COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF PCV20 COMPARED WITH PCV15 FOLLOWED BY PPSV23 AMONG ADULTS IN SOUTH KOREA
Author(s)
Dong-Won Kang, PhD1, Eunji Heo, RPH2, Min Joo Choi, PhD3, Sun-Kyeong Park, PhD4.
1Ajou University, College of Pharmacy, Suwon, Korea, Republic of, 2Health & Value, Pfizer Korea Ltd., Seoul, Korea, Republic of, 3Division of Infectious Disease, Department of Internal Medicine, Korea University Guro Hospital, Seoul, Korea, Republic of, 4The Catholic University of Korea, College of Pharmacy, Bucheon, Korea, Republic of.
1Ajou University, College of Pharmacy, Suwon, Korea, Republic of, 2Health & Value, Pfizer Korea Ltd., Seoul, Korea, Republic of, 3Division of Infectious Disease, Department of Internal Medicine, Korea University Guro Hospital, Seoul, Korea, Republic of, 4The Catholic University of Korea, College of Pharmacy, Bucheon, Korea, Republic of.
OBJECTIVES: Pneumococcal vaccination strategies for adults continue to evolve in South Korea, while the 23‑valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPSV23) remains the only vaccine currently covered by the National Immunization Program (NIP), resulting in a gap between guideline-recommended strategies and public funding. This study evaluated the cost‑effectiveness of the 20‑valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV20) compared with PCV15 followed by PPSV23 among adults aged ≥65 years.
METHODS: A cohort‑based Markov model was developed to estimate lifetime clinical and economic outcomes among adults aged ≥65 years from a healthcare system perspective. The population was stratified by age and pneumococcal disease risk status. In the base‑case analysis, PCV20 was compared with PCV15 followed by PPSV23, as both strategies are non‑preferentially recommended for adult in the Korean Society of Infectious Diseases guideline. Health states included invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD), non‑bacteremic pneumonia (NBP), and death. Model inputs were derived from Korean epidemiological data and published literature. Outcomes included life-years (LYs), quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), total costs, and clinical outcomes such as IPD, NBP, and deaths. Incremental cost-effectiveness was assessed as cost per LY gained and cost per QALY gained. Scenario analyses assessed uncertainty, including vaccine price threshold analyses using the current pediatric NIP price of PCV15 as the reference value. Costs and outcomes were discounted at 4.5% annually.
RESULTS: PCV20 generated higher life-years and QALYs while reducing total medical costs compared with PCV15 followed by PPSV23, demonstrating a cost-saving (dominant) outcome. In scenario analyses, PCV20 remained cost-saving when its price was increased up to 1.7-fold relative to current PCV15 pediatric NIP price, and remained cost-effective up to 2.3-fold.
CONCLUSIONS: PCV20 is a cost-saving option compared with PCV15 followed by PPSV23 among adults aged ≥65 years in South Korea. These findings support consideration of PCV20 in adult pneumococcal vaccination strategies.
METHODS: A cohort‑based Markov model was developed to estimate lifetime clinical and economic outcomes among adults aged ≥65 years from a healthcare system perspective. The population was stratified by age and pneumococcal disease risk status. In the base‑case analysis, PCV20 was compared with PCV15 followed by PPSV23, as both strategies are non‑preferentially recommended for adult in the Korean Society of Infectious Diseases guideline. Health states included invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD), non‑bacteremic pneumonia (NBP), and death. Model inputs were derived from Korean epidemiological data and published literature. Outcomes included life-years (LYs), quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), total costs, and clinical outcomes such as IPD, NBP, and deaths. Incremental cost-effectiveness was assessed as cost per LY gained and cost per QALY gained. Scenario analyses assessed uncertainty, including vaccine price threshold analyses using the current pediatric NIP price of PCV15 as the reference value. Costs and outcomes were discounted at 4.5% annually.
RESULTS: PCV20 generated higher life-years and QALYs while reducing total medical costs compared with PCV15 followed by PPSV23, demonstrating a cost-saving (dominant) outcome. In scenario analyses, PCV20 remained cost-saving when its price was increased up to 1.7-fold relative to current PCV15 pediatric NIP price, and remained cost-effective up to 2.3-fold.
CONCLUSIONS: PCV20 is a cost-saving option compared with PCV15 followed by PPSV23 among adults aged ≥65 years in South Korea. These findings support consideration of PCV20 in adult pneumococcal vaccination strategies.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2026-11, ISPOR Europe 2026, Vienna, Austria
Value in Health, Volume 29, Issue 12S
Code
EE596
Topic
Economic Evaluation, Health Policy & Regulatory, Health Technology Assessment
Disease
Infectious Disease (non-vaccine), No Additional Disease & Conditions/Specialized Treatment Areas, Respiratory-Related Disorders (Allergy, Asthma, Smoking, Other Respiratory), Vaccines