Skip to main content

Table 4 The cost-effectiveness of catch-up vaccination by upper age limit

From: The economic evaluation of human papillomavirus vaccination strategies against cervical cancer in women in Lao PDR: a mathematical modelling approach

Number

Options

Total cost per 1000 women

DALY averted per 1000 women

Cost-effective ratio (DALY averted)

ICER (DALY averted)

1.

No vaccination with current screening

4497

-

-

-

2.

Catch-up 11–18

24,680

34.1

591.9

592

3.

Catch-up 11–20

25,548

34.4

611.9

2373

4.

Catch-up 11–22

26,446

34.7

632.5

3476

5.

Catch-up 11–25

27,807

35.1

664.1

3420

6.

Catch-up 11–30

29,983

35.7

713.9

3880

7.

Catch-up 11–35

31,919

36.2

757.5

3882

8.

Catch-up 11–40

33,584

36.5

796.9

4662

9.

Catch-up 11–45

34,991

36.7

830.9

7012

10.

Catch-up 11–50

36,159

36.9

858.0

8408

11.

Catch-up 11–55

37,109

36.9

883.8

D

12.

Catch-up 11–60

37,857

37

901.6

15,750

13.

Catch-up 11–65

38,418

37

916.8

D

14.

Catch-up 11–70

38,812

37

927.4

D

15.

Catch-up 11–75

39,059

37

934.1

D

  1. Note: The cost-effectiveness ratio was a comparison of an option and the baseline scenarios (no vaccination with current screening). The incremental cost of the effectiveness ratio expressed as DALY averted is listed in order of increasing cost. In non-dominant strategies, the ICER was calculated by dividing different costs by different effectiveness. The intervention was compared to the next more effective and more costly option. The D refers to strong dominance, which is expressed as a higher cost and a lower effectiveness compared to the alternative options. The currency is 2013 international dollars, using purchasing power parity
  2. The GDP per capita in 2013 was about 4822 international dollars [30]