Modeling study shows cost-effectiveness and public health benefit from introducing the R21/Matrix-M malaria vaccine

Home > Modeling study shows cost-effectiveness and public health benefit from introducing the R21/Matrix-M malaria vaccine

Abstract

Background: The R21/Matrix-M vaccine which induces anti-circumsporozoite protein (CSP) antibodies against P. falciparum has demonstrated high efficacy against clinical malaria in Phase 2 and 3 trials in children in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). We used data from these trials to estimate the public health impact and cost-effectiveness of vaccine introduction across SSA.

Methods: We fitted a semi-mechanistic model of the relationship between anti-CSP antibody titres and vaccine efficacy to immunogenicity and clinical data over 3 years of follow-up from the Phase 2b trial undertaken in Nanoro, Burkina Faso. We validated the model by comparing predicted vaccine efficacy to that observed over 12-18 months of follow-up in five Phase 3 trial sites. Integrating this model within a mathematical transmission model, we estimated the cases, malaria deaths and DALYs averted, and cost-effectiveness across a range of transmission settings in SSA over a 15-year time horizon. We report estimates at a median of 20% parasite prevalence in children aged 2-10 years (PfPR2-10) and ranges representing 3% and 65% PfPR2-10.

Findings: Anti-CSP antibody titres were found to satisfy the criteria for a surrogate of protection for vaccine efficacy against clinical malaria. Introduction of a four-dose regimen of R21/Matrix-M vaccine under age-based implementation is estimated to avert 190,602 [range 42,236 to 330,866] clinical cases and 632 [range 268 to 633] malaria deaths for every 100,000 fully vaccinated children in perennial settings, and 210,616 [range 32,428 to 398,620] clinical cases and 663 [range 216 to 719] malaria deaths per 100,000 fully vaccinated children in seasonal settings. Similar estimates were obtained for seasonal or hybrid implementation. R21/Matrix-M was more cost-effective in settings with higher parasite prevalence. Under an assumed dose price of US$3 we estimated a median incremental cost-effectiveness ratio compared with current interventions of $7 [range $42, $4] and $6 [range $56, $3] per clinical case averted and $36 [range $126, $34] and $33 [range $158, $27] per DALY averted in perennial and seasonal settings, respectively.

Interpretation: Introduction of the R21/Matrix-M malaria vaccine could have a substantial public health benefit and is cost-effective compared to other malaria interventions and other childhood vaccines.

  • Primary authorNora Schmit, Imperial College London
  • LanguageEnglish

Submit your work

Any organization or individual working in the field of immunization economics can submit findings, opportunities, calls to action, or other relevant work below to be shared with our community.