Table 4. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for a multi-dose vaccine meeting minimally acceptable vaccine target criteria with no effect on megaviscera.
|
|
2-dose |
3-dose |
4-dose |
|||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Delay in cardiomyopathy |
10 y |
20 y |
10 y |
20 y |
10 y |
20 y |
|
Compliance | SAE Risk | ||||||
100% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1% |
Vaccinea,b |
Vaccine |
Vaccine |
Vaccine |
Vaccine |
Vaccine |
|
3% |
29c |
Vaccine |
476b |
Vaccine |
No Vaccine |
Vaccine |
75% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1% |
Vaccine |
Vaccine |
Vaccine |
Vaccine |
Vaccine |
Vaccine |
|
3% |
145 |
Vaccine |
No Vaccine |
Vaccine |
No Vaccine |
689 |
50% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1% |
Vaccine |
Vaccine |
40 |
Vaccine |
212 |
Vaccine |
|
3% |
1,034 |
Vaccine |
No Vaccine |
675 |
No Vaccine |
No Vaccine |
25% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1% |
278 |
Vaccine |
790 |
65 |
No Vaccine |
390 |
3% | No Vaccine | 2,701 | No Vaccine | No Vaccine | No Vaccine | No Vaccine |
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. bHighly cost-effective: ICER ≤ $9,867, Cost-effective: ICER $9,868–29,602. cBaseline minimally acceptable vaccine scenario