IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pmed00/1002181.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Long-Term Safety, Public Health Impact, and Cost-Effectiveness of Routine Vaccination with a Recombinant, Live-Attenuated Dengue Vaccine (Dengvaxia): A Model Comparison Study

Author

Listed:
  • Stefan Flasche
  • Mark Jit
  • Isabel Rodríguez-Barraquer
  • Laurent Coudeville
  • Mario Recker
  • Katia Koelle
  • George Milne
  • Thomas J Hladish
  • T Alex Perkins
  • Derek A T Cummings
  • Ilaria Dorigatti
  • Daniel J Laydon
  • Guido España
  • Joel Kelso
  • Ira Longini
  • Jose Lourenco
  • Carl A B Pearson
  • Robert C Reiner
  • Luis Mier-y-Terán-Romero
  • Kirsten Vannice
  • Neil Ferguson

Abstract

Background: Large Phase III trials across Asia and Latin America have recently demonstrated the efficacy of a recombinant, live-attenuated dengue vaccine (Dengvaxia) over the first 25 mo following vaccination. Subsequent data collected in the longer-term follow-up phase, however, have raised concerns about a potential increase in hospitalization risk of subsequent dengue infections, in particular among young, dengue-naïve vaccinees. We here report predictions from eight independent modelling groups on the long-term safety, public health impact, and cost-effectiveness of routine vaccination with Dengvaxia in a range of transmission settings, as characterised by seroprevalence levels among 9-y-olds (SP9). These predictions were conducted for the World Health Organization to inform their recommendations on optimal use of this vaccine. Methods and Findings: The models adopted, with small variations, a parsimonious vaccine mode of action that was able to reproduce quantitative features of the observed trial data. The adopted mode of action assumed that vaccination, similarly to natural infection, induces transient, heterologous protection and, further, establishes a long-lasting immunogenic memory, which determines disease severity of subsequent infections. The default vaccination policy considered was routine vaccination of 9-y-old children in a three-dose schedule at 80% coverage. The outcomes examined were the impact of vaccination on infections, symptomatic dengue, hospitalised dengue, deaths, and cost-effectiveness over a 30-y postvaccination period. Case definitions were chosen in accordance with the Phase III trials. Conclusions: Dengvaxia has the potential to reduce the burden of dengue disease in areas of moderate to high dengue endemicity. However, the potential risks of vaccination in areas with limited exposure to dengue as well as the local costs and benefits of routine vaccination are important considerations for the inclusion of Dengvaxia into existing immunisation programmes. These results were important inputs into WHO global policy for use of this licensed dengue vaccine. Mark Jit and colleagues report findings from eight independent modelling groups on the long-term safety, public health impact, and cost-effectiveness of routine vaccination with a recombinant, live-attenuated dengue vaccine (Dengvaxia).Why Was This Study Done?: What Did the Researchers Do and Find?: What Do These Findings Mean?:

Suggested Citation

  • Stefan Flasche & Mark Jit & Isabel Rodríguez-Barraquer & Laurent Coudeville & Mario Recker & Katia Koelle & George Milne & Thomas J Hladish & T Alex Perkins & Derek A T Cummings & Ilaria Dorigatti & D, 2016. "The Long-Term Safety, Public Health Impact, and Cost-Effectiveness of Routine Vaccination with a Recombinant, Live-Attenuated Dengue Vaccine (Dengvaxia): A Model Comparison Study," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(11), pages 1-19, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pmed00:1002181
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002181
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1002181
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1002181&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pmed.1002181?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pmed00:1002181. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosmedicine (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.