Back

A continental-scale scenario modelling framework for evaluating infant RSV immunisation strategies across Europe

Viola, E.; Mazzoli, M.; Paolotti, D.; Rizzo, A.; Zino, L.; Gozzi, N.

2026-06-11 epidemiology
10.64898/2026.06.10.26355338 medRxiv
Show abstract

Background. The recent approval of long-acting monoclonal antibodies (la-mAbs) and a maternal vaccine (MV) in the EU enables universal RSV prevention in infants. Modelling studies are widely used to quantify the population-level impact of alternative immunisation strategies. However, existing assessments of new RSV immunisation products focus on national or sub-national settings. Methods. We developed an age-stratified, stochastic compartmental model of RSV transmission for 28 EU/EEA countries. It combines literature-based parameters on RSV natural history and product efficacy with country-specific demographic and contact patterns. After model calibration against age- and country-specific RSV hospitalisation rates, we designed scenarios for both la-mAbs and MV at four coverage levels, with and without catch-up immunisation for infants under six months at season onset. We then evaluated each scenario against a no-immunisation baseline. Results. At 95% coverage, the cross-country median reduction in RSV hospitalisations over one season in infants under 12 months is 29.9% for la-mAbs (country median range: 27.7-33.9%) and 22.4% for MV (20.0-25.6%), scaling linearly with coverage. Out of all averted hospitalisations, 78.3% (90% CI: [67.3, 92.7]%) are concentrated in infants aged 0-2 months for la-mAbs and 72.7% (90\% CI: [61.4, 88.6]%) for MV. A catch-up campaign nearly doubles the overall reduction in RSV hospitalisations. Conclusions. Despite country-specific heterogeneities, impact of la-mAbs and MV is comparable across settings and herd-immunity effects are largely negligible. This supports harmonised European guidelines on coverage targets. Seasonal catch-up campaigns emerge as an effective lever to maximise the impact of immunisation programmes.

Matching journals

The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"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.