Table 3. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for a two-dose vaccine meeting desired vaccine target criteria with no effect on megaviscera.
| Duration of protection | 10 y | 20 y | Lifetime | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Compliance |
SAE Risk |
|
|
|
|
100% |
|
|
|
|
| |
1% |
Vaccinea |
Vaccine |
Vaccine |
| |
3% |
42c |
Vaccine |
Vaccineb |
|
75% |
|
|
|
|
| |
1% |
Vaccine |
Vaccine |
Vaccine |
| |
3% |
No Vaccine |
Vaccine |
Vaccine |
|
50% |
|
|
|
|
| |
1% |
Vaccine |
Vaccine |
Vaccine |
| |
3% |
No Vaccine |
Vaccine |
Vaccine |
|
25% |
|
|
|
|
| |
1% |
No Vaccine |
Vaccine |
Vaccine |
| 3% | No Vaccine | No Vaccine | 1,075 | |
a “Vaccine” and “No Vaccine” indicates that the strategy mentioned was economically dominant (was less costly and more effective) over the other for that scenario. bVaccine was economically dominant over no vaccine for the baseline scenario (1 dose vaccine, lifetime protection, 100% compliance, 3% risk of SAEs). cHighly cost-effective: ICER ≤ $9,867, Cost-effective: ICER $9,868–29,602