Tendering process for pneumococcal conjugate vaccine

This page is a knowledge crystal of subtype assessment. The page identifier is Op_en6352
Moderator:Jouni (see all)
Upload data {{#opasnet_base_link:Op_en6352}}

Main message:

Question: How should vaccine products be compared in the national procurement of the pneumococcal conjugate vaccine in Finland? Answer: To answer this question, THL is organising an open discussion during summer 2014. The outcome recommendation of this process is given to the National Immunization Technical Advisory Group (NITAG) and the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health in September. The discussion is focussed on three topics: What criteria should be used when comparing vaccines? How should the health effects of pneumococcal vaccination be assessed? How should the economic impact and cost-effectiveness of pneumococcal vaccination be evaluated? You can participate in two ways: Write your comments into the comment box at the end of each substance page. Moderator will include it into the text of the page. Sign in Opasnet and participate by editing the talk pages of any substance page. See instructions for discussion and wiki editing. You should first browse the pneumococcus assessment pages so that you can give your comments on a right page and check whether your comment has actually been raised already. Comments are not repeated, and irrelevant comments will be removed. All relevant content will stay on the pages. Please note, however, that other participants may try to prove your comments false; if proven false, your comments as such will not be reflected in the final recommendation that is given to NITAG and the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health. See additional information about Pneumococcal vaccine products.

Question

How should vaccine products be compared in the national procurement of the pneumococcal conjugate vaccine?

Scope

• We restrict the analysis to vaccination within the infant immunisation programme.
• We specify criteria for comparing pneumococcal conjugate vaccine products (in Finnish: Vertailuperusteet).
• The aim is to prepare selection criteria that enable the choice of the economically most advantageous tender.
• We discuss assumptions underlying the epidemiological model and the cost-effectiveness analysis.
• The preparation of the criteria is based on current knowledge of the impact of pneumococcal conjugate vaccination.
• The procurement can only involve a product that has marketing authorization in EU/Finland (see Section 20a of the Medicines Act [[1]]).
• The procurement must follow the Act on Public Contracts.
• The discussion on these pages is not binding the preparation of the procurement.

Answer

A preliminary answer is to focus on effectiveness to reduce serious pneumococcal diseases and on the economic effectiveness of the vaccines.

Rationale

The rationale has been summarised in the following 3 pages: Comparison criteria for vaccine, Epidemiological modelling and Economical assessment.

Comparison of vaccine products will be based on their price and expected health benefits (Comparison criteria for vaccine). The health benefits mean the expected reduction in the annual number of invasive pneumococcal disease in the Finnish population, if the vaccine would be used in the national infant immunisation programme. The assessment of the benefits is realised by using an epidemiological model. The effectiveness of the vaccination programme will be quantified as the expected improvement in health-associated quality of life. The selection criterion is formulated so that the economically most advantageous product will be chosen (Economical assessment).