ArticleBMC infectious diseases2026
Cost-benefit analysis of a potential hepatitis C vaccine: a modelling study.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundThe increased availability and cost-reduction of curative hepatitis C therapies and global commitments to elimination through treatment scale-up have made the value proposition for a hepatitis C vaccine unclear. This study aimed to estimate the health impact and benefit-cost ratio of a potential hepatitis C vaccine under different use scenarios.
methodsA compartmental model of hepatitis C transmission, disease progression and care cascade was calibrated to 116 countries, with populations stratified by age, sex, injection drug use status and incarceration status. Model inputs were taken from global datasets (e.g. United Nations, Institute of Health Metrics and Evaluation), published academic literature and WHO reports. Scenarios projected for 2026-2050 included: (1) test-treat-vaccinate for people who inject drugs at existing country-specific testing coverage; (2) Scenario 1 plus a one-off test-treat-vaccinate campaign for people who inject drugs; (3) Scenario 2 plus test-treat-vaccinate of prison populations; (4) Scenario 3 plus school-based vaccination; and (5) Scenario 4 plus a five-year adult catch-up campaign. Each scenario's comparator was a counterfactual with equivalent testing and treatment but no vaccine. Only RNA-negative individuals were eligible for the vaccine (i.e. following negative test or post-treatment), and the vaccine was modelled to increase spontaneous clearance rates to 80% for a mean five-year period. Vaccination costs included commodity (assumed US$5 per person in low and lower-middle income settings, with cost ratio of 1:2:15 for upper-middle and high income settings), service delivery and programmatic costs. Benefits included reduced confirmatory testing, treatment, disease management and productivity losses.
resultsGlobally, scenarios 1-5 averted 1.13-8.76 million infections and 2,490-24,100 deaths. Scenarios 1, 2 and 3 had benefit-cost ratios of 2.86, 3.24, and 2.20 respectively. Scenario 4 only had a benefit-cost ratio > 1 for a vaccine with longer duration of protection. Scenario 5 had a benefit-cost ratio < 1 for all characteristics tested.
conclusionsIn the context of heterogeneous treatment scale-up among countries, a hepatitis C vaccine is likely to have a positive return-on-investment when used to vaccinate populations at highest risk of infection.
trial registrationNot applicable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.