COST-EFFECTIVENESS AND BUDGET IMPACT ANALYSIS OF THE TRIVALENT ADJUVANTED INFLUENZA VACCINE IN PEOPLE OVER 50 YEARS OF AGE FOR ARGENTINA
Author(s)
Leandro J. Pastori, Sr., MEd1, Constanza Silvestrini Viola, MSc2, Tomas Alconada, MEd2, Gonzalo Pereira, Sr3, Jose Montes, MEd3, Joaquin F. Mould-Quevedo, MBA, MSc, PhD4, Carolina Saenz, MEd3, Nathalia Katz, MEd5, Ariel Bardach, MSc, PhD, MD6, Natalia Espinola, MSc6;
1Institute for Clinical Effectiveness and Health Policy (IECS), Researcher, Ciudad de Buenos Aires, Argentina, 2Institute for Clinical Effectiveness and Health Policy (IECS), Ciudad de Buenos Aires, Argentina, 3CSL Seqirus, Buenos Aires, Argentina, 4Seqirus, Summit, NJ, USA, 5ISALUD University, Buenos Aires, Argentina, 6Institute for Clinical Effectiveness and Health Policy (IECS), Buenos Aires, Argentina
1Institute for Clinical Effectiveness and Health Policy (IECS), Researcher, Ciudad de Buenos Aires, Argentina, 2Institute for Clinical Effectiveness and Health Policy (IECS), Ciudad de Buenos Aires, Argentina, 3CSL Seqirus, Buenos Aires, Argentina, 4Seqirus, Summit, NJ, USA, 5ISALUD University, Buenos Aires, Argentina, 6Institute for Clinical Effectiveness and Health Policy (IECS), Buenos Aires, Argentina
OBJECTIVES: Influenza affects millions of people worldwide, particularly adults aged 50-64 with comorbidities and those aged ≥ 65 years. Annual vaccination is the most effective strategy to prevent influenza-related complications. The adjuvanted trivalent influenza vaccine (aTIV) has demonstrated greater effectiveness compared to non-adjuvanted vaccines. This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness and budget impact of introducing aTIV for high-risk adults aged 50-64 years, alongside its use in adults aged ≥ 65 years from the perspective of the Argentine health system.
METHODS: A decision-analytic static model was developed to compare aTIV with standard-dose trivalent influenza vaccine (SD-TIV) over a single influenza season, considering a cohort of approximately 12 million. In addition, a 5-year budget impact analysis (BIA) was conducted under scenarios of progressive uptake: up to 40% coverage among high-risk adults aged 50-64 years, and an increase from 55% to 80% among adults aged ≥ 65 years. Model parameters were sourced from international literature, local sources, and expert consultations. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.
RESULTS: Expanding aTIV compared to SD-TIV resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of USD 5,999 per quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained, well below Argentina’s reference cost-effectiveness threshold (USD 11,059/QALY), corresponding to a gain of 1,489 QALYs at an incremental cost of USD 8.34 million. Although vaccine acquisition costs were higher, these were largely offset by avoided medical visits and hospitalizations. The BIA estimated that, under targeted adoption, average annual per-member-per-month costs would increase by only USD 0.0025, remaining below the Argentine moderate reference budget impact threshold (USD 0.0065).
CONCLUSIONS: Implementing aTIV in high-risk adults aged 50-64 years and adults aged ≥ 65 years would be both cost-effective and affordable for the health system in Argentina. These findings support the consolidation and potential expansion of current vaccination strategies to reduce influenza burden.
METHODS: A decision-analytic static model was developed to compare aTIV with standard-dose trivalent influenza vaccine (SD-TIV) over a single influenza season, considering a cohort of approximately 12 million. In addition, a 5-year budget impact analysis (BIA) was conducted under scenarios of progressive uptake: up to 40% coverage among high-risk adults aged 50-64 years, and an increase from 55% to 80% among adults aged ≥ 65 years. Model parameters were sourced from international literature, local sources, and expert consultations. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.
RESULTS: Expanding aTIV compared to SD-TIV resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of USD 5,999 per quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained, well below Argentina’s reference cost-effectiveness threshold (USD 11,059/QALY), corresponding to a gain of 1,489 QALYs at an incremental cost of USD 8.34 million. Although vaccine acquisition costs were higher, these were largely offset by avoided medical visits and hospitalizations. The BIA estimated that, under targeted adoption, average annual per-member-per-month costs would increase by only USD 0.0025, remaining below the Argentine moderate reference budget impact threshold (USD 0.0065).
CONCLUSIONS: Implementing aTIV in high-risk adults aged 50-64 years and adults aged ≥ 65 years would be both cost-effective and affordable for the health system in Argentina. These findings support the consolidation and potential expansion of current vaccination strategies to reduce influenza burden.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2026-05, ISPOR 2026, Philadelphia, PA, USA
Value in Health, Volume 29, Issue S6
Code
P14
Topic
Economic Evaluation
Topic Subcategory
Budget Impact Analysis
Disease
STA: Vaccines