OP151 Cost-Utility Of Gender-Neutral HPV Vaccination In Ireland

Abstract

Introduction

A number of economic evaluations of gender-neutral human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination have been published, generally finding that the cost-effectiveness is sensitive to the uptake rate in girls. In Ireland there is a girls-only program in place, but the initial high uptake rate (>85 percent) was substantially impacted by high profile negative publicity concerning perceived vaccine safety issues. Efforts to address perceived safety concerns have recently yielded a partial recovery in uptake rates. The aim of this study was to estimate the cost-utility of extending the program to include boys and explore the impact of fluctuating uptake rates.

Methods

A previously published cost-utility model used in the United States of America and Norway was adapted to the Irish setting and populated with Irish epidemiological and cost data. Comparators included no vaccination, and girls-only and gender-neutral vaccination, both with either a 4-valent or 9-valent vaccine. Vaccination is at age 12 years and oropharyngeal and penile cancers were excluded in the base case analysis. Additional analyses were used to incorporate fluctuating uptake rates into the model.

Results

A 9-valent girls-only program dominated the existing girls-only 4-valent program. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for a gender-neutral 9-valent program was EUR 50,823/quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Gender-neutral vaccination would be cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of EUR 45,000/QALY when the uptake rate is below 78 percent. The ICER decreased to between EUR 41,000 and EUR 42,000/QALY when the uptake rate was allowed to fluctuate across six to 12 yearly cycles.

Conclusions

The cost-effectiveness of gender-neutral HPV vaccination is highly sensitive to the assumed uptake rate in girls. Large fluctuations in HPV vaccine uptake rates have been observed in a number of countries in the last decade. Incorporating fluctuating uptake rates in the model shows that a gender-neutral program may be more cost-effective than when a stable uptake is assumed.