Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 Jul 5;36(29):4362-4368.
doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2018.04.071.

Cost-effectiveness of nonavalent HPV vaccination among males aged 22 through 26 years in the United States

Affiliations

Cost-effectiveness of nonavalent HPV vaccination among males aged 22 through 26 years in the United States

Harrell W Chesson et al. Vaccine. .

Abstract

Introduction: In the United States, routine human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination is recommended for females and males at age 11 or 12 years; the series can be started at age 9 years. Vaccination is also recommended for females through age 26 years and males through age 21 years. The objective of this study was to assess the health impact and cost-effectiveness of harmonizing female and male vaccination recommendations by increasing the upper recommended catch-up age of HPV vaccination for males from age 21 to age 26 years.

Methods: We updated a published model of the health impact and cost-effectiveness of 9-valent human papillomavirus vaccine (9vHPV). We examined the cost-effectiveness of (1) 9vHPV for females aged 12 through 26 years and males aged 12 through 21 years, and (2) an expanded program including males through age 26 years.

Results: Compared to no vaccination, providing 9vHPV for females aged 12 through 26 years and males aged 12 through 21 years cost an estimated $16,600 (in 2016 U.S. dollars) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. The estimated cost per QALY gained by expanding male vaccination through age 26 years was $228,800 and ranged from $137,900 to $367,300 in multi-way sensitivity analyses.

Conclusions: The cost-effectiveness ratios we estimated are not so favorable as to make a strong economic case for recommending expanding male vaccination, yet are not so unfavorable as to preclude consideration of expanding male vaccination. The wide range of plausible results we obtained may underestimate the true degree of uncertainty, due to model limitations. For example, the cost per QALY might be less than our lower bound estimate of $137,900 had our model allowed for vaccine protection against re-infection. Models that specifically incorporate men who have sex with men (MSM) are needed to provide a more comprehensive assessment of male HPV vaccination strategies.

Keywords: Cost-effectiveness; Cost-utility; Disease transmission models; Human papillomavirus; Nonavalent HPV vaccine; Vaccines.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of interest

The authors report no conflicts of interest.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Markowitz LE, Dunne EF, Saraiya M, Chesson HW, Curtis CR, Gee J, et al. Human papillomavirus vaccination: recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). MMWR Recomm Rep 2014;63:1–30. - PubMed
    1. Markowitz LE, Meites E, Unger ER. Two vs three doses of human papillomavirus vaccine: new policy for the second decade of the vaccination program. JAMA 2016;316:2370–2. - PubMed
    1. Meites E, Kempe A, Markowitz LE. Use of a 2-dose schedule for human papillomavirus vaccination – updated recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2016;65:1405–8. - PubMed
    1. Kim JJ. Targeted human papillomavirus vaccination of men who have sex with men in the USA: a cost-effectiveness modelling analysis. Lancet Infect Dis 2010;10:845–52. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Lawton MD, Nathan M, Asboe D. HPV vaccination to prevent anal cancer in men who have sex with men. Sex Transm Infect 2013;89:342–3. - PubMed

Substances

LinkOut - more resources