SARS-CoV-2 transmission. (C) 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of International Society for Infectious Diseases.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available