MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401154593 · doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2024.126164

Cost-effectiveness of RSVpreF vaccine and nirsevimab for the prevention of respiratory syncytial virus disease in Canadian infants

2024· article· en· W4401154593 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Gebremedhin Beedemariam Gebretekle, Man Wah Yeung, Raphael Ximenes, Alexandra Cernat, Alison E. Simmons, April Killikelly, Winnie Siu, Ellen Rafferty, Nicholas Brousseau, Matthew Tunis, Ashleigh R. Tuite

Bibliographic record

VenueVaccine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory viral infections research
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de Santé Publique du QuébecUniversité LavalUniversity of AlbertaInstitute of Health EconomicsUniversity of OttawaPublic Health OntarioUniversity of TorontoMcMaster UniversityPublic Health Agency of Canada
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsVirusVirologyMedicineCost effectivenessMononegaviralesDiseaseDisease preventionParamyxoviridaeImmunologyIntensive care medicineViral diseaseInternal medicineRisk analysis (engineering)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Health Canada recently authorized the RSVpreF pregnancy vaccine and nirsevimab to protect infants against respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) disease. OBJECTIVE: Assess the cost-effectiveness of RSVpreF and nirsevimab programs in preventing RSV disease in infants, compared to a palivizumab program. METHODS: We used a static cohort model of a Canadian birth cohort during their first RSV season to estimate sequential incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) in 2023 Canadian dollars per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) for nine strategies implemented over a one-year time period, from the health system and societal perspectives. Sensitivity and scenario analyses were conducted to explore the impact of uncertainties on the results. RESULTS: All-infants nirsevimab programs averted more RSV-related outcomes than year-round RSVpreF programs, with the most RSV cases averted in a seasonal nirsevimab program with catch-up. Assuming list prices for these immunizing agents, all-infants nirsevimab and year-round RSVpreF programs were never cost-effective, with ICERs far exceeding commonly used cost-effectiveness thresholds. Seasonal nirsevimab with catch-up for infants born outside the RSV season was a cost-effective program if prioritized for infants at moderate/high-risk (ICER <$28,000 per QALY) or those living in settings with higher RSV burden and healthcare costs, such as remote communities where transport would be complex (ICER of $5700 per QALY). Using a $50,000 per QALY threshold, an all-infants nirsevimab program could be optimal if nirsevimab is priced at <$110-190 per dose. A year-round RSVpreF for all pregnant women and pregnant people plus nirsevimab for infants at high-risk was optimal if nirsevimab is priced at >$110-190 per dose and RSVpreF priced at <$60-125 per dose. INTERPRETATION: Prophylactic interventions can substantially reduce RSV disease in infants, and more focused nirsevimab programs are the most cost-effective option at current product prices.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.172
Threshold uncertainty score0.984

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.062
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.341 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations34
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVaccineSame topicRespiratory viral infections researchFrench-language works237,207