The potential health and economic impacts of new tuberculosis vaccines under varying delivery strategies in Delhi and Gujarat, India: a modelling study
Clark, R. A.; Portnoy, A.; Weerasuriya, C. K.; Sumner, T.; Bakker, R.; Harris, R. C.; Rade, K.; Mattoo, S. K.; Tumu, D.; Menzies, N. A.; White, R. G.
10.1101/2023.09.27.23296211 medRxivShow abstract
BackgroundIndia has the largest tuberculosis burden globally, but this burden varies nationwide. All-age tuberculosis prevalence in 2021 ranged from 747/100,000 in Delhi to 137/100,000 in Gujarat. Previous modelling has demonstrated the benefits and costs of introducing novel tuberculosis vaccines in India overall. However, no studies have compared the potential impact of tuberculosis vaccines in regions within India with differing tuberculosis disease and infection prevalence. We used mathematical modelling to investigate how the health and economic impact of two potential tuberculosis vaccines, M72/AS01E and BCG-revaccination, could differ in Delhi and Gujarat under varying delivery strategies. MethodsWe applied a compartmental tuberculosis model separately for Delhi (higher disease and infection prevalence) and Gujarat (lower disease and infection prevalence), and projected epidemiological trends to 2050 assuming no new vaccine introduction. We simulated M72/AS01E and BCG-revaccination scenarios varying target ages and vaccine characteristics. We estimated cumulative cases, deaths, and disability-adjusted life years averted between 2025-2050 compared to the no-new-vaccine scenario and compared incremental cost-effectiveness ratios to three cost-effectiveness thresholds. ResultsM72/AS01E averted a higher proportion of tuberculosis cases than BCG-revaccination in both regions (Delhi: 16.0% vs 8.3%, Gujarat: 8.5% vs 5.1%) and had higher vaccination costs (Delhi: USD$118 million vs USD$27 million, Gujarat: US$366 million vs US$97 million). M72/AS01E in Delhi could be cost-effective, or even cost-saving, for all modelled vaccine characteristics. M72/AS01E could be cost-effective in Gujarat, unless efficacy was assumed only for those with current infection at vaccination. BCG-revaccination could be cost-effective, or cost-saving, in both regions for all modelled vaccine scenarios. DiscussionM72/AS01E and BCG-revaccination could be impactful and cost-effective in Delhi and Gujarat. Differences in impact, costs, and cost-effectiveness between vaccines and regions, were determined partly by differences in disease and infection prevalence, and demography. Age-specific regional estimates of infection prevalence could help to inform delivery strategies for vaccines that may only be effective in people with a particular infection status. Evidence on the mechanism of effect of M72/AS01E and its effectiveness in uninfected individuals, which were important drivers of impact and cost-effectiveness, particularly in Gujarat, are also key to improve estimates of population-level impact.
Matching journals
The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Mapping the Existing Body of Knowledge on New and Repurposed TB Vaccine Implementation: A Scoping Review 96%
- Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Alternative Infant and Neonatal Rotavirus Vaccination Schedules in Malawi 93%
- Evaluating the health impact, health-system costs and cost-effectiveness of using TrueNat on stool samples compared to usual care for the diagnosis of paediatric tuberculosis in primary care settings: a modelling analysis 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- The potential impact of novel tuberculosis vaccine introduction on economic growth in low- and middle-income countries 96%
- Health impact and cost-effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination in Sindh Province, Pakistan 94%
- Cost-effectiveness of screening with transcriptional signatures for incipient TB among U.S. migrants 92%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.