Conventional value-of-information (VOI) analysis bases decisions on a composite cost-effectiveness measure that aggregates clinical and cost outcomes. We sought to highlight potentially informative tradeoffs by estimating and reporting the “disaggregated” components, allowing stakeholders—such as clinicians, patients, trial funders, policymakers, and trial networks—to identify what drives the value of additional research. We used a microsimulation to project the value of a hypothetical trial comparing mortality associated with different tuberculosis screening strategies among hospitalized patients with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) in South Africa. Apart from expressing VOI as conventional, “aggregated” net monetary benefit (NMB), we assessed “disaggregated” outcomes that contribute to NMB calculations: tuberculosis cases detected, deaths, life-years, and healthcare costs associated with trial-informed decisions. We varied key parameters in probabilistic sensitivity analysis. We considered two willingness-to-pay thresholds: US 3000/year of life saved (YLS) ( 50

OBJECTIVE:The main objective was to estimate the potential public health impact and cost-effectiveness of an annual dose of mRNA-1273 in the United States (US) for a one-year time horizon compared with no vaccination in the mRNA-1273 licensed population (6 months-64 years with underlying medical conditions and all ≥65 years). mRNA-1273 was also compared to BNT162b2 in high-risk adults ages 18-64 years and all ≥65 years. METHODS:Analyses were conducted using a previously developed static decision-analytic model (1-year horizon) from the societal cost perspective. Vaccine effectiveness (VE) against infection and hospitalization for mRNA-1273 versus no vaccination was based on a 2024-2025 real world effectiveness study. VE estimates for mRNA-1273 versus BNT162b2 were based on systematic literature reviews and meta-analyses. Cost-effectiveness was assessed in terms of incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained and the benefit cost ratio (BCR) in the licensed target population as well as age-specific subgroups. Sensitivity and scenario analyses were performed. RESULTS:Between September and August, a single dose of mRNA-1273 was estimated to yield an incremental cost per QALY gained of $23,265 compared to no vaccine. For every 1 USD of mRNA-1273 vaccine related costs, there is a return of 1.91-7.90 dollars in societal perspective cost savings and monetized health benefit gained. In the subgroup of high-risk individuals 6 months-4 years, mRNA-1273 was associated with lower costs and improved health outcomes, resulting in mRNA-1273 dominating no vaccine. Study results are sensitive to COVID-19 incidence, percentage hospitalized, post-discharge mortality, and VE assumptions. Compared to BNT162b2, given improved clinical outcomes, combined with a lower vaccine unit cost, mRNA-1273 was estimated to dominate BNT162b2. CONCLUSIONS:mRNA-1273, the only licensed vaccine for those <5 years of age at high risk of severe COVID-19 related outcomes, could substantially reduce the clinical and economic burden of COVID-19 among US high-risk populations and older adults. These benefits were observed both in comparison to no vaccination and the BNT162b2 vaccine.

BACKGROUND:In sub-Saharan Africa, 20-40% of people living with HIV present with advanced HIV disease (AHD), which can be diagnosed, treated, and prevented using a package of care recommended by WHO. We aimed to project the cost-effectiveness and budget impact of the WHO-recommended AHD package in Malawi. METHODS:Using the Cost-Effectiveness of Preventing AIDS Complications-International model, we simulated a cohort of non-hospitalised people living with HIV (aged >19 years) initiating antiretroviral therapy (ART), 25% of whom had AHD (CD4 count <200 cells per μL and/or WHO stage 3 or 4 disease). We assessed 13 increasingly comprehensive strategies, ranging from ART only to the WHO-recommended AHD package, including tuberculosis diagnostics (ie, sputum Xpert and urine lipoarabinomannan), tuberculosis preventive therapy, serum cryptococcal antigen (CrAg) screening with pre-emptive fluconazole treatment if CrAg-positive, and co-trimoxazole to prevent bacterial infections. Model outcomes included 1 year survival, life expectancy, costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs, US$ per quality-adjusted life-year [QALY]); we considered a strategy cost-effective if the ICER was less than $600 per QALY (based on 2023 Malawi per capita gross domestic product). FINDINGS:ART only resulted in life expectancy of 17·45 undiscounted QALYs and discounted lifetime costs of $1450. All other strategies would increase both QALYs and costs. The WHO-recommended AHD package would result in the greatest life expectancy (19·30 undiscounted QALYs) and be cost-effective (ICER $580 per QALY). AHD prevalence and intervention efficacy had the greatest influence on ICERs; however, the WHO-recommended AHD package would remain cost-effective over a wide range of estimates. INTERPRETATION:The WHO-recommended AHD package of care at ART initiation would provide substantial clinical benefits and be cost-effective in Malawi. This package for AHD should be made widely available in Malawi and similar settings. FUNDING:WHO, the HIV Modelling Consortium within the Institute for Global Health at University College London, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, the Massachusetts General Hospital Jerome and Celia Reich Endowed Scholar in HIV/AIDS Research Award, and the Steve and Deborah Gorlin Massachusetts General Hospital Research Scholars Award. TRANSLATION:For the Chichewa translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

BACKGROUND:Persistent virological non-suppression among people with HIV receiving tenofovir-lamivudine-dolutegravir (TLD) can result from poor adherence with or without resistance; however, genotypic resistance testing (GRT) is not recommended routinely in South Africa. We examined the clinical and economic effect of GRT for all South African adults diagnosed with persistent virological non-suppression on TLD. METHODS:In this modelling study, we used the previously validated Cost-Effectiveness of Preventing AIDS Complications-International microsimulation model to compare three strategies: (1) continued TLD (baseline); (2) immediate switch to tenofovir-lamivudine plus ritonavir-boosted darunavir; and (3) GRT prompting switch to tenofovir-lamivudine plus ritonavir-boosted darunavir for people with dolutegravir resistance or TLD continuation for people without dolutegravir resistance. We estimated that 2·3% and 28·5% of the baseline population have dolutegravir resistance and nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) resistance, respectively. We also examined the effect of a low-cost, point-of-care urine tenofovir test in development to detect recent antiretroviral therapy use (84% sensitivity and 50% specificity), with GRT only when positive. Costs included GRT (US$157 per test), TLD ($45 per year), tenofovir-lamivudine plus ritonavir-boosted darunavir ($247 per year), and urine tenofovir testing ($2 per test). Outcomes included life-years, costs (provider perspective), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs; $ per disability-adjusted life-year [DALY]). We considered cost-effectiveness thresholds of less than $3310 per DALY (base case) and less than $1100 to $4250 per DALY. FINDINGS:Based on our model, we estimated that continued TLD results in 14·11 undiscounted life-years and costs $5380 discounted at 3%; GRT results in 14·36 life-years and costs $5860 (0·14 discounted DALYs averted; ICER $3500 per DALY). Immediate switch results in fewer DALYs averted and higher costs. GRT has an ICER of $3310 per DALY or less when baseline dolutegravir resistance prevalence is ≥2·5% or genotypic resistance test costs ≤$147 per test. Urine tenofovir testing to identify GRT eligibility results in an ICER of $2300 per DALY; the ICER would be less than $1100 per DALY if urine test specificity is 0·87 or greater and costs $2 per test or test specificity is higher than 0·98 and costs $10 per test or less. INTERPRETATION:GRT could increase life expectancy for people with HIV and persistent virological non-suppression on TLD in South Africa and could be cost-effective, especially at lower test costs. At current effectiveness and costs of tenofovir-lamivudine plus ritonavir-boosted darunavir, an immediate switch would not be preferred. FUNDING:National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, and the MGH Jerome and Celia Reich Endowed Scholar in HIV/AIDS Research Award.

Aims: COVID-19 disease burden in United States (US) older adults ≥65 years and persons with underlying medical conditions remains high. This modeling study provides an interim estimate of the anticipated public health impact of the next-generation COVID-19 mRNA-1283 vaccine in these populations at high-risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes. Methods: mRNA-1283 was compared to no vaccination and originally licensed mRNA COVID-19 vaccines mRNA-1273 and BNT162b2. Analyses were conducted using a static decision-analytic model (1-year horizon). Vaccine effectiveness (VE) against infection and hospitalization for mRNA-1283 versus no vaccination was based on the relative VE (rVE) from the Phase 3 pivotal randomized controlled trial comparing mRNA-1283 against mRNA-1273 and mRNA-1273 real-world data. rVE estimates for mRNA-1283 versus BNT162b2 were based on an indirect treatment comparison. Clinical outcomes calculated included total numbers of symptomatic infections, outpatient and long COVID cases, hospitalizations, and deaths. Sensitivity and scenario analyses were performed. Results: During the 2024/2025 season in the US, a single dose of the mRNA-1283 vaccine was estimated to prevent approximately 2.9 (1.3-4.3) million symptomatic infections, 171,000 (77,000-260,000) hospitalizations, and 22,350 (10,050-33,480) deaths compared to no vaccination. Compared to BNT162b2, mRNA-1283 was estimated to avert an additional 0.79 million symptomatic infections, 58,000 hospitalizations, and 7,565 deaths. Compared to mRNA-1273, mRNA-1283 was estimated to avert an additional 0.56 million symptomatic infections, 46,000 hospitalizations, and 5,920 deaths. Across all scenarios the majority of severe COVID-19 cases (i.e., hospitalizations and deaths) were prevented among older adults ≥65 years. Limitations: The real-world effectiveness and safety of mRNA-1283 have not yet been established and the relative VE estimates should be validated with real-world data. Future COVID-19 incidence and incidence pattern throughout the season is uncertain. Conclusions: Interim results suggest that the next-generation COVID-19 mRNA-1283 vaccine could substantially reduce the clinical burden of COVID-19 among those at high risk of severe disease. Compared to no vaccination and originally approved mRNA vaccines, mRNA-1283 provides a valuable option to potentially enhance COVID-19 immunization programmes and protection of those most vulnerable. ### Competing Interest Statement Declaration of Funding: This study was supported by Moderna, Inc. Declaration of competing interests: MK is a shareholder in Quadrant Health Economics Inc, which was contracted by Moderna, Inc. to conduct this study. AL, KF, MW and SC are consultants to Quadrant Health Economics Inc. KJ, NV and EB are employed by Moderna, Inc. and may hold stock/stock options in the company. ### Funding Statement This study was supported by Moderna, Inc. ### Author Declarations I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained. Yes I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals. Yes I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance). Yes I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable. Yes All data produced in the present work are contained in the manuscript.

BACKGROUND:Approximately 130 000 infants acquire HIV annually despite global maternal antiretroviral therapy scale-up. We evaluated the potential clinical impact and cost-effectiveness of offering long-acting, anti-HIV broadly neutralizing antibody (bNAb) prophylaxis to infants in three distinct settings. METHODS:We simulated infants in Côte d'Ivoire, South Africa, and Zimbabwe using the Cost-Effectiveness of Preventing AIDS Complications-Pediatric (CEPAC-P) model. We modeled strategies offering a three-bNAb combination in addition to WHO-recommended standard-of-care oral prophylaxis to infants: a) with known, WHO-defined high-risk HIV exposure at birth (HR-HIVE); b) with known HIV exposure at birth (HIVE); or c) with or without known HIV exposure (ALL). Modeled infants received 1-dose, 2-doses, or Extended (every 3 months through 18 months) bNAb dosing. Base case model inputs included 70% bNAb efficacy (sensitivity analysis range: 10-100%), 3-month efficacy duration/dosing interval (1-6 months), and $20/dose cost ($5-$100/dose). Outcomes included pediatric HIV infections, life expectancy, lifetime HIV-related costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs, in US$/year-of-life-saved [YLS], assuming a ≤ 50% GDP per capita cost-effectiveness threshold). FINDINGS:The base case model projects that bNAb strategies targeting HIVE and ALL infants would prevent 7-26% and 10-42% additional pediatric HIV infections, respectively, compared to standard-of-care alone, ranging by dosing approach. HIVE-Extended would be cost-effective (cost-saving compared to standard-of-care) in Côte d'Ivoire and Zimbabwe; ALL-Extended would be cost-effective in South Africa (ICER: $882/YLS). BNAb strategies targeting HR-HIVE infants would result in greater lifetime costs and smaller life expectancy gains than HIVE-Extended. Throughout most bNAb efficacies and costs evaluated in sensitivity analyses, targeting HIVE infants would be cost-effective in Côte d'Ivoire and Zimbabwe, and targeting ALL infants would be cost-effective in South Africa. INTERPRETATION:Adding long-acting bNAbs to current standard-of-care prophylaxis would be cost-effective, assuming plausible efficacies and costs. The cost-effective target population would vary by setting, largely driven by maternal antenatal HIV prevalence and postpartum incidence.

BACKGROUND:Adherence and retention concerns raise questions about the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of oral HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) in young men who have sex with men (YMSM).METHODS:Using an adolescent-focused simulation model, we compared annual HIV screening alone with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine-based oral PrEP with every 3-month HIV screening in YMSM (aged 15-24) at increased risk of HIV. Data derived from published sources included: age-stratified HIV incidence/100 person-years (PY) on- or off-PrEP (0.6-10.1 or 0.4-6.4), PrEP retention at 6 years (28%), transmissions by HIV RNA level (0.0-78.4/100PY) and annual costs of antiretroviral therapy ($32 000-69 000), HIV care ($3100-34 600), and PrEP program/generic drug ($900/360). Outcomes included transmissions (percent of cohort infected), quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), costs ($), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios ($/QALY). We explored the sensitivity of findings to variation in HIV incidence and drug prices.RESULTS:Compared with annual screening alone, PrEP would increase QALYs (9.58 to 9.67), reduce new infections (37% to 30%), and decrease costs (by $5000) over 10 years. PrEP would remain cost-saving for HIV incidence off-PrEP ≥5.1/100PY or annual PrEP price ≤$1200. Over a lifetime horizon, PrEP would be cost-saving for HIV incidence off-PrEP ≥1.0/100PY, across all retention assumptions examined. PrEP would not be cost-effective at HIV incidence ≤0.1/100PY, regardless of drug price, due to programmatic costs.CONCLUSIONS:In US YMSM at increased risk of HIV, generic oral PrEP and every-3-month screening would be cost-saving compared with annual screening alone, even with high discontinuation and low adherence, over a range of HIV incidences.

ABSTRACT Introduction Approximately 130 000 infants acquire HIV annually despite global maternal antiretroviral therapy scale-up. We evaluated the potential clinical impact and cost-effectiveness of offering long-acting, anti-HIV broadly neutralizing antibody (bNAb) prophylaxis to infants in three distinct settings. Methods We simulated infants in Côte d’Ivoire, South Africa, and Zimbabwe using the Cost-Effectiveness of Preventing AIDS Complications-Pediatric (CEPAC-P) model. We modeled strategies offering a three-bNAb combination in addition to WHO-recommended standard-of-care oral prophylaxis to infants: a) with known, WHO-defined high-risk HIV exposure at birth ( HR-HIVE ); b) with known HIV exposure at birth ( HIVE ); or c) with or without known HIV exposure ( ALL ). Modeled infants received 1-dose , 2-doses , or Extended (every 3 months through 18 months) bNAb dosing. Base case model inputs included 70% bNAb efficacy (sensitivity analysis range: 10-100%), 3-month efficacy duration/dosing interval (1-6 months), and $20/dose cost ($5-$100/dose). Outcomes included pediatric HIV infections, life expectancy, lifetime HIV-related costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs, in US$/year-of-life-saved [YLS], assuming a < 50% GDP per capita cost-effectiveness threshold). Results The base case model projects that bNAb strategies targeting HIVE and ALL infants would prevent 7-26% and 10-42% additional pediatric HIV infections, respectively, compared to standard-of-care alone, ranging by dosing approach. HIVE-Extended would be cost-effective (cost-saving compared to standard-of-care) in Côte d’Ivoire and Zimbabwe; ALL-Extended would be cost-effective in South Africa (ICER: $882/YLS). BNAb strategies targeting HR-HIVE infants would result in greater lifetime costs and smaller life expectancy gains than HIVE-Extended . Throughout most bNAb efficacies and costs evaluated in sensitivity analyses, targeting HIVE infants would be cost-effective in Côte d’Ivoire and Zimbabwe, and targeting ALL infants would be cost-effective in South Africa. Discussion Adding long-acting bNAbs to current standard-of-care prophylaxis would be cost-effective, assuming plausible efficacies and costs. The cost-effective target population would vary by setting, largely driven by maternal antenatal HIV prevalence and postpartum incidence.

Objectives. Conventional value-of-information (VOI) analysis assumes complete uptake of an optimal decision. We employed an extended framework that includes value-of-implementation (VOM)-the benefit of encouraging adoption of an optimal strategy-and estimated how future trials of diagnostic tests for HIV-associated tuberculosis could improve public health decision making and clinical and economic outcomes. Methods. We evaluated the clinical outcomes and costs, given current information, of 3 tuberculosis screening strategies among hospitalized people with HIV in South Africa: sputum Xpert (Xpert), sputum Xpert plus urine AlereLAM (Xpert+AlereLAM), and sputum Xpert plus the newer, more sensitive, and costlier urine FujiLAM (Xpert+FujiLAM). We projected the incremental net monetary benefit (INMB) of decision making based on results of a trial comparing mortality with each strategy, rather than decision making based solely on current knowledge of FujiLAM's improved diagnostic performance. We used a validated microsimulation to estimate VOI (the INMB of reducing parameter uncertainty before decision making) and VOM (the INMB of encouraging adoption of an optimal strategy). Results. With current information, adopting Xpert+FujiLAM yields 0.4 additional life-years/person compared with current practices (assumed 50% Xpert and 50% Xpert+AlereLAM). While the decision to adopt this optimal strategy is unaffected by information from the clinical trial (VOI = $ 0 at $3,000/year-of-life saved willingness-to-pay threshold), there is value in scaling up implementation of Xpert+FujiLAM, which results in an INMB (representing VOM) of $650 million over 5 y. Conclusions. Conventional VOI methods account for the value of switching to a new optimal strategy based on trial data but fail to account for the persuasive value of trials in increasing uptake of the optimal strategy. Evaluation of trials should include a focus on their value in reducing barriers to implementation.Highlights:In conventional VOI analysis, it is assumed that the optimal decision will always be adopted even without a trial. This can potentially lead to an underestimation of the value of trials when adoption requires new clinical trial evidence. To capture the influence that a trial may have on decision makers' willingness to adopt the optimal decision, we also consider value-of-implementation (VOM), a metric quantifying the benefit of new study information in promoting wider adoption of the optimal strategy. The overall value-of-a-trial (VOT) includes both VOI and VOM.Our model-based analysis suggests that the information obtained from a trial of screening strategies for HIV-associated tuberculosis in South Africa would have no value, when measured using traditional methods of VOI assessment. A novel strategy, which includes the urine FujiLAM test, is optimal from a health economic standpoint but is underutilized. A trial would reduce uncertainties around downstream health outcomes but likely would not change the optimal decision. The high VOT (nearly $700 million over 5 y) lies solely in promoting uptake of FujiLAM, represented as VOM.Our results highlight the importance of employing a more comprehensive approach for evaluating prospective trials, as conventional VOI methods can vastly underestimate their value. Trialists and funders can and should assess the VOT metric instead when considering trial designs and costs. If VOI is low, the VOM and cost of a trial can be compared with the benefits and costs of other outreach programs to determine the most cost-effective way to improve uptake.

Aims To assess the potential clinical impact and cost-effectiveness of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines updated for fall 2023 in adults aged >= 18 years over a 1-year analytic time horizon (September 2023-August 2024).Materials and methods A compartmental Susceptible-Exposed-Infected-Recovered model was updated to reflect COVID-19 cases in summer 2023. The numbers of symptomatic infections, COVID-19-related hospitalizations and deaths, and costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained were calculated using a decision tree model. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of a Moderna updated mRNA fall 2023 vaccine (Moderna Fall Campaign) was compared to no additional vaccination. Potential differences between the Moderna and the Pfizer-BioNTech fall 2023 vaccines were also examined.Results Base case results suggest that the Moderna Fall Campaign would decrease the expected 64.2 million symptomatic infections by 7.2 million (11%) to 57.0 million. COVID-19-related hospitalizations and deaths are expected to decline by 343,000 (-29%) and 50,500 (-33%), respectively. The Moderna Fall Campaign would increase QALYs by 740,880 and healthcare costs by $5.7 billion relative to no vaccine, yielding an ICER of $7700 per QALY gained. Using a societal cost perspective, the ICER is $2100. Sensitivity analyses suggest that vaccine effectiveness, COVID-19 incidence, hospitalization rates, and costs drive cost-effectiveness. With a relative vaccine effectiveness of 5.1% for infection and 9.8% for hospitalization for the Moderna vaccine versus the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, use of the Moderna vaccine is expected to prevent 24,000 more hospitalizations and 3300 more deaths than the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine.Limitations and conclusions As COVID-19 becomes endemic, future incidence, including patterns of infection, are highly uncertain. The effectiveness of fall 2023 vaccines is unknown, and it is unclear when a new variant that evades natural or vaccine immunity will emerge. Despite these limitations, our model predicts the Moderna Fall Campaign vaccine is highly cost-effective across all sensitivity analyses.

Abstract Introduction Infant HIV prophylaxis with broadly neutralizing anti‐HIV antibodies (bNAbs) could provide long‐acting protection against vertical transmission. We sought to estimate the potential clinical impact and cost‐effectiveness of hypothetical bNAb prophylaxis programmes for children known to be HIV exposed at birth in three sub‐Saharan African settings. Methods We conducted a cost‐effectiveness analysis using the CEPAC‐Pediatric model, simulating cohorts of infants from birth through death in Côte d'Ivoire, South Africa and Zimbabwe. These settings were selected to reflect a broad range of HIV care cascade characteristics, antenatal HIV prevalence and budgetary constraints. We modelled strategies targeting bNAbs to only WHO‐designated “high‐risk” HIV‐exposed infants (HR‐HIVE) or to all HIV‐exposed infants (HIVE). We compared four prophylaxis approaches within each target population: standard of care oral antiretroviral prophylaxis (SOC), and SOC plus bNAbs at birth (1‐dose), at birth and 3 months (2‐doses), or every 3 months throughout breastfeeding (Extended). Base‐case model inputs included bNAb efficacy (60%/dose), effect duration (3 months/dose) and costs ($60/dose), based on published literature. Outcomes included paediatric HIV incidence and incremental cost‐effectiveness ratios (ICERs) calculated from discounted life expectancy and lifetime HIV‐related costs. Results The model projects that bNAbs would reduce absolute infant HIV incidence by 0.3–2.2% (9.6–34.9% relative reduction), varying by country, prophylaxis approach and target population. In all three settings, HR‐HIVE–1‐dose would be cost‐saving compared to SOC. Using a 50% GDP per capita ICER threshold, HIVE‐Extended would be cost‐effective in all three settings with ICERs of $497/YLS in Côte d'Ivoire, $464/YLS in South Africa and $455/YLS in Zimbabwe. In all three settings, bNAb strategies would remain cost‐effective at costs up to $200/dose if efficacy is ≥30%. If the bNAb effect duration were reduced to 1 month, the cost‐effective strategy would become HR‐HIVE–1‐dose in Côte d'Ivoire and Zimbabwe and HR‐HIVE–2‐doses in South Africa. Findings regarding the cost‐effectiveness of bNAb implementation strategies remained robust in sensitivity analyses regarding breastfeeding duration, maternal engagement in postpartum care, early infant diagnosis uptake and antiretroviral treatment costs. Conclusions At current efficacy and cost estimates, bNAb prophylaxis for HIV‐exposed children in sub‐Saharan African settings would be a cost‐effective intervention to reduce vertical HIV transmission.

RSV causes acute respiratory disease (ARD), including severe lower respiratory tract disease (LRTD), which can result in hospitalization and death. The study objective was to compare the potential benefit of a hypothetical RSV vaccination strategy in US versus UK older adults.

Objective Emerging SARS-COV-2 variants are spurring the development of adapted vaccines as public health authorities plan for fall vaccinations. This study estimated the number of infections and hospitalizations prevented by three potential booster strategies for adults (>= 18 years) in the United States: boosting with either Moderna's (1) licensed first generation monovalent vaccine mRNA-1273 (ancestral strain) or (2) candidate bivalent vaccine mRNA-1273.214 (ancestral + BA.1 variant of concern [VOC]) starting in September 2022, or (3) Moderna's updated candidate bivalent vaccine mRNA-1273.222 (ancestral + BA.4/5 VOC) starting November 2022 due to longer development time. Methods An age-stratified, transmission dynamic, Susceptible-Exposed-Infection-Recovered (SEIR) model, adapted from previous literature, was used to estimate infections over time; the model contains compartments defined by SEIR and vaccination status. A decision tree was used to estimate clinical consequences of infections. Calibration was performed so the model tracks the actual course of the pandemic to present time. Results Vaccinating with mRNA-1273(Sept), mRNA-1273.214(Sept), and mRNA-1273.222(Nov) is predicted to reduce infections by 34%, 40%, and 18%, respectively, and hospitalizations by 42%, 48%, and 25%, respectively, over 6 months compared to no booster. Sensitivity analyses around transmissibility, vaccine coverage, masking, and waning illustrate that boosting with mRNA-1273.214 in September prevented more cases of infection and hospitalization than the other vaccines. Limitations and Conclusions With the emergence of new variants, key characteristics of the virus that affect estimates of spread and clinical impact also evolve, making parameter estimation difficult. Our analysis demonstrated that boosting with mRNA-1273.214 was more effective over 6 months in preventing infections and hospitalizations with a BA.4/5 subvariant than the tailored vaccine, simply because it could be deployed 2 months earlier. We conclude that there is no advantage to delay boosting until a more effective BA.4/5 vaccine is available; earlier boosting with mRNA-1273.214 will prevent the most infections and hospitalizations.

Abstract Background RSV causes acute respiratory disease (ARD), including severe lower respiratory tract disease (LRTD) in older adults, which can lead to hospitalization and death. Currently, there are no vaccines approved to prevent RSV disease. This study estimated the potential clinical impact of a hypothetical RSV vaccine over a 1-year time horizon in older adults aged ≥ 60 years. Methods A decision-analytic model was developed (Figure 1). A strategy was used where the entire US population aged ≥ 60 years was given a single dose vaccine with an assumed efficacy of 75% against ARD, LRTD, and LRTD-hospitalizations and compared to a population who did not receive a vaccine. Given the uncertainty around RSV hospitalization rates, 2 base-case scenarios were created: (1) hospitalization rates that used RSV-specific claim codes and (2) hospitalization rates increased by 49% to account for underreporting in claims; Table 1 shows key inputs. One-way sensitivity analyses were used to assess the impact of specific parameter estimates. Results The vaccine would prevent 1.8 million and 0.6 million upper respiratory disease and LRTD cases, respectively; Figure 2 shows additional results for both base-case scenarios. The number needed to vaccinate (NNV) to prevent 1 LRTD case is 119; the NNV to prevent 1 LRTD hospitalization or death ranges from 792 to 1180 and 10,452 to 15,574, respectively. Sensitivity analyses indicate that results mainly depend on vaccine efficacy, and incidence of ARD and LRTD. Conclusion There is substantial US public health benefit associated with utilization of an effective RSV vaccine in individuals ≥ 60 years of age to reduce RSV-associated morbidity and mortality; however, the magnitude of impact depends on RSV epidemiology, which is still being defined for older adults. Several model parameters were based on assumptions, and robust evidence generation is needed including the efficacy of an RSV vaccine, which is an important consideration in assessing the impact of vaccination in this age group. Disclosures Kelly Fust, MS, Quadrant Health Economics Inc: Contractor at Quadrant Health Economics Inc who was funded by Moderna to perform this study Michele Kohli, PhD, Quadrant Health Economics Inc: Shareholder at Quadrant Health Economics Inc who was funded by Moderna to perform this study|Quadrant Health Economics Inc: Stocks/Bonds Catherine A. Panozzo, PhD, Moderna, Inc.: Salary|Moderna, Inc.: Stocks/Bonds Philip Buck, PhD, MPH, Moderna, Inc.: Salary|Moderna, Inc.: Stocks/Bonds Parinaz Ghaswalla, PhD, Moderna, Inc.: Salary|Moderna, Inc.: Stocks/Bonds.

Objective: MSM in India are at a high risk for HIV infection given psychosocial challenges, sexual orientation stress, and stigma. We examined the cost-effectiveness of a novel resilience-based psychosocial intervention for MSM in India. Design: We parameterized a validated microsimulation model (CEPAC) with India-specific data and results from a randomized trial and examined two strategies for MSM: status quo HIV care (SQ), and a trial-based psychosocial intervention (INT) focused on building resilience to stress, improving mental health, and reducing condomless anal sex (CAS). Methods: We projected lifetime clinical and economic outcomes for MSM without HIV initially. Intervention effectiveness, defined as reduction in self-reported CAS, was estimated at 38%; cost was $49.37/participant. We used a willingness-to-pay threshold of US$2100 (2019 Indian per capita GDP) per year of life saved (YLS) to define cost-effectiveness. We also assessed the 5-year budget impact of offering this intervention to 20% of Indian MSM. Results: Model projections showed the intervention would avert 2940 HIV infections among MSM over 10 years. Over a lifetime horizon, the intervention was cost-effective (ICER = $900/YLS). Results were most sensitive to intervention effectiveness and cost; the intervention remained cost-effective under plausible ranges of these parameters. Offering this intervention in the public sector would require an additional US$28 M over 5 years compared with SQ. Conclusion: A resilience-based psychosocial intervention integrated with HIV risk reduction counseling among MSM in India would reduce HIV infections and be cost-effective. Programs using this approach should be expanded as a part of comprehensive HIV prevention in India.

Background: In the United Kingdom (UK), a cell-based quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIVc) and a recombinant vaccine (QIVr) are recommended for eligible adults under 65 years. The objective of this analysis was to determine the potential cost-effectiveness of QIVc compared to QIVr for this age group using a range of assumptions about relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE). Methods: A dynamic transmission model, calibrated to match infection data from the UK, was used to estimate the clinical and economic impact of vaccination across 10 influenza seasons. The list price was £12.50 for QIVc and £22.00 for QIVr. The base case effectiveness of QIVc was 63.9%. As there are no data comparing the vaccines in the 18 to 64-year-old age group, rVE was varied. Results: For the base case, the rVE of QIVr compared with QIVc must be at least 25% in order for the cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained to be £20,000 or lower. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the rVE required for QIVr to be cost-effective was most dependent on the absolute effectiveness of QIVc. Conclusion: At list prices, our analysis predicts that the rVE for QIVr must be at least 25% compared to QIVc in order to be considered cost-effective.

The Adolescent Medicine Trials Network for HIV/AIDS Interventions is evaluating treatment adherence interventions (AI) to improve virologic suppression (VS) among youth with HIV (YWH). Using a microsimulation model, we compared two strategies: standard-of-care (SOC) and a hypothetical 12-month AI that increased cohort-level VS in YWH in care by an absolute ten percentage points and cost $100/month/person. Projected outcomes included primary HIV transmissions, deaths and life-expectancy, lifetime HIV-related costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs, $/quality-adjusted life-year [QALY]). Compared to SOC, AI would reduce HIV transmissions by 15% and deaths by 12% at 12 months. AI would improve discounted life expectancy/person by 8 months at an added lifetime cost/person of $5,300, resulting in an ICER of $7,900/QALY. AI would be cost-effective at $2,000/month/person or with efficacies as low as a 1 percentage point increase in VS. YWH-targeted adherence interventions with even modest efficacy could improve life expectancy, prevent onward HIV transmissions, and be cost-effective.

AIMS:To examine the impact of increasing multi-target stool DNA test (mt-sDNA [Cologuard]) utilization for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening in cohorts aged 50-75 and 45-75 years old with varying levels of adherence from the perspectives of integrated delivery networks (IDNs) and payers. MATERIALS AND METHODS:We developed a budget impact model that simulates CRC screening with colonoscopy over a 10-year time horizon, fecal immunochemical test (FIT), and mt-sDNA according to the United States Preventive Services Task Force and American Cancer Society guidelines for average risk adults. We evaluated varying levels of screening adherence for a status quo scenario and for an increased mt-sDNA utilization scenario, from the IDN and payer perspectives. The IDN perspective included CRC screening program costs, whereas the payer perspective did not. Conversely, stool-based screening test and bowel preparation costs were unique to the payer perspective. RESULTS:The increased mt-sDNA scenarios yielded cost savings relative to the status quo under all adherence scenarios due to a decrease in screening and surveillance colonoscopies. For ages 50-75, in high and low adherence scenarios, savings were $19.8 M ($0.16 per-person-per-month (PPPM)) and $33.3 M ($0.28 PPPM) from the IDN perspective. From the payer perspective, savings were $4.2 M ($0.03 PPPM) and $6.7 M ($0.06 PPPM). For ages 45-75, in high and low adherence scenarios, cost savings were $19.3 M ($0.16 PPPM) and $33.0 M ($0.28 PPPM) from the IDN perspective and $3.9 M ($0.03 PPPM) and $6.2 M ($0.05 PPPM) from the payer perspective. In all imperfect adherence scenarios, the degree of cost-savings with increased mt-sDNA utilization correlated with the aggregate decrease in screening and surveillance colonoscopies. LIMITATIONS:Estimates of real-world adherence levels were based on cross-sectional screening data from the literature, and assumptions were applied to individual screening modalities and screening scenarios. CONCLUSIONS:Among all adherence scenarios, perspectives, and age ranges, increased mt-sDNA utilization yielded cost-savings.