Summary
Background In 2022, a global outbreak of mpox occurred among gay and bisexual men who have sex with men (GBMSM). In England, the outbreak was controlled through reductions in sexual risk behaviour and vaccination of high-risk GBMSM. However, mpox continues to circulate and so future outbreaks could occur. We evaluated the most cost-effective vaccination strategy to minimise future mpox outbreaks among GBMSM in England.
Methods A mathematical model of mpox transmission among GBMSM was developed to estimate the costs per quality-adjusted-life-year (QALY) gained for different vaccination strategies starting in 2024 (20-year time-horizon; 3.5% discount rate; willingness-to-pay threshold £20,000/QALY). The model was calibrated using English surveillance data from the 2022 outbreak and two community surveys. Reactive vaccination (only during outbreaks) and pre-emptive vaccination (continuous routine) strategies targeting high-risk GBMSM were compared to no vaccination. Baseline projections assumed vaccine effectiveness of 78%/89% for 5/10 years with 1/2 doses at £160/dose. Costs were estimated for case management, vaccination and public health responses (PHR) during an outbreak.
Findings All vaccination strategies reduced costs and gained QALYs compared to no vaccination. Continuous pre-emptive vaccination (daily rate 41 doses) was most cost-effective, saving £39.56 million and gaining 547.6 QALYs over 20-years. Threshold analyses suggested vaccination of high-risk GBMSM is cost-effective if the vaccine costs <£701/dose. Pre-emptive vaccination remains the optimal strategy across numerous sensitivity analyses, but the optimal vaccination rate can vary. Reactive vaccination only becomes more cost-effective when PHR costs are not included.
Interpretation Pre-emptive vaccination of high-risk GBMSM is a cost-saving strategy to prevent future mpox outbreaks.
Funding NIHR
Extended funding statement This study was funded by the NIHR Health Protection Research Unit in Behavioural Science and Evaluation at University of Bristol NIHR200877, in partnership with UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA). The views expressed are those of the author and not necessarily those of the NIHR, the Department of Health and Social Care, or UKHSA.
Evidence before this study The global outbreak of mpox in 2022 predominantly affected gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (GBMSM). After a steep rise in cases over May to June 2022, the rate of cases of mpox decreased dramatically after July 2022, thought to be due to the roll-out of vaccination programmes in many countries and reductions in sexual risk behaviour among GBMSM. Despite this decline in cases, new infections of mpox have occurred among GBMSM in many countries in 2023, raising concerns that new outbreaks could occur especially if levels of vaccine-induced protection reduce over time. We searched PubMed, bioRxiv and medRxiv for articles published from beginning May 2022 to 28 June 2024 with the following keywords: ((“monkeypox” OR “mpox” OR “mpx”) AND (“model” OR “modelling” OR “modeling”) AND (“vaccine” OR “vaccination” OR “cost-effectiveness” OR “cost-effective”)). Although this search identified many articles involving transmission modelling that assessed the impact of various interventions on mpox transmission, only eight provided insights on what is needed to prevent future outbreaks, just one considered the cost implications of vaccinating for mpox, and none evaluated the cost-effectiveness of vaccination. Existing model analyses have evaluated what interventions are needed to control outbreaks showing that future outbreaks could be controlled by vaccinating close contacts of cases and individuals in large sexual networks, as well as pre-emptively vaccinating high-risk individuals prior to outbreaks occurring. None of these analyses used detailed data to calibrate their models to actual settings, reducing their real-world relevance. Conversely, other model analyses undertook detailed modelling for specific settings (Canada, Netherlands and England), and showed that existing levels of vaccine roll-out may have reduced the magnitude of future outbreaks. However, these analyses did not model possible future vaccination strategies. The only economic analysis for mpox compared the costs of vaccination to not vaccinating the general population in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, suggesting that vaccination costs more than not vaccinating, although vaccinating the general population is an unrealistic strategy. Unfortunately, this economic analysis used implausible data (respiratory infection contact rates) to simulate the transmission of mpox, did not use recent data to estimate transmissibility, did not focus on GBMSM, and used very little data on the health-related costs of mpox disease.
Added value of this study This economic analysis extends our understanding of what is needed to control future outbreaks of mpox among GBMSM in England and other settings. Combining a previously validated model of mpox infection in England with real data on the costs of care for mpox, vaccination and public health responses, we undertook an economic analysis to evaluate the most cost-effective future vaccination strategy to prevent future mpox outbreaks. We model either reactive (only vaccinate during outbreaks) or pre-emptive (routine vaccination irrespective of outbreaks) vaccination strategies targeting high-risk GBMSM. Our analyses show that all modelled vaccination strategies are likely to be cost-saving and improve quality of life compared to not vaccinating, with continuous pre-emptive vaccination at a low rate (daily rate 41 doses) being the most cost-effective strategy. This finding is robust over most sensitivity analyses with mpox vaccination remaining cost-effective if the vaccine price is less than £701 per dose.
Implications of all the available evidence Ongoing importation of new sexually transmitted mpox cases in many non-endemic countries means that these countries need to be prepared for future mpox outbreaks if immunity levels fall or if the pool of unvaccinated people increases to a large extent. Our analyses give robust evidence that mpox vaccination is a cost-saving strategy for minimizing the likelihood of future mpox outbreaks in England and other comparable countries. These findings have been used as evidence by the UK Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation to recommend a pre-emptive (routine) vaccination programme of high-risk GBMSM through sexual health services in the UK. Other countries should seriously consider similar strategies to prevent future outbreaks.
Competing Interest Statement
PV and JW have received unrestricted research grants from Gilead not related to the submitted work and PV has received honorarium off GSK not related to this work. This research was funded in whole, or in part, by the National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Unit for Behavioural Science and Evaluation at the University of Bristol [NIHR200877] and the Wellcome Trust [WT 220866/Z/20/Z].
Funding Statement
NIHR, UK
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
N/A
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
↵* joint senior authors
Data Availability
This analysis and modelling were undertaken for health protection purposes under permissions granted to UKHSA to collect and process confidential patient data under Regulation 3 of The Health Service (Control of Patient Information) Regulations 2020 and Section 251 of the National Health Service Act 2006. All data were pseudonymised during analysis, and records were stored securely. As such, authors cannot make the underlying datasets publicly available for ethical and legal reasons, particularly due to the sensitive information included. Applications for relevant anonymised data should be submitted to the UKHSA Office for Data Release at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/accessing-ukhsa-protected-data. The model code and projections for this paper will be shared with interested parties upon reasonable request, which will be decided by Peter Vickerman, Josephine Walker and Xu-Sheng Zhang.
