ArticleVaccine2018
Cost-effectiveness of nonavalent HPV vaccination among males aged 22 through 26 years in the United States.
Article in Vaccine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cost-effectiveness modeling for gender-neutral human papillomavirus vaccines: A systematic literature review.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2025Pooled it
- Cost-effectiveness evaluations of the 9-Valent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine: Evidence from a systematic review.PloS one · 2020Pooled it
- Modelling the epidemic dynamics of HPV among women in China and optimization of ongoing cervical cancer elimination strategies.BMC medicine · 2026Article
- Methodological drivers, reporting completeness, and transferability in HPV vaccination economic evaluations: A scoping review.PloS one · 2026Article
- Cervical cancer screening by cotesting method for Vietnamese women 25-55 years old: a cost-effectiveness analysis.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Cost-Effectiveness of Extending Human Papillomavirus Vaccination to Population Subgroups Older Than 26 Years Who Are at Higher Risk for Human Papillomavirus Infection in the United States.Annals of internal medicine · 2025Article
- Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of human papillomavirus vaccination strategies among men who have sex with men in China: a modeling study.Frontiers in immunology · 2023Article
- HPV vaccine for men: Where to? (Review).Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2021Review
- Public health impact and cost-effectiveness of catch-up 9-valent HPV vaccination of individuals through age 45 years in the United States.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2021Article
- Relevance of Human Papillomaviruses in Head and Neck Cancer-What Remains in 2021 from a Clinician's Point of View?Viruses · 2021Review
- Human papillomavirus vaccination for adults aged 30 to 45 years in the United States: A cost-effectiveness analysis.PLoS medicine · 2021Article
- Article
- Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of Human Papillomavirus Vaccination Through Age 45 Years in the United States.Annals of internal medicine · 2020Article
- Updated medical care cost estimates for HPV-associated cancers: implications for cost-effectiveness analyses of HPV vaccination in the United States.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2019Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionIn the United States, routine human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination is recommended for females and males at age 11 or 12 years; the series can be started at age 9 years. Vaccination is also recommended for females through age 26 years and males through age 21 years. The objective of this study was to assess the health impact and cost-effectiveness of harmonizing female and male vaccination recommendations by increasing the upper recommended catch-up age of HPV vaccination for males from age 21 to age 26 years.
methodsWe updated a published model of the health impact and cost-effectiveness of 9-valent human papillomavirus vaccine (9vHPV). We examined the cost-effectiveness of (1) 9vHPV for females aged 12 through 26 years and males aged 12 through 21 years, and (2) an expanded program including males through age 26 years.
resultsCompared to no vaccination, providing 9vHPV for females aged 12 through 26 years and males aged 12 through 21 years cost an estimated $16,600 (in 2016 U.S. dollars) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. The estimated cost per QALY gained by expanding male vaccination through age 26 years was $228,800 and ranged from $137,900 to $367,300 in multi-way sensitivity analyses.
conclusionsThe cost-effectiveness ratios we estimated are not so favorable as to make a strong economic case for recommending expanding male vaccination, yet are not so unfavorable as to preclude consideration of expanding male vaccination. The wide range of plausible results we obtained may underestimate the true degree of uncertainty, due to model limitations. For example, the cost per QALY might be less than our lower bound estimate of $137,900 had our model allowed for vaccine protection against re-infection. Models that specifically incorporate men who have sex with men (MSM) are needed to provide a more comprehensive assessment of male HPV vaccination strategies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.