An economic model assessing the value of microneedle patch delivery of the seasonal influenza vaccine

Bruce Lee, Sarah Bartsch, Mercy Mvundura, Courtney Jarrahian, Kristina M. Zapf, Kathleen Marinan, Angela R. Wateska, Bill Snyder, Savitha Swaminathan, Erica Jacoby, James J. Norman, Mark R. Prausnitz, Darin Zehrung

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background: New vaccine technologies may improve the acceptability, delivery (potentially enabling self-administration), and product efficacy of influenza vaccines. One such technology is the microneedle patch (MNP), a skin delivery technology currently in development. Although MNPs hold promise in preclinical studies, their potential economic and epidemiologic impacts have not yet been evaluated. Methods: We utilized a susceptible-exposed-infectious-recovered (SEIR) transmission model linked to an economic influenza outcomes model to assess the economic value of introducing the MNP into the current influenza vaccine market in the United States from the third-party payer and societal perspectives. We also explored the impact of different vaccination settings, self-administration, the MNP price, vaccine efficacy, compliance, and MNP market share. Outcomes included costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), cases, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs; cost/QALY). Results: With healthcare provider administration, MNP introduction would be cost-effective (ICERs ≤$23,347/QALY) at all MNP price points ($9.50-$30) and market shares (10-60%) assessed, except when compliance and efficacy were assumed to be the same as existing vaccines and the MNP occupied a 10% market share. If MNP self-administration were available (assuming the same efficacy as current technologies), MNP compliance or its efficacy would need to increase by ≥3% in order to be cost-effective (ICERs ≤$1401/QALY), assuming a 2% reduction in administration success with unsupervised self-administration. Under these conditions, MNP introduction would be cost-effective for all price points and market shares assessed. Conclusions: When healthcare providers administered the MNP, its introduction would be cost-effective or dominant (i.e., less costly and more effective) in the majority of scenarios assessed. If self-administration were available, MNP introduction would be cost-effective if it increased compliance enough to overcome any decrease in self-administration success or if the MNP presentation afforded an increase in efficacy over current delivery methods for influenza vaccines.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)4727-4736
Number of pages10
JournalVaccine
Volume33
Issue number37
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 8 2015

Fingerprint

Economic Models
econometric models
Influenza Vaccines
Self Administration
quality-adjusted life year
influenza
market share
vaccines
Quality-Adjusted Life Years
Costs and Cost Analysis
compliance
Compliance
Technology
Vaccines
Economics
health services
Health Personnel
economics
Health Insurance Reimbursement
cost effectiveness

Keywords

  • Cost-effectiveness
  • Economics
  • Influenza
  • Influenza vaccination
  • Microneedle patch

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Immunology and Microbiology(all)
  • Infectious Diseases
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
  • veterinary(all)
  • Molecular Medicine

Cite this

An economic model assessing the value of microneedle patch delivery of the seasonal influenza vaccine. / Lee, Bruce; Bartsch, Sarah; Mvundura, Mercy; Jarrahian, Courtney; Zapf, Kristina M.; Marinan, Kathleen; Wateska, Angela R.; Snyder, Bill; Swaminathan, Savitha; Jacoby, Erica; Norman, James J.; Prausnitz, Mark R.; Zehrung, Darin.

In: Vaccine, Vol. 33, No. 37, 08.09.2015, p. 4727-4736.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Lee, B, Bartsch, S, Mvundura, M, Jarrahian, C, Zapf, KM, Marinan, K, Wateska, AR, Snyder, B, Swaminathan, S, Jacoby, E, Norman, JJ, Prausnitz, MR & Zehrung, D 2015, 'An economic model assessing the value of microneedle patch delivery of the seasonal influenza vaccine', Vaccine, vol. 33, no. 37, pp. 4727-4736. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2015.02.076
Lee, Bruce ; Bartsch, Sarah ; Mvundura, Mercy ; Jarrahian, Courtney ; Zapf, Kristina M. ; Marinan, Kathleen ; Wateska, Angela R. ; Snyder, Bill ; Swaminathan, Savitha ; Jacoby, Erica ; Norman, James J. ; Prausnitz, Mark R. ; Zehrung, Darin. / An economic model assessing the value of microneedle patch delivery of the seasonal influenza vaccine. In: Vaccine. 2015 ; Vol. 33, No. 37. pp. 4727-4736.
@article{71a3fcdceec941d3b92f3d3a3f8545c1,
title = "An economic model assessing the value of microneedle patch delivery of the seasonal influenza vaccine",
abstract = "Background: New vaccine technologies may improve the acceptability, delivery (potentially enabling self-administration), and product efficacy of influenza vaccines. One such technology is the microneedle patch (MNP), a skin delivery technology currently in development. Although MNPs hold promise in preclinical studies, their potential economic and epidemiologic impacts have not yet been evaluated. Methods: We utilized a susceptible-exposed-infectious-recovered (SEIR) transmission model linked to an economic influenza outcomes model to assess the economic value of introducing the MNP into the current influenza vaccine market in the United States from the third-party payer and societal perspectives. We also explored the impact of different vaccination settings, self-administration, the MNP price, vaccine efficacy, compliance, and MNP market share. Outcomes included costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), cases, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs; cost/QALY). Results: With healthcare provider administration, MNP introduction would be cost-effective (ICERs ≤$23,347/QALY) at all MNP price points ($9.50-$30) and market shares (10-60{\%}) assessed, except when compliance and efficacy were assumed to be the same as existing vaccines and the MNP occupied a 10{\%} market share. If MNP self-administration were available (assuming the same efficacy as current technologies), MNP compliance or its efficacy would need to increase by ≥3{\%} in order to be cost-effective (ICERs ≤$1401/QALY), assuming a 2{\%} reduction in administration success with unsupervised self-administration. Under these conditions, MNP introduction would be cost-effective for all price points and market shares assessed. Conclusions: When healthcare providers administered the MNP, its introduction would be cost-effective or dominant (i.e., less costly and more effective) in the majority of scenarios assessed. If self-administration were available, MNP introduction would be cost-effective if it increased compliance enough to overcome any decrease in self-administration success or if the MNP presentation afforded an increase in efficacy over current delivery methods for influenza vaccines.",
keywords = "Cost-effectiveness, Economics, Influenza, Influenza vaccination, Microneedle patch",
author = "Bruce Lee and Sarah Bartsch and Mercy Mvundura and Courtney Jarrahian and Zapf, {Kristina M.} and Kathleen Marinan and Wateska, {Angela R.} and Bill Snyder and Savitha Swaminathan and Erica Jacoby and Norman, {James J.} and Prausnitz, {Mark R.} and Darin Zehrung",
year = "2015",
month = "9",
day = "8",
doi = "10.1016/j.vaccine.2015.02.076",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "33",
pages = "4727--4736",
journal = "Vaccine",
issn = "0264-410X",
publisher = "Elsevier BV",
number = "37",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - An economic model assessing the value of microneedle patch delivery of the seasonal influenza vaccine

AU - Lee, Bruce

AU - Bartsch, Sarah

AU - Mvundura, Mercy

AU - Jarrahian, Courtney

AU - Zapf, Kristina M.

AU - Marinan, Kathleen

AU - Wateska, Angela R.

AU - Snyder, Bill

AU - Swaminathan, Savitha

AU - Jacoby, Erica

AU - Norman, James J.

AU - Prausnitz, Mark R.

AU - Zehrung, Darin

PY - 2015/9/8

Y1 - 2015/9/8

N2 - Background: New vaccine technologies may improve the acceptability, delivery (potentially enabling self-administration), and product efficacy of influenza vaccines. One such technology is the microneedle patch (MNP), a skin delivery technology currently in development. Although MNPs hold promise in preclinical studies, their potential economic and epidemiologic impacts have not yet been evaluated. Methods: We utilized a susceptible-exposed-infectious-recovered (SEIR) transmission model linked to an economic influenza outcomes model to assess the economic value of introducing the MNP into the current influenza vaccine market in the United States from the third-party payer and societal perspectives. We also explored the impact of different vaccination settings, self-administration, the MNP price, vaccine efficacy, compliance, and MNP market share. Outcomes included costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), cases, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs; cost/QALY). Results: With healthcare provider administration, MNP introduction would be cost-effective (ICERs ≤$23,347/QALY) at all MNP price points ($9.50-$30) and market shares (10-60%) assessed, except when compliance and efficacy were assumed to be the same as existing vaccines and the MNP occupied a 10% market share. If MNP self-administration were available (assuming the same efficacy as current technologies), MNP compliance or its efficacy would need to increase by ≥3% in order to be cost-effective (ICERs ≤$1401/QALY), assuming a 2% reduction in administration success with unsupervised self-administration. Under these conditions, MNP introduction would be cost-effective for all price points and market shares assessed. Conclusions: When healthcare providers administered the MNP, its introduction would be cost-effective or dominant (i.e., less costly and more effective) in the majority of scenarios assessed. If self-administration were available, MNP introduction would be cost-effective if it increased compliance enough to overcome any decrease in self-administration success or if the MNP presentation afforded an increase in efficacy over current delivery methods for influenza vaccines.

AB - Background: New vaccine technologies may improve the acceptability, delivery (potentially enabling self-administration), and product efficacy of influenza vaccines. One such technology is the microneedle patch (MNP), a skin delivery technology currently in development. Although MNPs hold promise in preclinical studies, their potential economic and epidemiologic impacts have not yet been evaluated. Methods: We utilized a susceptible-exposed-infectious-recovered (SEIR) transmission model linked to an economic influenza outcomes model to assess the economic value of introducing the MNP into the current influenza vaccine market in the United States from the third-party payer and societal perspectives. We also explored the impact of different vaccination settings, self-administration, the MNP price, vaccine efficacy, compliance, and MNP market share. Outcomes included costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), cases, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs; cost/QALY). Results: With healthcare provider administration, MNP introduction would be cost-effective (ICERs ≤$23,347/QALY) at all MNP price points ($9.50-$30) and market shares (10-60%) assessed, except when compliance and efficacy were assumed to be the same as existing vaccines and the MNP occupied a 10% market share. If MNP self-administration were available (assuming the same efficacy as current technologies), MNP compliance or its efficacy would need to increase by ≥3% in order to be cost-effective (ICERs ≤$1401/QALY), assuming a 2% reduction in administration success with unsupervised self-administration. Under these conditions, MNP introduction would be cost-effective for all price points and market shares assessed. Conclusions: When healthcare providers administered the MNP, its introduction would be cost-effective or dominant (i.e., less costly and more effective) in the majority of scenarios assessed. If self-administration were available, MNP introduction would be cost-effective if it increased compliance enough to overcome any decrease in self-administration success or if the MNP presentation afforded an increase in efficacy over current delivery methods for influenza vaccines.

KW - Cost-effectiveness

KW - Economics

KW - Influenza

KW - Influenza vaccination

KW - Microneedle patch

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84940447009&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84940447009&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.vaccine.2015.02.076

DO - 10.1016/j.vaccine.2015.02.076

M3 - Article

VL - 33

SP - 4727

EP - 4736

JO - Vaccine

JF - Vaccine

SN - 0264-410X

IS - 37

ER -