PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Fu, Han
AU  - Abbas, Kaja
AU  - Klepac, Petra
AU  - van Zandvoort, Kevin
AU  - Tanvir, Hira
AU  - Portnoy, Allison
AU  - Jit, Mark
TI  - Effect of evidence updates on key determinants of measles vaccination impact: a DynaMICE modelling study in ten high-burden countries
AID  - 10.1101/2021.05.28.21257964
DP  - 2021 Jan 01
TA  - medRxiv
PG  - 2021.05.28.21257964
4099  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/05/30/2021.05.28.21257964.short
4100  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/05/30/2021.05.28.21257964.full
AB  - Background Model-based estimates of measles burden and the impact of measles-containing vaccine (MCV) are crucial for global health priority setting. Recently, evidence from systematic reviews and database analyses have improved our understanding of key determinants of measles vaccine impact. We explore how updated representations of these determinants affect model-based estimation of MCV impact in ten countries with highest measles burden.Methods Using Dynamic Measles Immunisation Calculation Engine (DynaMICE), an age-structured compartmental model of measles transmission and vaccination, we evaluated the effect of evidence updates for five determinants of MCV impact: case fatality risk, contact patterns, age-dependent vaccine efficacy, the potential of supplementary immunisation activities (SIAs) to reach zero-dose children, and the basic reproduction number. We also evaluated the incremental impact of the first dose (MCV1), second dose (MCV2), and SIA dose of measles vaccines, based on country-specific coverage estimates from the World Health Organization. The MCV impact was assessed by cumulative vaccine-averted cases, deaths, and disability-adjusted life years over 2000–2050.Results Incorporated with the updated data sources, DynaMICE projected 252 million measles cases, 3.7 million deaths and 230 million disability-adjusted life years incurred over 2000–2050 in the ten high-burden countries when MCV1, MCV2, and SIA doses were implemented. Compared to no vaccination, the administration of MCV1 contributed to 66% reduction in cumulative measles burden, while MCV2 and SIAs reduced this further to 89%. With routine and supplementary vaccination, India and countries with high vaccination coverage could maintain measles incidence below 1 per million. Among the updated determinants, shifting from fixed to linearly-varying vaccine efficacy by age and from static to time-varying case fatality risks had the biggest effect on the model projections of MCV impact. While varying the basic reproduction number showed a limited effect on vaccine-averted burden, updates on the other four determinants together led to an overall reduction of MCV impact by 0.87–26.7%.Conclusions High coverage of measles vaccine through both routine and SIA delivery platforms are essential for achieving and maintaining low incidence in high-measles burden settings. Incorporating updated evidence particularly on vaccine efficacy and case fatality risk reduces estimates of the impact of vaccination slightly, but its overall impact remains considerable.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis work was carried out as part of the Vaccine Impact Modelling Consortium (www.vaccineimpact.org), but the views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Consortium or its funders. The funders were given the opportunity to review this paper prior to publication, but the final decision on the content of the publication was taken by the authors. This work was supported, in whole or in part, by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, via the Vaccine Impact Modelling Consortium [Grant Number INV-009125]. Under the grant conditions of the Foundation, a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Generic License has already been assigned to the Author Accepted Manuscript version that might arise from this submission.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:This modelling analysis was based on publicly available data. No individual patient data were used.All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI 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).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesCountry-specific coverage data for measles vaccination were extracted from public databases of the World Health Organization. Population statistics were obtained from the United Nations World Prospect Project 2019. https://apps.who.int/immunization_monitoring/globalsummary/timeseries/tswucoveragemcv1.html https://apps.who.int/immunization_monitoring/globalsummary/timeseries/tswucoveragemcv2.html https://www.who.int/entity/immunization/monitoring_surveillance/data/Summary_Measles_SIAs.xls https://population.un.org/wpp/