Journal Mobile Options
Table of Contents
Vol. 12, No. 5-6, 2009
Issue release date: August 2009
Public Health Genomics 2009;12:343–351

Economic Evaluation of Human Papillomavirus Vaccination in Developed Countries

Brisson M. · van de Velde N. · Boily M.-C.
aDépartement de médecine sociale et préventive, Université Laval, bUnité de recherche en santé des populations, Centre hospitalier affilié universitaire de Québec, Québec, Qué., Canada; cDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Imperial College, London, UK

Individual Users: Register with Karger Login Information

Please create your User ID & Password

Contact Information

I have read the Karger Terms and Conditions and agree.

To view the fulltext, please log in

To view the pdf, please log in


Background: With promising efficacy results from randomized control trials of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines and the availability of new screening paradigms, policymakers are being asked to make recommendations and decisions regarding the optimal strategies to reduce HPV infection and disease. Such decisions are increasingly being made with significant input from mathematical and economic models. The demand for modeling has resulted in the publication of numerous mathematical models looking at the cost-effectiveness of HPV vaccination. Objective: To review published models that have been used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of HPV vaccination in developed countries and highlight points of consensus and disagreement in methods and findings. Methods: This review consists of cost-effectiveness studies published in the peer-reviewed literature before August 2008. Results: Despite variations in methods, modeling studies are producing consistent conclusions: (1) vaccinating young girls against HPV is likely to be cost- effective; (2) vaccinating boys will most likely not be cost- effective in countries that can reach high coverage rates in girls, and (3) results are most sensitive to the duration of vaccine protection. However, results from analyses examining the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of vaccinating boys when coverage rates are low (≤80%) and catch-up strategies have reached conflicting conclusions.

Copyright / Drug Dosage

Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher or, in the case of photocopying, direct payment of a specified fee to the Copyright Clearance Center.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in goverment regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.


  1. Paavonen J, Jenkins D, Bosch FX, et al: Efficacy of a prophylactic adjuvanted bivalent L1 virus-like-particle vaccine against infection with human papillomavirus types 16 and 18 in young women: an interim analysis of a phase III double-blind, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2007;369:2161–2170.
  2. Garland SM, Hernandez-Avila M, Wheeler CM, Perez G, Harper DM, Leodolter S, et al: Quadrivalent vaccine against human papillomavirus to prevent anogenital diseases. N Engl J Med 2007;356:1928–1943.
  3. FUTURE II Study Group: Quadrivalent vaccine against human papillomavirus to prevent high-grade cervical lesions. N Engl J Med 2007;356:1915–1927.
  4. Rambout L, Hopkins L, Hutton B, Fergusson D: Prophylactic vaccination against human papillomavirus infection and disease in women: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. CMAJ 2007;177:469–479.
  5. Goldhaber-Fiebert JD, Stout NK, Salomon JA, Kuntz KM, Goldie SJ: Cost-effectiveness of cervical cancer screening with human papillomavirus DNA testing and HPV-16,18 vaccination. J Natl Cancer Inst 2008;100:308–320.
  6. Kulasingam S, Connelly L, Conway E, Hocking JS, Myers E, Regan DG, Roder D, Ross J, Wain G: A cost-effectiveness analysis of adding a human papillomavirus vaccine to the Australian National Cervical Cancer Screening Program. Sex Health 2007;4:165–175.
  7. Boot HJ, Wallenburg I, de Melker HE, Mangen MJ, Gerritsen AA, van der Maas NA, Berkhof J, Meijer CJ, Kimman TG: Assessing the introduction of universal human papillomavirus vaccination for preadolescent girls in The Netherlands. Vaccine 2007;25:6245–6256.
  8. Brisson M, Van de Velde N, De Wals P, Boily MC: Estimating the number needed to vaccinate to prevent diseases and death related to human papillomavirus infection. CMAJ 2007;177:464–468.
  9. French KM, Barnabas RV, Lehtinen M, Kontula O, Pukkala E, Dillner J, Garnett GP: Strategies for the introduction of human papillomavirus vaccination: modelling the optimum age- and sex-specific pattern of vaccination in Finland. Br J Cancer 2007;96:514–518.
  10. Kim JJ, Kuntz KM, Stout NK, Mahmud S, Villa LL, Franco EL, Goldie SJ: Multiparameter calibration of a natural history model of cervical cancer. Am J Epidemiol 2007;166:137–150.
  11. Brisson M, Van de Velde N, De Wals P, Boily MC: The potential cost-effectiveness of prophylactic human papillomavirus vaccines in Canada. Vaccine 2007;25:5399–5408.
  12. Van de Velde N, Brisson M, Boily MC: Modeling human papillomavirus vaccine effectiveness: quantifying the impact of parameter uncertainty. Am J Epidemiol 2007;165:762–775.
  13. Bergeron C, Largeron N, McAllister R, Mathevet P, Remy V: Cost-effectiveness analysis of the introduction of a quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccine in France. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2008;24:10–19.
  14. Elbasha EH, Dasbach EJ, Insinga RP: Model for assessing human papillomavirus vaccination strategies. Emerg Infect Dis 2007;13:28–41.
  15. Kohli M, Ferko N, Martin A, Franco EL, Jenkins D, Gallivan S, Sherlaw-Johnson C, Drummond M: Estimating the long-term impact of a prophylactic human papillomavirus 16/18 vaccine on the burden of cervical cancer in the UK. Br J Cancer 2007;96:143–150.
  16. Barnabas RV, Laukkanen P, Koskela P, Kontula O, Lehtinen M, Garnett GP: Epidemiology of HPV 16 and cervical cancer in Finland and the potential impact of vaccination: mathematical modelling analyses. PLoS Med 2006;3:e138.
  17. Taira AV, Neukermans CP, Sanders GD: Evaluating human papillomavirus vaccination programs. Emerg Infect Dis 2004;10:1915–1923.
  18. Goldie SJ, Kohli M, Grima D, Weinstein MC, Wright TC, Bosch FX, Franco E: Projected clinical benefits and cost-effectiveness of a human papillomavirus 16/18 vaccine. J Natl Cancer Inst 2004;96:604–615.
  19. Sanders GD, Taira AV: Cost-effectiveness of a potential vaccine for human papillomavirus. Emerg Infect Dis 2003;9:37–48.
  20. Kulasingam SL, Myers ER: Potential health and economic impact of adding a human papillomavirus vaccine to screening programs. JAMA 2003;290:781–789.
  21. Günther OP, Ogilvie G, Naus M, Young E, Patrick DM, Dobson S, Duval B, Noël PA, Marra F, Miller D, Brunham RC, Pourbohloul B: Protecting the next generation: what is the role of the duration of human papillomavirus vaccine-related immunity? J Infect Dis 2008;197:1653–1661.
  22. Chesson HW, Ekwueme DU, Saraiya M, Markowitz LE: Cost-effectiveness of human papillomavirus vaccination in the United States. Emerg Infect Dis 2008;14:244–251.
  23. Jit M, Choi YH, Edmunds WJ: Economic evaluation of human papillomavirus vaccination in the United Kingdom. BMJ 2008;337:a769.
  24. Kim JJ, Goldie SJ: Health and economic implications of HPV vaccination in the United States. N Engl J Med 2008;359:821–832.
  25. Kulasingam SL, Benard S, Barnabas RV, Largeron N, Myers ER: Adding a quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccine to the UK cervical cancer screening programme: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Cost Eff Resour Alloc 2008;6:4.
  26. Dasbach EJ, Insinga RP, Elbasha EH: The epidemiological and economic impact of a quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccine (6/11/16/18) in the UK. BJOG 2008;115:947–956.
  27. Szucs TD, Largeron N, Dedes KJ, Rafia R, Bénard S: Cost-effectiveness analysis of adding a quadrivalent HPV vaccine to the cervical cancer screening programme in Switzerland. Curr Med Res Opin 2008;24:1473–1483.
  28. Llamazares M, Smith RJ: Evaluating human papillomavirus vaccination programs in Canada: should provincial healthcare pay for voluntary adult vaccination? BMC Public Health 2008;8:114.
  29. Kim JJ, Brisson M, Edmunds J, Goldie SJ: Modeling cervical cancer prevention in developed countries. Vaccine 2008;26(suppl 10):K76–K86.
  30. Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russell LB, Weinstein MC (eds): Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. New York, Oxford University Press, 1996.
  31. Beutels P: Economic Evaluation of Vaccination Programmes in Humans: A Methodological Exploration with Applications to Hepatitis B, Varicella-Zoster, Measles, Pertussis, Hepatitis A and Pneumococcal Vaccination. Antwerp, University of Antwerp, 2001.
  32. Drummond MF, O’Brien B, Stoddart GL, Torrance GW: Methods for the Evaluation of Health Care Programmes. New York, Oxford University Press, 1997.
  33. Boily MC, Abu-Raddad L, Desai K, Masse B, Self S, Anderson R: Measuring the public-health impact of candidate HIV vaccines as part of the licensing process. Lancet Infect Dis 2008;8:200–207.
  34. Parkin DM, Bray F: Chapter 2: the burden of HPV-related cancers. Vaccine 2006;24(suppl 3):S11–S25.
  35. Lacey CJ, Lowndes CM, Shah KV: Chapter 4: burden and management of non-cancerous HPV-related conditions: HPV-6/11 disease. Vaccine 2006;24(suppl 3):S35–S41.
  36. Koopman JS: Modeling infection transmission-the pursuit of complexities that matter. Epidemiology 2002;13:622–624.
  37. Brisson M, Edmunds WJ: Economic evaluation of vaccination programmes: the impact of herd-immunity. Med Decis Making 2003;23:76–82.
  38. Brisson M, Edmunds WJ: Impact of Model, Methodological and Parameter Uncertainty in the Economic Evaluation of Vaccination Programs. Med Decis Making 2006;26:434–446.
  39. Beutels P, Scuffham PA, MacIntyre CR: Funding of drugs: do vaccines warrant a different approach? Lancet Infect Dis 2008;8:727–733.
  40. Weinstein MC, O’Brien B, Hornberger J, et al: Principles of good practice for decision analytic modeling in health-care evaluation: report of the ISPOR Task Force on Good Research Practices – Modeling Studies. Value Health 2003;6:9–17.
  41. Marra F, Gunther O, Ogilvie G, Marra CA, Pourbohloul B, Ehlen T, Miller D, Naus M, Patrick DM, Brunham RC: A dynamic model to determine cost effectiveness of HPV vaccine in girls and boys in Canada. ISSTDR, Seattle, July 2007.

Pay-per-View Options
Direct payment This item at the regular price: USD 38.00
Payment from account With a Karger Pay-per-View account (down payment USD 150) you profit from a special rate for this and other single items.
This item at the discounted price: USD 26.50