Estimated impact of RTS,S/AS01 malaria vaccine allocation strategies in sub-Saharan Africa: A modelling study

BackgroundThe RTS,S/AS01 vaccine against Plasmodium falciparum malaria infection completed phase III trials in 2014 and demonstrated efficacy against clinical malaria of approximately 36% over 4 years for a 4-dose schedule in children aged 5–17 months. Pilot vaccine implementation has recently begun in 3 African countries. If the pilots demonstrate both a positive health impact and resolve remaining safety concerns, wider roll-out could be recommended from 2021 onwards. Vaccine demand may, however, outstrip initial supply. We sought to identify where vaccine introduction should be prioritised to maximise public health impact under a range of supply constraints using mathematical modelling.Methods and findingsUsing a mathematical model of P. falciparum malaria transmission and RTS,S vaccine impact, we estimated the clinical cases and deaths averted in children aged 0–5 years in sub-Saharan Africa under 2 scenarios for vaccine coverage (100% and realistic) and 2 scenarios for other interventions (current coverage and World Health Organization [WHO] Global Technical Strategy targets). We used a prioritisation algorithm to identify potential allocative efficiency gains from prioritising vaccine allocation among countries or administrative units to maximise cases or deaths averted. If malaria burden at introduction is similar to current levels—assuming realistic vaccine coverage and country-level prioritisation in areas with parasite prevalence >10%—we estimate that 4.3 million malaria cases (95% credible interval [CrI] 2.8–6.8 million) and 22,000 deaths (95% CrI 11,000–35,000) in children younger than 5 years could be averted annually at a dose constraint of 30 million. This decreases to 3.0 million cases (95% CrI 2.0–4.7 million) and 14,000 deaths (95% CrI 7,000–23,000) at a dose constraint of 20 million, and increases to 6.6 million cases (95% CrI 4.2–10.8 million) and 38,000 deaths (95% CrI 18,000–61,000) at a dose constraint of 60 million. At 100% vaccine coverage, these impact estimates increase to 5.2 million cases (95% CrI 3.5–8.2 million) and 27,000 deaths (95% CrI 14,000–43,000), 3.9 million cases (95% CrI 2.7–6.0 million) and 19,000 deaths (95% CrI 10,000–30,000), and 10.0 million cases (95% CrI 6.7–15.7 million) and 51,000 deaths (95% CrI 25,000–82,000), respectively. Under realistic vaccine coverage, if the vaccine is prioritised sub-nationally, 5.3 million cases (95% CrI 3.5–8.2 million) and 24,000 deaths (95% CrI 12,000–38,000) could be averted at a dose constraint of 30 million. Furthermore, sub-national prioritisation would allow introduction in almost double the number of countries compared to national prioritisation (21 versus 11). If vaccine introduction is prioritised in the 3 pilot countries (Ghana, Kenya, and Malawi), health impact would be reduced, but this effect becomes less substantial (change of <5%) if 50 million or more doses are available. We did not account for within-country variation in vaccine coverage, and the optimisation was based on a single outcome measure, therefore this study should be used to understand overall trends rather than guide country-specific allocation.ConclusionsThese results suggest that the impact of constraints in vaccine supply on the public health impact of the RTS,S malaria vaccine could be reduced by introducing the vaccine at the sub-national level and prioritising countries with the highest malaria incidence.

Alexandra Hogan and colleagues explore strategies to optimize vaccine allocation for maximum public health benefit in the face of potential supply constraints.     

COVID-19 vaccination in Sindh Province,Pakistan: A modelling study of health impact and cost-effectiveness

BackgroundMultiple Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines appear to be safe and efficacious, but only high-income countries have the resources to procure sufficient vaccine doses for most of their eligible populations. The World Health Organization has published guidelines for vaccine prioritisation, but most vaccine impact projections have focused on high-income countries, and few incorporate economic considerations. To address this evidence gap, we projected the health and economic impact of different vaccination scenarios in Sindh Province, Pakistan (population: 48 million).Methods and findingsWe fitted a compartmental transmission model to COVID-19 cases and deaths in Sindh from 30 April to 15 September 2020. We then projected cases, deaths, and hospitalisation outcomes over 10 years under different vaccine scenarios. Finally, we combined these projections with a detailed economic model to estimate incremental costs (from healthcare and partial societal perspectives), disability-adjusted life years (DALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for each scenario.We project that 1 year of vaccine distribution, at delivery rates consistent with COVAX projections, using an infection-blocking vaccine at $3/dose with 70% efficacy and 2.5-year duration of protection is likely to avert around 0.9 (95% credible interval (CrI): 0.9, 1.0) million cases, 10.1 (95% CrI: 10.1, 10.3) thousand deaths, and 70.1 (95% CrI: 69.9, 70.6) thousand DALYs, with an ICER of $27.9 per DALY averted from the health system perspective. Under a broad range of alternative scenarios, we find that initially prioritising the older (65+) population generally prevents more deaths. However, unprioritised distribution has almost the same cost-effectiveness when considering all outcomes, and both prioritised and unprioritised programmes can be cost-effective for low per-dose costs. High vaccine prices ($10/dose), however, may not be cost-effective, depending on the specifics of vaccine performance, distribution programme, and future pandemic trends.The principal drivers of the health outcomes are the fitted values for the overall transmission scaling parameter and disease natural history parameters from other studies, particularly age-specific probabilities of infection and symptomatic disease, as well as social contact rates. Other parameters are investigated in sensitivity analyses.This study is limited by model approximations, available data, and future uncertainty. Because the model is a single-population compartmental model, detailed impacts of nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) such as household isolation cannot be practically represented or evaluated in combination with vaccine programmes. Similarly, the model cannot consider prioritising groups like healthcare or other essential workers. The model is only fitted to the reported case and death data, which are incomplete and not disaggregated by, e.g., age. Finally, because the future impact and implementation cost of NPIs are uncertain, how these would interact with vaccination remains an open question.ConclusionsCOVID-19 vaccination can have a considerable health impact and is likely to be cost-effective if more optimistic vaccine scenarios apply. Preventing severe disease is an important contributor to this impact. However, the advantage of prioritising older, high-risk populations is smaller in generally younger populations. This reduction is especially true in populations with more past transmission, and if the vaccine is likely to further impede transmission rather than just disease. Those conditions are typical of many low- and middle-income countries.

In a modelling study, Carl A B Pearson and coauthors investigate the health impact and cost-effectiveness of various COVID-19 vaccination scenarios in Sindh Province, Pakistan     

Focus: Bioethics: Scaling Up the Global COVID-19 Vaccination Program: Production, Allocation,and Distribution with an Emphasis on Equity

After just over 2 years, the COVID-19 pandemic continues to contribute to extensive morbidity and mortality worldwide. In addition to the burden and loss caused by the virus itself, collateral consequences of the pandemic wreak havoc on the global economy, disrupt essential health care services and childhood education, and weaken existing mechanisms of preventing other infectious diseases such as HIV and tuberculosis (TB). These impacts are unequally felt in low- and middle-income countries due to an insufficient supply of COVID-19 vaccines and an unfair allocation process of distributing vaccines worldwide. An emphasis on equity throughout the continued scaling up of the global COVID-19 vaccination program with production, allocation, and distribution of COVID-19 vaccines could begin to mitigate the disparities in vaccinations seen across the world. Current policy solutions including COVAX, intellectual property waivers, technology transfer in South Africa, and dose donations are examined to evaluate efficacy in increasing equitable access to COVID-19 vaccines.     

Charity or empowerment? The role of COVAX for low and middle-income countries

What has the past reaction to the COVID-19 pandemic taught us? We have seen that many low and middle-income countries (LMICs) still lack access to vaccines, and it seems little progress has been made in the last few months and year. This article discusses whether the current strategies, most notably, vaccine donations by the international community and the COVID-19 global access facility COVAX, offer meaningful solutions to tackle the problem. At the centre of our analysis, we compare the concepts of “donations” and “charity” with “vaccine equity” and the “empowerment” of poorer countries. We suggest that the achievement of fair global vaccine production requires that our global approach is supportive of the idea of empowerment. We, therefore, need structural reforms, which would most importantly include capacity building, to positively impact this goal and to take the interests of the global poor seriously.     

Anatomy of the first six months of COVID-19 vaccination campaign in Italy

We analyze the effectiveness of the first six months of vaccination campaign against SARS-CoV-2 in Italy by using a computational epidemic model which takes into account demographic, mobility, vaccines data, as well as estimates of the introduction and spreading of the more transmissible Alpha variant. We consider six sub-national regions and study the effect of vaccines in terms of number of averted deaths, infections, and reduction in the Infection Fatality Rate (IFR) with respect to counterfactual scenarios with the actual non-pharmaceuticals interventions but no vaccine administration. Furthermore, we compare the effectiveness in counterfactual scenarios with different vaccines allocation strategies and vaccination rates. Our results show that, as of 2021/07/05, vaccines averted 29, 350 (IQR: [16, 454–42, 826]) deaths and 4, 256, 332 (IQR: [1, 675, 564–6, 980, 070]) infections and a new pandemic wave in the country. During the same period, they achieved a −22.2% (IQR: [−31.4%; −13.9%]) IFR reduction. We show that a campaign that would have strictly prioritized age groups at higher risk of dying from COVID-19, besides frontline workers and the fragile population, would have implied additional benefits both in terms of avoided fatalities and reduction in the IFR. Strategies targeting the most active age groups would have prevented a higher number of infections but would have been associated with more deaths. Finally, we study the effects of different vaccination intake scenarios by rescaling the number of available doses in the time period under study to those administered in other countries of reference. The modeling framework can be applied to other countries to provide a mechanistic characterization of vaccination campaigns worldwide.     

Health Gains and Financial Protection from Pneumococcal Vaccination and Pneumonia Treatment in Ethiopia: Results from an Extended Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

Background

Pneumonia and pneumococcal disease cause a large disease burden in resource-constrained settings. We pursue an extended cost-effectiveness analysis (ECEA) of two fully publicly financed interventions in Ethiopia: pneumococcal vaccination for newborns and pneumonia treatment for under-five children in Ethiopia.

Methods

We apply ECEA methods and estimate the program impact on: (1) government program costs; (2) pneumonia and pneumococcal deaths averted; (3) household expenses related to pneumonia/pneumococcal disease treatment averted; (4) prevention of household medical impoverishment measured by an imputed money-metric value of financial risk protection; and (5) distributional consequences across the wealth strata of the country population. Available epidemiological and cost data from Ethiopia are applied and the two interventions are assessed separately at various incremental coverage levels.

Results

Scaling-up pneumococcal vaccines at around 40% coverage would cost about $11.5 million and avert about 2090 child deaths annually, while a 10% increase of pneumonia treatment to all children under 5 years of age would cost about $13.9 million and avert 2610 deaths annually. Health benefits of the two interventions publicly financed would be concentrated among the bottom income quintile, where 30–40% of all deaths averted would be expected to occur in the poorest quintile. In sum, the two interventions would eliminate a total of $2.4 million of private household expenditures annually, where the richest quintile benefits from around 30% of the total private expenditures averted. The financial risk protection benefits would be largely concentrated among the bottom income quintile. The results are most sensitive to variations in vaccine price, population size, number of deaths due to pneumonia, efficacy of interventions and out-of-pocket copayment share.

Conclusions

Vaccine and treatment interventions for children, as shown with the illustrative examples of pneumococcal vaccine and pneumonia treatment, can bring large health and financial benefits to households in Ethiopia, most particularly among the poorest socio-economic groups.     

Optimizing one-dose and two-dose cholera vaccine allocation in outbreak settings: A modeling study

BackgroundA global stockpile of oral cholera vaccine (OCV) was established in 2013 for use in outbreak response and are licensed as two-dose regimens. Vaccine availability, however, remains limited. Previous studies have found that a single dose of OCV may provide substantial protection against cholera.MethodsUsing a mathematical model with two age groups paired with optimization algorithms, we determine the optimal vaccination strategy with one and two doses of vaccine to minimize cumulative overall infections, symptomatic infections, and deaths. We explore counterfactual vaccination scenarios in three distinct settings: Maela, the largest refugee camp in Thailand, with high in- and out-migration; N’Djamena, Chad, a densely populated region; and Haiti, where departments are connected by rivers and roads.ResultsOver the short term under limited vaccine supply, the optimal strategies for all objectives prioritize one dose to the older age group (over five years old), irrespective of setting and level of vaccination coverage. As more vaccine becomes available, it is optimal to administer a second dose for long-term protection. With enough vaccine to cover the whole population with one dose, the optimal strategies can avert up to 30% to 90% of deaths and 36% to 92% of symptomatic infections across the three settings over one year. The one-dose optimal strategies can avert 1.2 to 1.8 times as many cases and deaths compared to the standard two-dose strategy.ConclusionsIn an outbreak setting, speedy vaccination campaigns with a single dose of OCV is likely to avert more cases and deaths than a two-dose pro-rata campaign under a limited vaccine supply.     

Helicobacter pylori vaccine development and use: a cost-effectiveness analysis using the Institute of Medicine Methodology

Background. Prophylactic vaccination has been suggested as a better strategy than antibiotics to control Helicobacter pylori infection. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness (CE) of H. pylori vaccine development and use in the United States and developing countries, using a method developed by the Institute of Medicine (IOM).
Methods. The IOM model includes costs of vaccine development, vaccination program, and averted medical treatments; morbidity and mortality prevented; expected efficacy and use; and proportion of disease that is vaccine-preventable. The model employs infant mortality equivalence (IME) to estimate disease burden; with IME, the societal cost of infection-related morbidity is expressed as equivalent to a specific rate of infant deaths. We tested model assumptions by univariate sensitivity analyses.
Results. In the United States, H. pylori vaccine would save 1,176 IME and would cost $58.71 million (1997 dollars) annually, yielding a CE ratio of $49,932 per IME; the health benefits would exceed all IOM-studied vaccines, even when efficacy dropped to 55%. H. pylori vaccine could be cost-saving if priced at less than $60 per course. In developing countries, H. pylori vaccine would rank unfavorably both in terms of health benefits (33,518 IME) and costs ($5,254 million). None of the changes in assumptions improved significantly the H. pylori vaccine's ranking relative to other IOM-studied vaccines.
Conclusions. Compared to other vaccines evaluated in the IOM study, H. pylori vaccine warrants public resource allocation for accelerated development and use in the United States but not for use in developing countries.     

The value of decreasing the duration of the infectious period of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection

Finding medications or vaccines that may decrease the infectious period of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) could potentially reduce transmission in the broader population. We developed a computational model of the U.S. simulating the spread of SARS-CoV-2 and the potential clinical and economic impact of reducing the infectious period duration. Simulation experiments found that reducing the average infectious period duration could avert a median of 442,852 [treating 25% of symptomatic cases, reducing by 0.5 days, reproductive number (R₀) 3.5, and starting treatment when 15% of the population has been exposed] to 44.4 million SARS-CoV-2 cases (treating 75% of all infected cases, reducing by 3.5 days, R₀ 2.0). With R₀ 2.5, reducing the average infectious period duration by 0.5 days for 25% of symptomatic cases averted 1.4 million cases and 99,398 hospitalizations; increasing to 75% of symptomatic cases averted 2.8 million cases. At $500/person, treating 25% of symptomatic cases saved $209.5 billion (societal perspective). Further reducing the average infectious period duration by 3.5 days averted 7.4 million cases (treating 25% of symptomatic cases). Expanding treatment to 75% of all infected cases, including asymptomatic infections (R₀ 2.5), averted 35.9 million cases and 4 million hospitalizations, saving $48.8 billion (societal perspective and starting treatment after 5% of the population has been exposed). Our study quantifies the potential effects of reducing the SARS-CoV-2 infectious period duration.     

Achieving global equity for COVID-19 vaccines: Stronger international partnerships and greater advocacy and solidarity are needed

Peter Figueroa and co-authors advocate for equity in the worldwide provision of COVID-19 vaccines.

Many may not be aware of the full extent of global inequity in the rollout of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines in response to the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic. As of June 20, 2021, only 0.9% of those living in low-income countries and less than 10% of those in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) had received at least 1 dose of a COVID-19 vaccine compared with 43% of the population living in high-income countries (HICs) [1] (Fig 1). Only 2.4% of the population of Africa had been vaccinated compared with 41% of North America and 38% of Europe [1,2] (S1 Fig). Primarily due to the inability to access COVID-19 vaccines, less than 10% of the population in as many as 85 LMICs had been vaccinated compared with over 60% of the population in 26 HICs [1]. Only 10 countries account for more than 75% of all COVID-19 vaccines administered [3]. This striking and ongoing inequity has occurred despite the explicit ethical principles affirming equity of access to COVID-19 vaccines articulated in WHO SAGE values framework [4,5] prepared in mid-2020, well prior to the availability of COVID-19 vaccines.Open in a separate windowFig 1Proportion of people vaccinated with at least 1 dose of COVID-19 vaccine by income (April 14 to June 23, 2021).Note: Data on China appeared on the database on June 9, hence the jump in upper middle-income countries. COVID-19, Coronavirus Disease 2019. Source: https://ourworldindata.org/covid-vaccinations.The COVID-19 pandemic highlights the grave inequity and inadequacy of the global preparedness and response to serious emerging infections. The establishment of the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) in 2018, the Access to COVID-19 Tools Accelerator (ACT-A), and the COVID-19 Vaccines Global Access (COVAX) Facility in April 2020 and the rapid development of COVID-19 vaccines were all positive and extraordinary developments [6]. The COVAX Facility, as of June 2021, has delivered approximately 83 million vaccine doses to 75 countries, representing approximately 4% of the global supply, and one-fifth of this was for HICs [7]. The COVAX Facility has been challenged to meet its supply commitments to LMICs due to insufficient access to doses of COVID-19 vaccines with the prerequisite WHO emergency use listing (EUL) or, under exceptional circumstances, product approval by a stringent regulatory authority (SRA) [8,9]. Because of the anticipated insufficient COVID-19 vaccine supply through the COVAX Facility, the majority of nonvaccine-producing LMIC countries made the decision, early in the COVID-19 pandemic, to secure and use vaccines produced in China or Russia prior to receipt of WHO EUL or SRA approval. Most of the vaccines used in LMICs as of June 20, 2021 (nearly 1.5 billion doses of the 2.6 billion doses administered) were neither WHO EUL or SRA approved at the time they were given [10]. This may raise possible concerns with respect to the effectiveness, safety, and acceptability of individual vaccines used by many countries [8,9].     

Antenatal Syphilis Screening Using Point-Of-Care Testing in Low- and Middle-Income Countries in Asia and Latin America: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

BackgroundUntreated syphilis in pregnancy is associated with adverse clinical outcomes to the infant. In low- and middle-income countries in Asia and Latin America, 20%-30% of women are not tested for syphilis during pregnancy. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of increasing the coverage for antenatal syphilis screening in 11 Asian and 20 Latin American countries, using a point-of-care immunochromatographic strip (ICS) test.MethodsThe decision analytical cost-effectiveness models reported incremental costs per disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) averted from the perspectives of the national health care payer. Clinical outcomes were stillbirths, neonatal deaths, and congenital syphilis. DALYs were computed using WHO disability weights. Costs included the ICS test, three injections of benzathine penicillin, and nurse wages. Country-specific inputs included the antenatal prevalence of syphilis and the proportion of women in the antenatal care setting that are screened for syphilis infection as reported in the 2014 WHO baseline report on global sexually transmitted infection surveillance. Country-specific data on the annual number of live births, proportion of women with at least one antenatal care visit, and per capita gross national income were also included in the model.ResultsThe incremental cost/DALY averted of syphilis screening is US$53 (range: US$10-US$332; Prob<1*per capita GDP=99.71%) in Asia and US$60 (range: US$5-US$225; Prob<1*per capita GDP=99.77%) in Latin America. Universal screening may reduce the annual number of stillbirths by 20,344 and 4,270, neonatal deaths by 8,201 and 1,721, cases of congenital syphilis by 10,952 and 2,298, and avert 925,039 and 197,454 DALYs in the aggregate Asian and Latin American panel, respectively.ConclusionAntenatal syphilis screening is highly cost-effective in all the 11 Asian and 20 Latin American countries assessed. Our findings support the decision to expand syphilis screening in countries with currently low screening rates or continue national syphilis screening programs in countries with high rates.     

Removing the Age Restrictions for Rotavirus Vaccination: A Benefit-Risk Modeling Analysis

Background

To minimize potential risk of intussusception, the World Health Organization (WHO) recommended in 2009 that rotavirus immunization should be initiated by age 15 weeks and completed before 32 weeks. These restrictions could adversely impact vaccination coverage and thereby its health impact, particularly in developing countries where delays in vaccination often occur.

Methods and Findings

We conducted a modeling study to estimate the number of rotavirus deaths prevented and the number of intussusception deaths caused by vaccination when administered on the restricted schedule versus an unrestricted schedule whereby rotavirus vaccine would be administered with DTP vaccine up to age 3 years. Countries were grouped on the basis of child mortality rates, using WHO data. Inputs were estimates of WHO rotavirus mortality by week of age from a recent study, intussusception mortality based on a literature review, predicted vaccination rates by week of age from USAID Demographic and Health Surveys, the United Nations Children''s Fund (UNICEF) Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys (MICS), and WHO-UNICEF 2010 country-specific coverage estimates, and published estimates of vaccine efficacy and vaccine-associated intussusception risk. On the basis of the error estimates and distributions for model inputs, we conducted 2,000 simulations to obtain median estimates of deaths averted and caused as well as the uncertainty ranges, defined as the 5th–95th percentile, to provide an indication of the uncertainty in the estimates.We estimated that in low and low-middle income countries a restricted schedule would prevent 155,800 rotavirus deaths (5th–95th centiles, 83,300–217,700) while causing potentially 253 intussusception deaths (76–689). In contrast, vaccination without age restrictions would prevent 203,000 rotavirus deaths (102,000–281,500) while potentially causing 547 intussusception deaths (237–1,160). Thus, removing the age restrictions would avert an additional 47,200 rotavirus deaths (18,700–63,700) and cause an additional 294 (161–471) intussusception deaths, for an incremental benefit-risk ratio of 154 deaths averted for every death caused by vaccine. These extra deaths prevented under an unrestricted schedule reflect vaccination of an additional 21%–25% children, beyond the 63%–73% of the children who would be vaccinated under the restricted schedule. Importantly, these estimates err on the side of safety in that they assume high vaccine-associated risk of intussusception and do not account for potential herd immunity or non-fatal outcomes.

Conclusions

Our analysis suggests that in low- and middle-income countries the additional lives saved by removing age restrictions for rotavirus vaccination would far outnumber the potential excess vaccine-associated intussusception deaths. Please see later in the article for the Editors'' Summary     

Evaluation of COVID-19 vaccination strategies with a delayed second dose

Two of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines currently approved in the United States require 2 doses, administered 3 to 4 weeks apart. Constraints in vaccine supply and distribution capacity, together with a deadly wave of COVID-19 from November 2020 to January 2021 and the emergence of highly contagious Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants, sparked a policy debate on whether to vaccinate more individuals with the first dose of available vaccines and delay the second dose or to continue with the recommended 2-dose series as tested in clinical trials. We developed an agent-based model of COVID-19 transmission to compare the impact of these 2 vaccination strategies, while varying the temporal waning of vaccine efficacy following the first dose and the level of preexisting immunity in the population. Our results show that for Moderna vaccines, a delay of at least 9 weeks could maximize vaccination program effectiveness and avert at least an additional 17.3 (95% credible interval [CrI]: 7.8–29.7) infections, 0.69 (95% CrI: 0.52–0.97) hospitalizations, and 0.34 (95% CrI: 0.25–0.44) deaths per 10,000 population compared to the recommended 4-week interval between the 2 doses. Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines also averted an additional 0.60 (95% CrI: 0.37–0.89) hospitalizations and 0.32 (95% CrI: 0.23–0.45) deaths per 10,000 population in a 9-week delayed second dose (DSD) strategy compared to the 3-week recommended schedule between doses. However, there was no clear advantage of delaying the second dose with Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines in reducing infections, unless the efficacy of the first dose did not wane over time. Our findings underscore the importance of quantifying the characteristics and durability of vaccine-induced protection after the first dose in order to determine the optimal time interval between the 2 doses.

There are two widely used COVID-19 vaccination strategies; administering the two doses three to four weeks apart or delaying the administration of the second dose. A modelling study calibrated to COVID-19 spread and vaccination in the US shows that delaying the second dose can maximize the benefits of vaccination programs under certain conditions.     

Focus: Vaccines: Achieving Global Vaccine Equity: The Case for an International Pandemic Treaty

This paper presents an ethical argument in support of an international Pandemic Treaty. It argues that an international Pandemic Treaty is the best way to mark progress on global vaccine equity and broader issues of global pandemic preparedness and response which came to light during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Section I evaluates principles of multilateral charity, national security, and international diplomacy standardly invoked in debates about global vaccine allocation and argues that these approaches fall short. Section II explicates notions of solidarity, duties to the least well-off, and mutual aid as ethical values more fitting for an era of emerging infectious diseases. Section III relates the discussion to an international Pandemic Treaty and presents legal, pragmatic, and ethical reasons to support it. The paper concludes that in an interconnected world, fair sharing of vaccines between nations is morally mandatory.     

Novel Viral Vectored Vaccines for the Prevention of Influenza

Influenza represents a substantial global healthcare burden, with annual epidemics resulting in 3–5 million cases of severe illness with a significant associated mortality. In addition, the risk of a virulent and lethal influenza pandemic has generated widespread and warranted concern. Currently licensed influenza vaccines are limited in their ability to induce efficacious and long-lasting herd immunity. In addition, and as evidenced by the H1N1 pandemic in 2009, there can be a significant delay between the emergence of a pandemic influenza and an effective, antibody-inducing vaccine. There is, therefore, a continued need for new, efficacious vaccines conferring cross-clade protection—obviating the need for biannual reformulation of seasonal influenza vaccines. Development of such a vaccine would yield enormous health benefits to society and also greatly reduce the associated global healthcare burden. There are a number of alternative influenza vaccine technologies being assessed both preclinically and clinically. In this review we discuss viral vectored vaccines, either recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient viruses, which are current lead candidates for inducing efficacious and long-lasting immunity toward influenza viruses. These alternate influenza vaccines offer real promise to deliver viable alternatives to currently deployed vaccines and more importantly may confer long-lasting and universal protection against influenza viral infection.     

Updated Global Burden of Cholera in Endemic Countries

BackgroundThe global burden of cholera is largely unknown because the majority of cases are not reported. The low reporting can be attributed to limited capacity of epidemiological surveillance and laboratories, as well as social, political, and economic disincentives for reporting. We previously estimated 2.8 million cases and 91,000 deaths annually due to cholera in 51 endemic countries. A major limitation in our previous estimate was that the endemic and non-endemic countries were defined based on the countries’ reported cholera cases. We overcame the limitation with the use of a spatial modelling technique in defining endemic countries, and accordingly updated the estimates of the global burden of cholera.Conclusion/SignificanceThe global burden of cholera remains high. Sub-Saharan Africa accounts for the majority of this burden. Our findings can inform programmatic decision-making for cholera control.     

Comparative economic evaluation of Haemophilus influenzae type b vaccination in Belarus and Uzbekistan

Background

Hib vaccine has gradually been introduced into more and more countries during the past two decades, partly due to GAVI Alliance support to low-income countries. However, since Hib disease burden is difficult to establish in settings with limited diagnostic capacities and since the vaccine continues to be relatively expensive, some Governments remain doubtful about its value leading to concerns about financial sustainability. Similarly, several middle-income countries have not introduced the vaccine. The aim of this study is to estimate and compare the cost-effectiveness of Hib vaccination in a country relying on self-financing (Belarus) and a country eligible for GAVI Alliance support (Uzbekistan).

Methods and Findings

A decision analytic model was used to estimate morbidity and mortality from Hib meningitis, Hib pneumonia and other types of Hib disease with and without the vaccine. Treatment costs were attached to each disease event. Data on disease incidence, case fatality ratios and costs were primarily determined from national sources. For the Belarus 2009 birth cohort, Hib vaccine is estimated to prevent 467 invasive disease cases, 4 cases of meningitis sequelae, and 3 deaths, while in Uzbekistan 3,069 invasive cases, 34 sequelae cases and 341 deaths are prevented. Estimated costs per discounted DALY averted are US$ 9,323 in Belarus and US$ 267 in Uzbekistan.

Conclusion

The primary reason why the cost-effectiveness values are more favourable in Uzbekistan than in Belarus is that relatively more deaths are averted in Uzbekistan due to higher baseline mortality burden. Two other explanations are that the vaccine price is lower in Uzbekistan and that Uzbekistan uses a three dose schedule compared to four doses in Belarus. However, when seen in the context of the relative ability to pay for public health, the vaccine can be considered cost-effective in both countries.     

Factors associated with the unwillingness of Jordanians,Palestinians and Syrians to be vaccinated against COVID-19

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic is expected to continue to inflect immense burdens of morbidity and mortality, not to mention the sever disruption of societies and economies worldwide. One of the major challenges to managing COVID-19 pandemic is the negative attitudes towards vaccines and the uncertainty or unwillingness to receive vaccinations. We evaluated the predictors and factors behind the negative attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccines in 3 countries in the Middle East.MethodsA cross-sectional, self-administered survey was conducted between the 1^st and the 25^th of December, 2020. Representative sample of 8619 adults residing in Jordan, West Bank, and Syria, completed the survey via the Web or via telephone interview. The survey intended to assess intent to be vaccinated against COVID-19 and to identify predictors of and reasons among participants unwilling/hesitant to get vaccinated.ResultsThe total of the 8619 participants included in this study were the ones who answered the question on the intent to be vaccinated. Overall, 32.2% of participants (n = 2772) intended to be vaccinated, 41.6% (n = 3589) didn’t intend to get vaccinated, and 26.2% (n = 2258) were not sure. The main factors associated with the willingness to take the vaccine (yes responses) included females, 18–35 years old, Syrians and Jordanians, a large family size, and having received a flu vaccine last year. Reasons for vaccine hesitancy included the lack of rigorous evaluation of the vaccine by the FDA and the possible long-term health risks associated with the vaccines (the wait-and-see approach).ConclusionThis survey, conducted in December when the number of cases and deaths per day due to COVID-19 were at or near peak levels of the initial surge in the three regions under investigation. The survey revealed that most of survey’s participants (67.8%) were unwilling/hesitant to get vaccinated against COVID-19 with the lack of trust in the approval process of the vaccine being the main concern; the two main characteristics of those participants were more than 35 years old and participants holding a Bachelor’s degree or higher. Targeted and multi-pronged efforts will be needed to increase acceptance of COVID-19 vaccine in Jordan, West Bank and Syria.     

Correlates of Complete Childhood Vaccination in East African Countries

Background

Despite the benefits of childhood vaccinations, vaccination rates in low-income countries (LICs) vary widely. Increasing coverage of vaccines to 90% in the poorest countries over the next 10 years has been estimated to prevent 426 million cases of illness and avert nearly 6.4 million childhood deaths worldwide. Consequently, we sought to provide a comprehensive examination of contemporary vaccination patterns in East Africa and to identify common and country-specific barriers to complete childhood vaccination.

Methods

Using data from the Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) for Burundi, Ethiopia, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania, and Uganda, we looked at the prevalence of complete vaccination for polio, measles, Bacillus Calmette–Guérin (BCG) and DTwPHibHep (DTP) as recommended by the WHO among children ages 12 to 23 months. We conducted multivariable logistic regression within each country to estimate associations between complete vaccination status and health care access and sociodemographic variables using backwards stepwise regression.

Results

Vaccination varied significantly by country. In all countries, the majority of children received at least one dose of a WHO recommended vaccine; however, in Ethiopia, Tanzania, and Uganda less than 50% of children received a complete schedule of recommended vaccines. Being delivered in a public or private institution compared with being delivered at home was associated with increased odds of complete vaccination status. Sociodemographic covariates were not consistently associated with complete vaccination status across countries.

Conclusions

Although no consistent set of predictors accounted for complete vaccination status, we observed differences based on region and the location of delivery. These differences point to the need to examine the historical, political, and economic context of each country in order to maximize vaccination coverage. Vaccination against these childhood diseases is a critical step towards reaching the Millennium Development Goal of reducing under-five mortality by two-thirds by 2015 and thus should be a global priority.     

Cost-effectiveness of the national dog rabies prevention and control program in Mexico, 1990–2015

BackgroundRabies is a viral zoonosis that imposes a substantial disease and economic burden in many developing countries. Dogs are the primary source of rabies transmission; eliminating dog rabies reduces the risk of exposure in humans significantly. Through mass annual dog rabies vaccination campaigns, the national program of rabies control in Mexico progressively reduced rabies cases in dogs and humans since 1990. In 2019, the World Health Organization validated Mexico for eliminating rabies as a public health problem. Using a governmental perspective, we retrospectively assessed the economic costs, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness of the national program of rabies control in Mexico, 1990–2015.MethodologyCombining various data sources, including administrative records, national statistics, and scientific literature, we retrospectively compared the current scenario of annual dog vaccination campaigns and post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) with a counterfactual scenario without an annual dog vaccination campaign but including PEP. The counterfactual scenario was estimated using a mathematical model of dog rabies transmission (RabiesEcon). We performed a thorough sensitivity analysis of the main results.Principal findingsResults suggest that in 1990 through 2015, the national dog rabies vaccination program in Mexico prevented about 13,000 human rabies deaths, at an incremental cost (MXN 2015) of $4,700 million (USD 300 million). We estimated an average cost of $360,000 (USD 23,000) per human rabies death averted, $6,500 (USD 410) per additional year-of-life, and $3,000 (USD 190) per dog rabies death averted. Results were robust to several counterfactual scenarios, including high and low rabies transmission scenarios and various assumptions about potential costs without mass dog rabies vaccination campaigns.ConclusionsAnnual dog rabies vaccination campaigns have eliminated the transmission of dog-to-dog rabies and dog-mediated human rabies deaths in Mexico. According to World Health Organization standards, our results show that the national program of rabies control in Mexico has been highly cost-effective.