How can the results of Health Technology Assessment (HTA) evaluations applied to vaccinations be communicated to decision-makers and stakeholders? The ISPOR Rome Chapter Project




HTA is considered the most comprehensive and transparent method of supporting decision-makers in their choices in Public Health.

HTA on vaccines is being performed by many experts. However, they often present their studies to colleagues, but not to decision-makers, who should be the main target and current users. It is therefore crucial to improve the transfer of scientific data to decision-makers and all stakeholders.

The aims of the present project are: 1) to set up a team of experts to collect economic evaluations and HTA studies on vaccines and assess their actual use in decision-making processes; 2) to constitute regional working groups in order to identify the critical aspects of the communication process and identify the most appropriate method of data transfer.

Systematic reviews of economic evaluations and HTA on vaccines and their actual use in decision-making will be used to draw up the basic documents for discussion by the 3 regional working boards. The working groups will discuss the current scientific evidence and communication methods and will try to implement a model of technology assessment with well-defined and objective criteria, in order to better fit pharmaco-economic and HTA methods to the field of vaccinations.

Improving the transfer of HTA results to stakeholders, particularly decision-makers, will enable decisions to be taken on the basis of scientific evidence, and appropriate, sustainable actions to be undertaken.


World Health Organization (WHO). Vaccine introduction guidelines. Adding a vaccine to the national immunizaiton pro- gramme: Decision and implementation. 2005. Available at: tion_guidelines_who_2005.pdf

Ministero della Salute. Piano Nazionale Prevenzione Vaccinale (PNPV) 2012-14. Gazzetta Ufficiale n. 47 del 12/03/2012 (Sup- plemento ordinario). Available at: imgs/C_17_pubblicazioni_1721_allegato.pdf .

s dimensions and tools. SEEd. First Edition, Turin 2010.

Torre, G. La, , Waure, C. de, , Chiaradia G, et al. The future of best investing in vaccines: the Health Technology Assessment ap- proach. Vaccine 2008;26(13):1609-10. Available from: doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2008.01.009. [Google Scholar]

Panatto D, Bragazzi NL, Rizzitelli E, Bonanni P, Boccalini S, Icardi G, et al. Evaluation of the economic burden of Herpes Zoster (HZ) infection. Hum Vaccin Immunother 2015;11(1):245-262. Available from: PubMed PMID: 25483704. doi: 10.4161/hv.36160. [Google Scholar]

Unim B, Saulle R, Boccalini S, et al. Economic evaluation of Varicella vaccination: results of a systematic review. Hum Vac- cin Immunother 2013;9(9):1932-42. Available from: doi: 10.4161/hv.25228. [Google Scholar]

Boccalini S, Taddei C, Ceccherini V, Bechini A, Levi M, Bartolozzi D, et al. Economic analysis of the first 20 years of universal hepatitis B vaccination program in Italy: an a posteriori evaluation and forecast of future benefits.. Hum Vaccin Immunother 2013 Feb;9(5):1119-1128. Available from: PubMed PMID: 23376840. doi: 10.4161/hv.23827. [Google Scholar]

Boccalini S, Bechini A, Levi M, et al. Cost-effectiveness of new adult pneumococcal vaccination strategies in Italy. Hum Vaccin Immunother 2013;9(3):699-706. Available from: PubMed PMID: 23295824. doi: 10.4161/hv.23268. [Google Scholar]

Boccalini S, Azzari C, Resti M, et al. Economic and clinical evaluation of a catch-up dose of 13-valent pneumococcal conju- gate vaccine in children already immunized with three doses of the 7-valent vaccine in Italy. Vaccine 2011;29(51):9521-8. Available from: doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2011.10.013. [Google Scholar]

Bonanni P, Boccalini S, Bechini A, et al. Economic evaluation of varicella vaccination in Italian children and adolescents ac- cording to different intervention strategies: the burden of un- complicated hospitalised cases. Vaccine 2008;26(44):5619-26. Available from: doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2008.07.096. [Google Scholar]

Torre, G. La , Waure, C. de , Chiaradia G, et al. The Health Tech- nology Assessment of bivalent HPV vaccine Cervarix in Italy. Vaccine 2010;28(19):3379-84. Available from: doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2010.02.080. [Google Scholar]

Torre, G. La , Waure, C. de , Chiaradia G, et al. Guidance for fu- ture HTA applications to vaccines: the HPV lesson. Hum Vaccin 2011;7(9):900-4. Available from: doi: 10.4161/hv.7.9.16084. [Google Scholar]

Damiani G, Federico B, Visca M, et al. The impact of socioeco- nomic level on influenza vaccination among Italian adults and elderly: a cross-sectional study. Prev Med 2007;45(5):373-9. Available from: doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2007.07.007. [Google Scholar]

deWaureC,VenezianoMA,CadedduC , et al. Economicvalueof influenza vaccination. Hum Vaccin Immunother 2012;8(1):119-29. Available from: doi: 10.4161/hv.8.1.18420. [Google Scholar]

Cadeddu C, Waure, C. De , Gualano MR, et al. 23-valent pneu- mococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPV23) for the prevention of invasive pneumococcal diseases (IPDs) in the elderly: is it re- ally effective. J Prev Med Hyg 2012;53:101-3. [Google Scholar]

Panatto D, Amicizia D, Lai PL, et al. New versus old meningo- coccal group B vaccines: how the new ones may benefit infants & toddlers. Indian J Med Res 2013;138:835-46. [Google Scholar]

Gasparini R, Amicizia D, Lai PL, et al. Clinical and socioeco- nomic impact of seasonal and pandemic influenza in adults and the elderly. Hum Vaccin Immunother 2012;8(1):21-8. Available from: doi: 10.4161/hv.8.1.17622. [Google Scholar]

Sindoni D, Fauci, V. La , Squeri R, et al. Comparison between a conventional subunit vaccine and the MF59-adjuvanted subunit influenza vaccine in the elderly: an evaluation of the safety, tol- erability and immunogenicity. J Prev Med Hyg 2009;50:121-6. [Google Scholar]

Panatto D, Amicizia D, Ansaldi F, Marocco A, Marchetti F, Bamfi F, et al. Burden of rotavirus disease and cost-effectiveness of universal vaccination in the Province of Genoa (Northern Italy. Vaccine 2009 Feb;27(25-26):3450-3453. Available from: PubMed PMID: 19200850. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2009.01.054. [Google Scholar]

Aballéa S, Chancellor J, Martin M, et al. The cost-effectiveness of influenza vaccination for people aged 50 to 64 years: an in- ternational model. Value Health 2007;10(2):98-116. Available from: doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2006.00157.x. [Google Scholar]

Esposito S, Gasparini R, Bosis S, et al. Clinical and socio-eco- nomic impact of influenza and respiratory syncytial virus infec- tion on healthy children and their households. Clin Microbiol Infect 2005;11(11):933-6. Available from: doi: 10.1111/j.1469-0691.2005.01270.x. [Google Scholar]

Principi N, Esposito S, Marchisio P, et al. Socioeconomic impact of influenza on healthy children and their families. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2003;22(Suppl. 10). [Google Scholar]

Tafuri S, Fortunato F, Cappelli MG, et al. Effectiveness of vac- cination against varicella in children under 5 years in Puglia, Italy 2006-2012. Hum Vaccin Immunother 2015;11(1):214-9. Available from: doi: 10.4161/hv.36153. [Google Scholar]

Bechini A, Boccalini S, Baldo V. et al. Impact of universal vac- cination against varicella in Italy. Hum Vaccin Immunother 2015;11(1):63-71. Available from: doi: 10.4161/hv.34311. [Google Scholar]

Martinelli D, Pedalino B, Cappelli MG, et al. Towards the 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate universal vaccination: effec- tiveness in the transition era between PCV7 and PCV13 in Italy, 2010-2013. Hum Vaccin Immunother 2014;10(1):33-9. Available from: doi: 10.4161/hv.26650. [Google Scholar]

Sackett DL, Rosenberg WM, Gray JA, et al. Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it is not. BMJ 1996;312(7023):71-2. Available from: doi: 10.1136/bmj.312.7023.71. [Google Scholar]

Ricciardi W, Torre, G. La . Health Technology Assessment. Principles dimensions and tools. SEEd. First Edition. Turin: 2010. [Google Scholar]