Insights from modelling malaria vaccines for policy decisions: the focus on RTS,S

Mathematical models are increasingly used to inform decisions throughout product development pathways from pre-clinical studies to country implementation of novel health interventions. This review illustrates the utility of simulation approaches by reviewing the literature on malaria vaccine modelling, with a focus on its link to the development of policy guidance for the first licensed product, RTS,S/AS01. The main contributions of modelling studies have been in inferring the mechanism of action and efficacy profile of RTS,S; to predicting the public health impact; and economic modelling mainly comprising cost-effectiveness analysis. The value of both product-specific and generic modelling of vaccines is highlighted

Costing interventions in the field: preliminary cost estimates and lessons learned from an evaluation of community-wide mass drug administration for elimination of soil-transmitted helminths in the DeWorm3 trial

OBJECTIVE: To present a costing study integrated within the DeWorm3 multi-country field trial of community-wide mass drug administration (cMDA) for elimination of soil-transmitted helminths. DESIGN: Tailored data collection instruments covering resource use, expenditure and operational details were developed for each site. These were populated alongside field activities by on-site staff. Data quality control and validation processes were established. Programmed routines were used to clean, standardise and analyse data to derive costs of cMDA and supportive activities. SETTING: Field site and collaborating research institutions. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: A strategy for costing interventions in parallel with field activities was discussed. Interim estimates of cMDA costs obtained with the strategy were presented for one of the trial sites. RESULTS: The study demonstrated that it was both feasible and advantageous to collect data alongside field activities. Practical decisions on implementing the strategy and the trade-offs involved varied by site; trialists and local partners were key to tailoring data collection to the technical and operational realities in the field. The strategy capitalised on the established processes for routine financial reporting at sites, benefitted from high recall and gathered operational insight that facilitated interpretation of the estimates derived. The methodology produced granular costs that aligned with the literature and allowed exploration of relevant scenarios. In the first year of the trial, net of drugs, the incremental financial cost of extending deworming of school-aged children to the whole community in India site averaged US$1.14 (USD, 2018) per person per round. A hypothesised at-scale routine implementation scenario yielded a much lower estimate of US$0.11 per person treated per round. CONCLUSIONS: We showed that costing interventions alongside field activities offers unique opportunities for collecting rich data to inform policy toward optimising health interventions and for facilitating transfer of economic evidence from the field to the programme. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03014167; Pre-results

Health system readiness and the implementation of rectal artesunate for severe malaria in sub-Saharan Africa: an analysis of real-world costs and constraints

BACKGROUND: Rectal artesunate, an efficacious pre-referral treatment for severe malaria in children, was deployed at scale in Uganda, Nigeria, and DR Congo. In addition to distributing rectal artesunate, implementation required additional investments in crucial but neglected components in the care for severe malaria. We examined the real-world costs and constraints to rectal artesunate implementation. METHODS: We collected primary data on baseline health system constraints and subsequent rectal artesunate implementation expenditures. We calculated the equivalent annual cost of rectal artesunate implementation per child younger than 5 years at risk of severe malaria, from a health system perspective, separating neglected routine health system components from incremental costs of rectal artesunate introduction. FINDINGS: The largest baseline constraints were irregular health worker supervisions, inadequate referral facility worker training, and inadequate malaria commodity supplies. Health worker training and behaviour change campaigns were the largest startup costs, while supervision and supply chain management accounted for most annual routine costs. The equivalent annual costs of preparing the health system for managing severe malaria with rectal artesunate were US$2.63,$2.20, and $4.19 per child at risk and$322, $219, and$464 per child treated in Uganda, Nigeria, and DR Congo, respectively. Strengthening the neglected, routine health system components accounted for the majority of these costs at 71.5%, 65.4%, and 76.4% of per-child costs, respectively. Incremental rectal artesunate costs accounted for the minority remainder. INTERPRETATION: Although rectal artesunate has been touted as a cost-effective pre-referral treatment for severe malaria in children, its real-world potential is limited by weak and under-financed health system components. Scaling up rectal artesunate or other interventions relying on community health-care providers only makes sense alongside additional, essential health system investments sustained over the long term. FUNDING: Unitaid. TRANSLATION: For the French translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section

Country specific predictions of the cost-effectiveness of malaria vaccine RTS,S/AS01 in endemic Africa

BACKGROUND: RTS,S/AS01 is a safe and moderately efficacious vaccine considered for implementation in endemic Africa. Model predictions of impact and cost-effectiveness of this new intervention could aid in country adoption decisions. METHODS: The impact of RTS,S was assessed in 43 countries using an ensemble of models of Plasmodium falciparum epidemiology. Informed by the 32months follow-up data from the phase 3 trial, vaccine effectiveness was evaluated at country levels of malaria parasite prevalence, coverage of control interventions and immunization. Benefits and costs of the program incremental to routine malaria control were evaluated for a four dose schedule: first dose administered at six months, second and third - before 9months, and fourth dose at 27months of age. Sensitivity analyses around vaccine properties, transmission, and economic inputs were conducted. RESULTS: If implemented in all 43 countries the vaccine has the potential to avert 123 (117;129) million malaria episodes over the first 10years. Burden averted averages 18,413 (range of country median estimates 156-40,054) DALYs per 100,000 fully vaccinated children with much variation across settings primarily driven by differences in transmission intensity. At a price of $5 per dose program costs average$39.8 per fully vaccinated child with a median cost-effectiveness ratio of $188 (range$78-$22,448) per DALY averted; the ratio is lower by one third -$136 (range $116-$220) - in settings where parasite prevalence in children aged 2-10years is at or above 10%. CONCLUSION: RTS,S/AS01has the potential to substantially reduce malaria burden in children across Africa. Conditional on assumptions on price, coverage, and vaccine properties, adding RTS,S to routine malaria control interventions would be highly cost-effective. Implementation decisions will need to further consider feasibility of scaling up existing control programs, and operational constraints in reaching children at risk with the schedule

Country specific predictions of the cost-effectiveness of malaria vaccine RTS,S/AS01 in endemic Africa

BACKGROUND: RTS,S/AS01 is a safe and moderately efficacious vaccine considered for implementation in endemic Africa. Model predictions of impact and cost-effectiveness of this new intervention could aid in country adoption decisions. METHODS: The impact of RTS,S was assessed in 43 countries using an ensemble of models of Plasmodium falciparum epidemiology. Informed by the 32months follow-up data from the phase 3 trial, vaccine effectiveness was evaluated at country levels of malaria parasite prevalence, coverage of control interventions and immunization. Benefits and costs of the program incremental to routine malaria control were evaluated for a four dose schedule: first dose administered at six months, second and third - before 9months, and fourth dose at 27months of age. Sensitivity analyses around vaccine properties, transmission, and economic inputs were conducted. RESULTS: If implemented in all 43 countries the vaccine has the potential to avert 123 (117;129) million malaria episodes over the first 10years. Burden averted averages 18,413 (range of country median estimates 156-40,054) DALYs per 100,000 fully vaccinated children with much variation across settings primarily driven by differences in transmission intensity. At a price of $5 per dose program costs average$39.8 per fully vaccinated child with a median cost-effectiveness ratio of $188 (range$78-$22,448) per DALY averted; the ratio is lower by one third -$136 (range $116-$220) - in settings where parasite prevalence in children aged 2-10years is at or above 10%. CONCLUSION: RTS,S/AS01has the potential to substantially reduce malaria burden in children across Africa. Conditional on assumptions on price, coverage, and vaccine properties, adding RTS,S to routine malaria control interventions would be highly cost-effective. Implementation decisions will need to further consider feasibility of scaling up existing control programs, and operational constraints in reaching children at risk with the schedule

A methodology for malaria programme impact evaluation

This document describes a methodology for continual assessment of the impact of malaria interventions, and the efficiency of the malaria programme. The methodology is designed to be implemented recurrently on a cycle of 2–5 years, with the involvement of stakeholders, including National Malaria Control Programmes, development partners and other organizations active in the programme. Their participation should inform the impact and efficiency assessment, so that it is linked to subsequent decision making defining the nature and scope of malaria control interventions. The methodology is designed in a modular way, providing some flexibility with regard to which elements are implemented at any given time. Some modules require technical capabilities usually not available in a regular monitoring and evaluation (M&amp;E) team, and will require contributions from other national and/or international partners.</jats:p