Recombinant Varicella Zoster Virus Glycoprotein E Antigen (As01b Adjuvanted) Vaccine
Not recommended VaccinesRestrictedNot applicable line
Prevention of herpes zoster (HZ) and post-herpetic neuralgia (PHN) in adults aged 60 years and older, with a five-year catch-up program for ages 60–79 years.
1
Submissions
2018–18
On the record
—
ICER range
Not modelled
Cost basis
From the public summary
PBAC outcome
7.1 The PBAC did not recommend the listing of the varicella zoster virus vaccine (HZ/su) on the National Immunisation Program (NIP) for the prevention of herpes zoster in adults aged 60 years, with a five-year catch-up program.PSD · Nov 2018
7.2 The PBAC noted that the submission did not include an evaluation of NIP-funded HZ/su vaccine at a lower age threshold of at least 50 years, as was recommended in the ATAGI pre-submission advice, for: (i) Indigenous individuals (who have a greater burden of disease); or (ii) people who are immunocompromised as a result of underlying medical conditions or treatment who cannot receive the live-HZ vaccine (unmet need).PSD · Nov 2018
Economic analysis
6.42 The submission presented a stepped, modelled economic evaluation based on direct randomised trials. The type of economic evaluation presented was a cost-utility analysis.PSD · Nov 2018
6.43 Although the ESC considered that the HZ/su vaccine would provide direct benefits to the treated individual, it was concerned about the high opportunity costs. The ESC recalled that the threshold of incremental quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained previously accepted by the PBAC for treatments with large opportunity costs, such as population preventative interventions including lipid-lowering, anti-hypertensive drugs and vaccines, was at the …PSD · Nov 2018
Clinical claim
6.37 The submission described two doses of the HZ/su vaccine as having: Superior efficacy and a similar safety profile, despite being more reactogenic, compared with the live-HZ vaccine, the current funded standard of care for individuals aged 70 to 79 years; and. Superior efficacy and slightly inferior safety when compared with no vaccine (placebo) for individuals aged 60 to 69 years and 80 years and over.PSD · Nov 2018
6.38 In terms of efficacy, the ESC considered that the HZ/su vaccine was superior to placebo and the live-HZ vaccine. However, the ESC considered that the magnitude of benefit in both comparisons should be considered with caution as: The trials excluded individuals who had previously experienced HZ, had previously received a varicella/HZ vaccine, or were immunocompromised or immunosuppressed.PSD · Nov 2018
Cost-effectiveness
No ICER calculated; this is a cost-effectiveness comparison submission but no numeric ICER values are stated in the public text. Economic model details are not disclosed.
Decision context
PopulationAdults aged 60 years and older (60–69 years, 70–79 years, and 80+ years); healthy/immunocompetent individuals in the pivotal trials, though the product information permits use in immunocompromised patients.
Submission history
| Decided | Outcome | Comparator | ICER | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 2018 | Not recommended | No vaccine (ages 60–69 and 80+); live herpes zoster vaccine (Zostavax) (ages 70–79) | — | RCT · Vaccine efficacy (VE) against HZ and PHN |
Similar precedents
Varicella Zoster Virus Recombinant Vaccine93%Zoster Virus Vaccine Live81%Zoster Virus Vaccine Live (Oka/Merk)81%Influenza Vaccine, Injection65%Inactivated Trivalent Influenza Vaccine (Split Virion)64%Inactivated Trivalent Influenza Vaccine (Split Virion), High Dose64%Respiratory Syncytial Virus Vaccine, Recombinant Pre-Fusion F Protein 3 Older Adult (Rsvpref3 Oa)63%Respiratory Syncytial Virus Vaccine, Recombinant, Pre-Fusion F Protein 3, Older Adult63%