The health cost of vaccination disparity was estimated by modeling a scenario where coverage in all quintiles was equal to that of the highest wealth quintile. Results were reported as the estimated rotavirus deaths averted
per 1000 children, with current coverage and ‘equitable’ coverage. Table 4 shows the estimated deaths averted for the richest INCB018424 order quintile and the poorest quintile (current and equitable coverage), as well as the mortality cost of disparities in coverage for the country as a whole. The health cost of disparity for the poor in Chad, Nigeria, DRC, India and Niger is substantial, where equitable coverage could improve mortality reduction among the poorest quintile by 656%, 460%, 96%, 90% and 89%, respectively. In contrast, the potential increase
in impact in the poorest quintile, due to more equitable vaccine coverage, was less than 5% in Bangladesh, Uganda, and Ghana. Across the 25 countries, Fulvestrant order equitable coverage would increase mortality reduction benefits by 89% (range of 88–91% across mortality proxy measures) among the poorest quintile and 38% overall (range of 37–40%). Geographic patterns of disparities were examined by modeling expected outcomes for India by state. Fig. 4 shows the estimated cost-effectiveness ($/DALY averted) and vaccination benefit (DALYs averted/1000 children) by state. Cost-effectiveness and benefits differed substantially among states, from over $250/DALY averted in Kerala to less than $60/DALY averted Methisazone in Madhya Pradesh. The states with the lowest CERs are those with high pre-vaccination mortality
(larger circles). However, many of these same states also have the lowest percent reduction in rotavirus mortality (further to the left), due to low vaccination coverage (lighter color). If national rotavirus vaccination were implemented on top of existing EPI coverage, then the states with the most favorable cost-effectiveness ratios and greatest burden would actually benefit the least. Previous analyses have demonstrated substantial variability in vaccination benefit and cost-effectiveness among countries based on geography and economic status [1]. This disparity, in part, is the justification for GAVI investment in low-income countries where benefits are greater and there is better value for money. These investments are also based on rights and fairness principles that children in low-income settings are entitled to these interventions, even if households and national governments cannot afford them. The present analysis demonstrates that there are also strong gradients within countries that should be considered in decisions regarding vaccination programs. Our analysis focuses on underlying disparities in vaccination coverage and pre-vaccination rotavirus mortality risk, and their impact on vaccination outcomes.