Skip directly to site content Skip directly to page options Skip directly to A-Z link Skip directly to A-Z link Skip directly to A-Z link
Volume 13, Number 1—January 2007

Model for Assessing Human Papillomavirus Vaccination Strategies

Elamin H. Elbasha*Comments to Author , Erik J. Dasbach*, and Ralph P. Insinga*
Author affiliations: *Merck Research Laboratories, North Wales, Pennsylvania, USA;

Main Article

Table 1

Cost-effectiveness analysis of alternative HPV vaccination strategies*

Discounted total
No vaccination72,659,3022,698,711––––––
12-y-old girls74,042,9902,699,1781,383,6874672,964
12-y-old girls and boys78,707,8252,699,3274,664,835149Dominated
12-y-old girls plus 12- to 24-y-old females catch-up74,815,6672,699,343–3,892,159164,666
12-y-old girls and boys plus 12− to 24-y-old females catch-up79,746,3572,699,4614,930,69011841,803
12-y-old girls and boys plus 12− to 24-y-old females and males catch-up81,761,2102,699,5062,014,8534545,056

*Assumes cost of vaccination series is US $360 and duration of protection is lifelong. All costs are measured in 2005 US dollars, and costs and QALY are discounted at 3%. HPV, human papillomavirus; QALY, quality-adjusted life years.
†Compared with the preceding nondominated strategy. Strategy A is dominated if there is another strategy, B, that is more effective and less costly than strategy A.

Main Article

Page created: June 28, 2010
Page updated: June 28, 2010
Page reviewed: June 28, 2010
The conclusions, findings, and opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the official position of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors' affiliated institutions. Use of trade names is for identification only and does not imply endorsement by any of the groups named above.