ArticleBMJ public health2025
Estimating the economically justifiable price of nirsevimab versus standard of practice for the prevention of respiratory syncytial virus infections in neonates and infants in Spain: a cost-utility modelling study.
Article in BMJ public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Systematic Review: Efficacy, Safety Profile, and Cost-Effectiveness of Nirsevimab Versus Palivizumab for RSV Prevention in Children Under 24 Months.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) causes great morbidity and mortality among newborns. Nirsevimab represents a prophylactic alternative used in Spain for a universal prophylaxis strategy of all infants. The aim of this study was to estimate the economically justifiable price (EJP) of nirsevimab in Spain, being the price to consider nirsevimab efficient compared with the standard of practice (administration of palivizumab in eligible infants and no intervention in all other). Methods: An economic model based on a decision tree was developed to conduct a cost-utility analysis. The RSV epidemiology, RSV-related health events, clinical variables, resources consumption, costs and utilities were derived from the scientific literature and agreed by a multidisciplinary advisory board. The analyses included the universal immunisation of all infants with nirsevimab, considering both payer and societal perspectives. The EJPs were estimated considering the following willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds: €0/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), €22 000/QALY and €30 000/QALY. Alternative scenarios (including immunisation strategy targeted at high-risk infants), deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were also conducted. Results: The prophylaxis with nirsevimab in all infants averted 215 878 RSV events, 9 deaths, avoided 1307 QALYs lost and reduced €48.4 and €17.3 million in direct and indirect costs. For a payer perspective, at those WTP thresholds, the EJPs resulted in €222.27, €320.52 and €356.25, raising to €281.47, €379.72 and €415.45 for a societal perspective. The robustness of the model and its results was confirmed by alternative scenarios and sensitivity analyses. Conclusions: Nirsevimab reduces RSV-related health events, leading to cost savings and avoided QALY loss associated with RSV infection in infants compared to the previous standard of practice. This study provides a range of cost-effective prices that would lead nirsevimab to be an efficient intervention, or even dominant (achieves better outcomes and produces cost savings), compared with the standard of-practice for RSV prevention, being key for decision-making in public health.
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.