<HashMap><database>biostudies-literature</database><scores/><additional><submitter>Ritchie AJ</submitter><funding>Oregon Department of Agriculture</funding><funding>UK Research and Innovation</funding><funding>Wellcome Trust</funding><funding>Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, UK Government</funding><pagination>126703</pagination><full_dataset_link>https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC7618176</full_dataset_link><repository>biostudies-literature</repository><omics_type>Unknown</omics_type><volume>47</volume><pubmed_abstract>&lt;h4>Background&lt;/h4>Pre-exposure prophylactic rabies vaccination (PrEP) is advised for travellers to countries with high rabies incidence, but rarely available for local residents. Some studies suggest poor cost-effectiveness of PrEP in such settings, but have generally focused upon post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) cost savings as the main benefit of PrEP, without considering lives saved by PrEP efficacy.&lt;h4>Methods&lt;/h4>We compared incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of use of rabies PrEP, against an alternative of using only PEP, by adapting a decision-tree model previously used to inform Gavi's investment in rabies PEP. We consider scenarios including: a range of PrEP efficacies in individuals unable to access PEP; PrEP costs significantly below current prices (through single-dose approaches, inclusion in childhood vaccination schedules, increased manufacturing volume and/or new low-cost products); and variable rabies exposure risk and PEP access. We also present results from a simplified model, designed for ease of understanding.&lt;h4>Results&lt;/h4>Modelled ICERs were &lt;1000 USD per quality adjusted life year (QALY) across a range of plausible combinations of rabies exposure risk, PEP access, PrEP cost and PrEP efficacy. If PrEP efficacy exceeds 50 % over 15 years, we estimate ICERs &lt;500 USD/QALY where rabies incidence ≥3 per 100,000 per year and cost of vaccination is ≤5 USD/child. Under scenarios with lower rabies incidence of around 0.3 per 100,000 per year, due either to more limited exposure or greater access to PEP, ICERs &lt;3000 USD may still be achieved even if PrEP efficacy is as low as 30 %.&lt;h4>Conclusions&lt;/h4>Routine childhood PrEP may be cost-effective in settings with modest willingness-to-pay, and rabies exposure risks plausible across much of Africa and South Asia. Cost-effectiveness requires low-cost PrEP regimes and some efficacy of PrEP in individuals unable to access PEP. Under such conditions, PrEP may be an attractive additional tool in the fight against rabies.</pubmed_abstract><journal>Vaccine</journal><pubmed_title>Routine childhood rabies pre-exposure prophylaxis can be cost effective in low- and middle-income countries.</pubmed_title><pmcid>PMC7618176</pmcid><funding_grant_id>220679</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>220679/Z/20/Z</funding_grant_id><pubmed_authors>Douglas AD</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Trotter C</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Meeyai A</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Ritchie AJ</pubmed_authors></additional><is_claimable>false</is_claimable><name>Routine childhood rabies pre-exposure prophylaxis can be cost effective in low- and middle-income countries.</name><description>&lt;h4>Background&lt;/h4>Pre-exposure prophylactic rabies vaccination (PrEP) is advised for travellers to countries with high rabies incidence, but rarely available for local residents. Some studies suggest poor cost-effectiveness of PrEP in such settings, but have generally focused upon post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) cost savings as the main benefit of PrEP, without considering lives saved by PrEP efficacy.&lt;h4>Methods&lt;/h4>We compared incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of use of rabies PrEP, against an alternative of using only PEP, by adapting a decision-tree model previously used to inform Gavi's investment in rabies PEP. We consider scenarios including: a range of PrEP efficacies in individuals unable to access PEP; PrEP costs significantly below current prices (through single-dose approaches, inclusion in childhood vaccination schedules, increased manufacturing volume and/or new low-cost products); and variable rabies exposure risk and PEP access. We also present results from a simplified model, designed for ease of understanding.&lt;h4>Results&lt;/h4>Modelled ICERs were &lt;1000 USD per quality adjusted life year (QALY) across a range of plausible combinations of rabies exposure risk, PEP access, PrEP cost and PrEP efficacy. If PrEP efficacy exceeds 50 % over 15 years, we estimate ICERs &lt;500 USD/QALY where rabies incidence ≥3 per 100,000 per year and cost of vaccination is ≤5 USD/child. Under scenarios with lower rabies incidence of around 0.3 per 100,000 per year, due either to more limited exposure or greater access to PEP, ICERs &lt;3000 USD may still be achieved even if PrEP efficacy is as low as 30 %.&lt;h4>Conclusions&lt;/h4>Routine childhood PrEP may be cost-effective in settings with modest willingness-to-pay, and rabies exposure risks plausible across much of Africa and South Asia. Cost-effectiveness requires low-cost PrEP regimes and some efficacy of PrEP in individuals unable to access PEP. Under such conditions, PrEP may be an attractive additional tool in the fight against rabies.</description><dates><release>2025-01-01T00:00:00Z</release><publication>2025 Feb</publication><modification>2026-06-03T22:57:26.677Z</modification><creation>2026-05-02T03:12:12.625Z</creation></dates><accession>S-EPMC7618176</accession><cross_references><pubmed>39799849</pubmed><doi>10.1016/j.vaccine.2024.126703</doi></cross_references></HashMap>