Cost-effectiveness analysis of 20-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV20) to prevent pneumococcal disease in the Greek pediatric population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of 20-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV20) compared to 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV13) and 15-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV15) for prevention of pneumococcal disease in the pediatric population in Greece. METHODS: A published decision-analytic Markov model was adapted from payer perspective, to compare PCV20 (under a 3 + 1 dosing schedule per EMA approval) with PCV13 and PCV15 (both under a 2 + 1 dosing schedule) over a 10-year time horizon. Inputs for epidemiology, serotype coverage, vaccine effectiveness, utilities, and direct medical costs (€2024) were sourced from published literature and official data. Model outcomes included number of invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD), noninvasive hospitalized pneumonia, non-hospitalized pneumonia and otitis media (OM) cases, attributable deaths, costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) for each vaccination strategy and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for each comparison. Scenario analyses assessed PCV20 in a 2 + 1 schedule per recent national recommendations. RESULTS: The analysis indicated that, vaccination with PCV20 compared to PCV13 and PCV15 prevents an additional 1,953 and 1,514 cases of IPD 54,956 and 42,069 noninvasive hospitalized and non-hospitalized pneumonia cases, 343,353 and 271,864 OM cases and 1,377 and 987 deaths respectively, resulting in incremental gain of 23,065 (vs PCV13) and 17,118 (vs PCV15) QALYs respectively. The lower number of pneumococcal disease cases with PCV20 compared to PCV13 and PCV15, translated to a reduction in total medical care cost of €249 M vs PCV13 and €192 M vs PCV15 over the modeled time horizon. Scenario analyses showed that PCV20 remained dominant under a 2 + 1 dosing schedule. CONCLUSION: Vaccination with PCV20, whether in a 2 + 1 or a 3 + 1 schedule, was estimated to be a dominant vaccination strategy over PCV15 or PCV13 for the prevention of pneumococcal disease in Greek infants, as expansion of serotype coverage prevents additional morbidity and costs.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".